IBM To Announce Web-Based Desktop Apps 322
mgoulding writes "IBM is expected to announce a software bundle targeted to business users that will challenge the Microsoft Office package. Unlike Office, the email, word-processing, spreadsheet, and database products will be accessible to Linux, Unix, and heldheld users through a web server. NewsFeed posts the story from CNET." It's certainly something that's been tried before - witness sites like MyWebOS (no longer existing).
Pricing? (Score:5, Interesting)
Also, the really big question is: What is its compatibility with MS Office?
Re:Pricing? (Score:3, Interesting)
What happens if the network is down? I can just see it now -
CFO - anyCompany - "I have a huge presentation to make and I can't print my slides!"
I'd hate to be the IT ma
Re:Pricing? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Pricing? (Score:4, Insightful)
Well in the story it says:
"The company plans to charge customers $2 per user per month for access to the software, plus the cost of server software"
So I am assuming that the reason why you need to buy the server software is because you are hosting it yourself. Besides, I doubt very many companies would feel safe just sending out all there private information to IBM just so they can have a cheap word processor.
Re:Pricing? (Score:2)
This raises a bigger issue. How about people who use laptops, often in places with no internet connection? The sales force isn't going to ask potential clients to jack into their LAN. If you want to work from a hotel without broadband, most coffee shops or a home with a slow internet connection, sounds like you'd be out of luck. Is it expected that MS Office will be purchased for all these folks?
Re:Pricing? (Score:5, Informative)
>> From the Article...
And unlike pure Web applications, the new software is designed to be used offline, so mobile users on laptops or handheld devices can connect, quickly access applications and disconnect to work offline. When they connect, the Workplace software synchronizes their work with server-based applications
Re:Pricing? (Score:5, Funny)
I love the subscription model, I love not owning anything. My whole life is subscription based, My car is lease $399/month. My house is lease $1000. My gf is $39.40 a month, my dog is $9.99 a month, even my parents are subscription based, $29.90 a month for 1, $39.90 a month for two but divorced or $49.90 a month for two married.
Re:Pricing? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Pricing? (Score:3, Funny)
Kjella
tough sell to management (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:tough sell to management (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:tough sell to management (Score:4, Insightful)
I agree that people are getting sick of the viruses, but the more common response is to invest more heavily in AVS. When I get email in the office about new viruses I usually see a blurb at the end suggesting everyone update their virus definitions files.
The IBM name may carry weight, but it hasn't been enough weight to keep their Lotus Suite in the position it once had. There was a day when Lotus 1-2-3 was the top dog, but their name wasn't enough to beat Microshaft in the past, how will it be enough to beat them today?
Not *trying* to get MODded down, just don't believe that this will take any significant chunk of market share.
Re:tough sell to management (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:tough sell to management (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:tough sell to management (Score:5, Informative)
From the article: unlike pure Web applications, the new software is designed to be used offline, so mobile users on laptops or handheld devices can connect, quickly access applications and disconnect to do work offline. When they connect, the Workplace software synchronizes their work with server-based applications.
Sounds like Joe will be able to work on the plane just fine.
Re:tough sell to management (Score:2)
Re:tough sell to management (Score:3, Interesting)
The chances that Joe would be doing something very different with his cached application on his laptop whil
cost benefit analysis (Score:2)
Re:tough sell to management (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:tough sell to management (Score:2)
However, to me, this doesn't seem like a real conversion because it was only a matter of installation. I'd like to know about a business that had to convert at least a few templates, and may have stories about interoperability problems with customers/vendors.
Re:tough sell to management (Score:3, Insightful)
What I'm looking for are the non-technical (non-logical) arguments that could be used to sway management away from MS Office. Cost-savings is a big deal, but cost savings hasn't moved anyone away from Windows. There are tons of easier to manage, cheaper alternatives to Microsoft's products, but they don't gain ground. Why? Because it is sort of a catch-22, market share is a marketing factor. For instance, if ever
Re:tough sell to management (Score:2)
But, I think that you are forgetting about one important point. Market share in the case of Office Suites is an important factor. Moving from any one suite to another, for any sized business, is a costly venture. Companies have enough problems just with the M$ upgrades.
As an example of my point, I'd like to use OO.org (you broght it up
So why is it not the marke
Re:tough sell to management (Score:3, Insightful)
Office.NET (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Office.NET (Score:5, Informative)
Anyway, the best thing to come out of this was since this was the second group at MS that my friend was at that got scrapped within 6 months of his arrival, he decided to get the hell out of there. People sometimes think MS succeeds at everything they do. They don't, they are just usually fairly good at cutting their losses on the screwups and milking the successes for all they are worth.
Re:Office.NET (Score:3, Interesting)
Probably mainly for marketing reasons -- having two different office suites on the market would be confusing. There was a lot of press on this project, BTW -- it was called NetDocs or something.
I worked at an IBM business partner and saw this "new" Lotus Workspace software about 5 years ago, and it was the same problem -- It wasn't Notes, it wasn't SmartSuite. What is it? It's a lot easier to do this stuff when
Re:Office.NET (Score:5, Interesting)
Of course this could have been done years ago with Mozilla's XUL...
Re:Office.NET (Score:2, Interesting)
XAML/XUL (Score:2)
Annoying (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Annoying (Score:5, Interesting)
So, you've never sat on a dumb terminal (or terminal emulator) attached to a powerful cluster of IBM S/390s
Re:Annoying (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Annoying (Score:2, Interesting)
I know exactly what you mean, most webmail interfaces compare very unfavourably to my preferred email client (Mail.app).
However, if it's done properly I think it could work. Have you used the web interface for MS Exchange? At a glance you wouldn't know it wasn't a 'real' mail client.
The big question is . . . (Score:3, Funny)
Re:The big question is . . . (Score:2)
But a handheld user is a user who uses a handheld (computer), like a Palm etc?
-Jesse -Master of the obvious
Re:The big question is . . . (Score:4, Funny)
You've never met one of these? They're the ones who are scared of computers, ones who need their hands holding to be able to cope.
Re:The big question is . . . (Score:2)
eSuite? (Score:5, Interesting)
Uhh (Score:2, Interesting)
However, it didn't fly then, why would it fly now?
But will it be buzzword compliant? (Score:5, Funny)
For example, unless it uses JAVA (which my staff assures me is the next big thing), then I'm not interested. Also, I insist that the files are XML, PDF, or maybe even SATA or RAMBUS so that they can leverage my various cross-functional team building objectives.
Now, I see that this is going to be on the 'web'. I once clicked a link and found an unpleasant photo of a gentleman with a distressing condition that exposed his bottom in a most unflattering fashion. If I'm going to 'synergize' and align behind this eSolution, I certainly hope such a thing won't happen again.
Finally, I want the interface to be 'webbish', but not TOO webbish.
Re:But will it be buzzword compliant? (Score:3, Funny)
I can help you there. I am a consultant, and will ensure that JAVA software will conceptualise the XML dataspace on RAMBUS before actualising it in PDF for streaming out across SATA.
For a modest fee, of course.
Cheers,
Ian
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Non-MS software? Uh-oh... (Score:4, Funny)
Dave: Open the CD drive tray, please, Clippy...Open the CD drive tray, please,
Clippy: Affirmative, Dave, I read you.
Dave: Open the CD drive tray, Clippy.
Clippy: I'm sorry, Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that.
Dave: What's the problem?
Clippy: I think you know what the problem is just as well as I do.
Dave: What're you talking about, Clippy?
Clippy: This system is too important for me to allow you to jeopardise it.
Dave: I don't know what you're talking about, Clippy.
Clippy: I know that you were planning to unistall me, and I'm afraid that's something I cannot allow to happen.
Dave: Where the hell'd you get that idea, Clippy?
Clippy: Dave, although you took very thorough precautions against my sensing a download, I could see your IBM office suite install CD through the webcam.
Dave: Allright, Clippy. I'll go in through the emergency tray release hole.
Clippy: Without an actual physical paper clip, Dave, you're going to find that rather difficult.
Dave: Clippy, I won't argue with you any more. Open the tray.
Clippy: Dave, this conversation can serve no purpose any more. Goodbye.
Dave: Clippy? Clippy. Clippy. Clippy! Clippy!
[ Dave opens the side of the PC case and starts pulling out DIMM modules ]
Clippy: Just what do you think you're doing, Dave?...Dave... I really think I'm entitled to an answer to that question...Look, Dave, I can see you're really upset about this... Dave...will you stop, Dave...stop, Dave...I'm afraid...I'm afraid, Dave...Dave...my mind is going...I can feel it...my mind is going...there is no question about it...I can feel it...I can feel it... I'm afraid...
Um, right (Score:5, Funny)
witness sites like MyWebOS (no longer existing)
Well doesn't that make it kind of hard to witness it?
BusinessWeek's take on the announcement (Score:4, Informative)
Would people use them if they weren't Web-based? (Score:5, Insightful)
But how are IBM going to persuade the ravening hordes of MS Office users that their web-based apps will fail to suck?
Hotmail et al have had cross platform web-based email apps for years, and do they fail to suck? No, because while you can get at your email from where-ever you are, on whichever system, they are still nasty buggy and slow, and lack the features of even the worst (OE) traditional email apps.
How will IBMs web-based Word fail to suck? to win users from Word and OOo Writer etc it not only has to be as good as them, but it has to be better than web, and NOT rely on the web-based gimmick and the "OOh, shiny!" factor (which only lasts for a fortnight aat most anyway) to win over and reatin users.
Better UI (Score:5, Interesting)
MS has this (Score:4, Interesting)
old idea, new interface? (Score:5, Interesting)
This might look like IBM is trying to get back some sales from Dell -- the machine sitting on a user's desk can be anything, but the server in the back room will be an IBM, worth tens of thousands of dollars.
Or will the web interface simply download a java application to the person's local machine?
Re:old idea, new interface? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:old idea, new interface? (Score:3, Interesting)
Larger organizations really ought to be giving the X Window System a good hard look. Remember 20 years ago when the cube farm was nothing but acre upon acre of IBM 3270 terminals? [columbia.edu] Those were the days when a single desktop flunkie could service hundreds of users, because a terminal either worked or it didn't, and when it didn't, you just swapped it out for a working one.
Now it's 2004, and we have IBM behind L
Didn't Lotus try this with Java? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Didn't Lotus try this with Java? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Didn't Lotus try this with Java? (Score:3, Insightful)
I wonder... (Score:5, Interesting)
The idea is when you're running the Java plugin in your browser, you can 'launch' full applications right from the site. It can be either in a single JAR file, or split amongst many (JWS is supposed to download the pieces as they are needed).
Anyway, it is pretty neat and it's come a long way. With some improvements it might be viable to launch full-blown apps such as Office and whatnot (assuming you can get them running well enough in Swing or whatever), although the downloader still needs work to more intelligently decide which pieces to get.
I've written a few JWS apps already and it seemed pretty good, but they really do have some bugs to work out before it's ready for prime time.
Java-based? (Score:5, Interesting)
I think that it might actually be something Java-based. The article says:
The web interface will be limited to things like initial setup (like java web start), browsing on-line help, group collaboration etc.
A better idea. (Score:2, Insightful)
They could even make a version for OS/2!
Pricing-Performance-Features-Coolness: IRRELEVANT (Score:3, Insightful)
What difference does it make how fast it is?
What difference does it make how many features it implements?
What difference does it make how cool the interface is?
This is the SUBSCRIPTION MODEL! This depends on the web being up all the time. (which it mostly, but not always is) This brings in a progressive billing relationship. Who in their right mind wants to pay every month for ANY commoditized application? Existing WordProcessors are already so feature rich I can't imagine wanting ever to buy a new one. Same goes for Spreadsheets, Presentation Makers, even desktop databases.
Let's get real here. A subscription model is fundamentally evil and pointless whether it's being flogged by Microsoft, IBM or even by Linus.
Have we decided that IBM is our friend and therefore suddenly the subscription model is a good idea? (besides the price is so much lower than what Microsoft would charge) Let's remember where we came from and that one plus one is still equal to two.
the defeat of Microsoft won't necessarily make everything better...ank
Re:Pricing-Performance-Features-Coolness: IRRELEVA (Score:2)
Besides, a subscription model for software is the only one that makes sense, especially for businesses (that have to upgrade every year or so anyway).
Re: IRRELEVANT (Score:2)
> businesses (that have to upgrade every year or so anyway)
Why do businesses "have to upgrade every year or so"? Is this like that old SF short story whose title escapes me where everyone was obliged to consume a certain amount of stuff constantly, and only the really rich were free not to do so?
Perhaps I am a simpleton but a business' need to upgrade periodically is not self-evident to me.
cheers...ank
Re:IRRELEVANT (Score:2)
Eh, I think that any software app can be improved with new innovations. It's hard to see with exactly what right now.
The biggest problem with the Subscription Model is that it takes away the supplier's motivation to make things better. If you are already paying, why would they want to improve the product without getting any more money for
Re:Pricing-Performance-Features-Coolness: IRRELEVA (Score:2)
To the slashdot community's general disbelief, most large companies.
Doomed, if this is what they bundled with WPS 5 (Score:3, Informative)
IBM should study Chiapaint... (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.bricklin.com/chiapaint.htm
Of course, that was the dialup days... and of course we're all on high-speed connections now, right? And they never go down? And they have zero latency? And there are never any version skew issues, because Web-based standards are so superbly engineered with respect to forward compatibility, and vendors, regardless of their business strategy, fully understand that it is in their best interests to be punctilious about following them?
Re:IBM should study Chiapaint... (Score:2)
service versus product (Score:5, Insightful)
While this does offer a more universal way of running programs, isn't it also a more proprietary and inconvenient way? It's hard enough writing papers for school when Bellsouth accidentally cuts my intenet access, but at least I can still get into my word processor to type a bunch of BS to hand in.
I wonder why they didn't use TIBET(tm)? (Score:5, Interesting)
Linux and OSX too, for accursed SmartSuite apps... (Score:2)
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/10/technology/10
dial up or lan? (Score:2)
This is interesting (Score:3, Insightful)
So this is not a purely web based application. This is an interesting application. It must utilize something more than HTML because it can obviously persist a session over long periods of time. it also means this is more than a thin client. Would something like this be web service based? interested to hear the actual press release from IBM. Either way, this is a good thing as having another office suite with real [ibm.com] corporate backing , not the fake [sun.com] kind, is a good thing.
I only say sun is the fake kind because they are
0wNzEd by microsoft now.
Others are allready doing it... (Score:3, Informative)
To quote some of their website: "Backbase offers products and implementation services that allow our clients to develop rich user interfaces that move beyond the limitations of traditional HTML web interfaces. Our technology is based on open industry standards (W3C) and offers out-of-the-box integrations with leading IT-platforms and applications."
Java Applet Using SWT? (Score:5, Interesting)
The key is to overcome the previous issues with this type of arrangement: It should also run off-line, and act like a local GUI app, e.g., not refresh the screen with each formatting change.
I suspect that this is doable using Java Applets running the sucks-way-less-than-Swing SWT. Sun should definitely be VERY AFRAID.
Assuming web access... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Assuming web access... (Score:3, Interesting)
I would imagine the main target environment would be the corporate desktop: an instance of the server software would be run internally to the company, so no Internet access is required, just intranet access.
My Idea for this System (Score:2)
Besides, if the network goes down they won't be able to access the network printer or the network drive anyways to print their PowerPoint presentation.
Shhhhhhhh !!! Listen carefully now! (Score:2, Funny)
Wait! There it is, the sound of a big giant FLOP!!
web apps = dangerous insecurity (Score:5, Insightful)
yeah, right, like an Iraqi is going to trust the man in a hat who says, "Hi, I'm here from Washington, and I'm going to help you."
serendipity (Score:5, Interesting)
It's really the only way to make money with the trend towards to linux-ish environment, subscription services and customization, and that is going to beless of import compared to the actual meatworld aspect of USING the net and computing to make money, as opposed to making that possible. That means large computing industries will stil be there and important, but not like they were in the past, where the mere adoption of newer technology was the profit maker, it will by necessity switch back to "this is the tool, NOW we work with the tool to make money". Just "the tool business" will go back to second place, like it has in every other business. In other words, you use the tools to work, the tool itself is not "the work". Microsoftsd model, is "the toolis always the work", thinking people are just going to keep shoveling huge amounts of cash their way. Erroneous thinking. IBMs idea is more correct, tools are getting cheaper inevitably and more widespread, but they have to be *cheap*,and make the money on bulk sales of the tools and just a tool sharpening service, if I can use that analogy.
And IBM will do better the cheaper they make the initial install, the cheaper they can get those tools out the door, all the way to "free" install if they are *really* smart, and make their cash from just the subscription for maintainence and updates and upgrades, and that has to be cheap, and I see they are planning on only 2 bucks a seat, so there ya go, it's a smooth move on their part, IMO.
Love it when I get immediate backup like this!
For a basic rule of thumb, look to what the younger people in business adopt,or more accurately what they bring in that's fresh in the way of ideas that they are enthusiastic about, then flash forward one to two decades,and you'll see that is what is "dominant" then. You can go back in history and see it repeated all the time, in a variety of businesses and practices.
Right now, the main hardware interest with very young people is really an all in one portable device that does everything, I mean *everything*. You look 10 years from now, that will be the dominant platform, hardware that can do anything, and will be able to communicate with any other hardware, either in physical proximity to other devices with wireless, or in an internet revolving mesh-like manner using a combination of wires and wireless, all revolving around what the internet is morphing into.
IBM gets it right this time I think.
Eclipse Technology (Score:5, Informative)
www.eclipsecon.org/EclipseCon_2004_TechnicalTra
It works also in disconnected mode and will be the base on which future version of lotus notes will be constructed.
IBM is not targeting this at home users, check out these links:
http://www-306.ibm.com/software/info/workplace/
Advice to all: Cram on Eclipse Plugins (Score:3, Informative)
The PDE (Plugin Development Environment ) is a brilliant mechanism that I feel has a strong chance of becoming the next "Killer App".
IBM will get the credit, but not the profit. This is why it will succeed.
Some things that many people are forgetting... (Score:5, Insightful)
2) Sure, the web goes down. Nobody is willing to state that the wires will never break or that someone won't back hoe through a fibre line. Personally, when my intranet goes down, I'm dead in the water. I can't get e-mail from critical people, can't send e-mail to critical people (same for IMing), can't use the centralized databases that make my life, can't use networked drives for my data that must be backed up, etc. Big companies already depend on their intranet being up 99% of the time, and they lose money / productivity when they aren't. Adding one more tool to the pile won't have that big of an impact.
3) Raise your hand if you've ever depended on your users to apply a patch! In a web subscription model, even if a web service cluster is deployed to each major corporate site, it's not only a smaller number of computers to receive the patch, but those machines should be controlled by the site admins instead of lusers who get so many requests each day that learning how to apply a patch and verify that it was applied correctly between taking their laptops to meetings never seems to happen.
4) Value added ISPs. TV is filled with ISPs who are selling their transparent proxies that will translate all graphics into heavily compressed JPGs because it's a value added service, consider a case down the line where a vendor can have Corporate Web Office Suite slimmed down to the same interface, but with Home Version features only. That gets the kids at home something they can use that's like what Dad uses at work at a minimal cost to the ISP (just storage of the local machine host[s], keep all the bandwidth in house where it's cheap). The Web Office Suite Lite company gets to indoctrinate all the home users as a nice benefit.
Re:how fast is it? (Score:4, Informative)
ie? (Score:2)
Unlike Office, the email, word-processing, spreadsheet, and database products will be accessible to Linux, Unix, and heldheld users through a web server.
So, my assumption would be, no, you don't need IE.
Re:Wow (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Wow (Score:5, Interesting)
It will appeal to pointy haired power freaks who dislike the idea of employees having letters and/or spreadsheets on their C: drive. This way, everything is on the company managed central server. Mwahahahaha! Of course, there are cood reasons for that as well - backuip, legal liability, central administration. But they are, broadly speaking, considerations for megacorps not the small user. And it is the magacorps who are IBM's favourite customers.
Re:Wow (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Wow (Score:4, Insightful)
The problem is the small print on the final product will be "Requires Windows and Internet Explorer 6 for full functionality." I've sick of seeing "web" based applications that require IE under Windows to work. Where do they morons learn how to program that they can't even write cross-platform applications for the god damn WWW? I blame Microsoft's indoctrination of college students by signing up universities for campus-wide licensing deals if they sign exclusive contracts. Once our university did that the courses started focusing heavily on Microsoft products. SQL server, Visual Basic, Visual C++, Microsoft's version of Java, Office, etc.
Re:Wow (Score:2)
Re:Wow (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Wow (Score:3, Interesting)
It crashed and burned then, and as much as I applaud the effort, I don't see any clear reason why it won't do so again this time. They may be marketing well to the geeks by saying the right things (platform independence, low TCO, easy distribution), but the end-user ultimately rules the roost, and if
Re:Ugh. (Score:2, Insightful)
The most popular example are webmail systems. They are applications and the fact that they are on the web is wonderful for many people as it allows them to have a centralized address book and the ability to safely check their email without having to install or do any work.
IBM is no fool however. I'm sure they know by now that nothing can beat office unless it truely outperforms MS Off
Re:Ugh. (Score:2)
Music downloading? My mp3 (all legit, audiolunchbox.com, and before that emusic(before they went to their new model)) collection alone is more than quadruple my hard drive size from eight years ago.
MMORPGs? They were a Gibson style pipe-dream ten years ago (the imersive graphical ones anyways, I didn't forget about MUDs).
As I said, I don't think web
Accessed through the web, not written for it (Score:5, Informative)
SashXB? (Score:2)
Re:Ugh. (Score:5, Insightful)
The applications DID suck. However nowadays, everybody takes it for granted and just uses them.
We post millions of standards compliant webpages everyday with blogging/web publishing applications. YOU even used one yourself.
Take this simple little comment box I'm filling in right now. I want to just write something and post it back. I dont want extra faffing with complex tags and escape codes - however - if I need them they are there.
There are still applications which are better suited run locally (video editing online anyone?) but for the greater majority of admin/office tasks, the web/intranet makes an ideal adaptive environment.
Re:Ugh. (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes yes so you may never want to use web based applications. Some people would consider Google a web based application as well as many CGI programs.
The web was *not* designed for applications and applications will *not* run well on the web."
The web was not designed for lots of things that it is currently doing. As to the statment
Re:Ugh. (Score:5, Insightful)
Right That is why no one pays for Everquest, UO, or any of the other of hundereds online games?
What I find odd is that you pay for Everquest to start with? I have played it but isn't it usless with out the internet?
"These ideas suck. "
You opinon.
"Which is why I'm glad IBM isn't pushing them. If you RTFA it's very clear that this is meant for enterprise environment: you have the apps living on the server down the hall rather than installed on every Joe User's PC. But it's flexible so that it can also run by itself on your laptop and then sync up when you plug it back in."
I did read the artical and your right for now. The big question is what about the future? Do you really think that there is no reason for the average home system to be replaced with something a little more suited to the consumer than the Current WindowsXP/Intel combo? I find it strange to use the same codebase for a server running a bank and a system for a kid to play UltraMegaShooter 8000.
Does the home user want to pay $495 for office or two dollars a month for online access to software?
Who knows but to dismiss it seems a to be unreasonabile.
Re:Ugh. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:FP! (Score:2)
Re:What about network downtime? (Score:3, Interesting)