Challenging Microsoft on the Desktop

Dotnaught writes "As Microsoft moves to offer software-as-a-service with Windows Live, online companies are moving to challenge Microsoft on the desktop. In a decision that would have been seen as foolish a few years ago, file sharing and social networking company TransMedia plans to release desktop productivity apps (in conjunction with online ones) as lightweight Microsoft Office alternatives. Google, meanwhile, through its deal with Intuit, is colonizing desktop apps as it has done with browsers and search toolbars. Microsoft used to have a home field advantage on the desktop, thanks to Windows. Lately, operating system ownership is looking a lot less valuable."

Is this new?

[andrewman327]

I really fail to see how this is a new advancement. The only real news that I see here is that some of these programs (OoO, Linux) are finally mature enough mature enough to challenge Microsoft. Haven't there always been other providers of desktop applications?

I don't see how this is unique threat to M$ either. From TFA's first sentence (underlining mine): A year after the release of its suite of online integrated media-sharing and social networking applications, Glide Effortless, TransMedia is redoubling its effort to challenge Apple, Microsoft, MySpace, and Google.

Re:I cant wait to see how the compare...

[Brian-esser.com]

I'd love to see google or some of the others challenge M$ on their home turf and walk all over them. my money is on Google being the most likely to pull it off.

Re:I cant wait to see how the compare...

[jimstapleton]

I dunno, I hold more faith in OpenOffice than Google for wordprocessing, they've been at it for quite a while and have a really good product.

As for web browser, I'll probably stick to FireFox.

Problem is, google is not unknown for somewhat shady practices on occasion, and with them being in an excellent position to bias things (they are a search engine after all - ever search with "web", "internet", "net", and "browser" could have the first result become GoogleUseItOrDieWebBrowser or someting).

It has been MS office more than Windows for years

[EMB Numbers]

Most Windows users don't understand what an operating system is or where the boundaries between the operating system, its desk top, and its application might be.

Even the ones who know they run "Windows XP" as opposed to some other version don't know what that means. They do know and use Outlook, Excel, Word, PowerPoint, Visio, and Access. Why do they know ? Because they start those applications frequently and a splash screen tells them what they are running. The equivalent to the splash screen for the operating system is only shown at startup, and most people neither reboot regularly nor pay attention when they do.

My assertion is that a corporate IT department could substitute any operating system and users would barely notice as long as they could continue to use Outlook, Excel, Word, PowerPoint, Visio, and Access.

If I am right, competing with MS in the application space will be a lot harder than competing in the OS space, and we all know how successful competitors have been in the OS space.

Why I'm sticking with my MS Office (97)...

[xxxJonBoyxxx]

Why I'm sticking with MS Office (97):
    - It still works with people using Office 2003
    - It doesn't take a registration key
    - The CD is quite easy to copy for friends and family
    - The built-in VB stuff is completely (safely) broken when you just run it off a file share
    - It never phones home (and there's no Internet component)
    - It installs in under 100MB
    - If any new features have been introduced since 1997, I don't need them
    - It doesn't try to figure out my advertising profile from the documents I work with

Re:OS owneship

[E IS mC(Square)]

True. But with M$ itself trying to set a foothold in the webbased applications, it changes some - if not all - rules of the game.

And this is just a beginning. Earlier, due to unavaillibity of a lot of applications on non-M$ (read Linux) OS, I had practially no way of getting myself rid of XP. Now, there is only one application (Creative soundblaster music reciever driver, and sadly, I dont see them doing anything for Linux users.*). So, at least the ball has been set to roll, and appear to gather the critical mass pretty soon.

But having said that, there will always be some part of OS/Softwares which can never be ported to work with a virtual machine/browser. Take various drivers for instance.

Re:I cant wait to see how the compare...

[hpavc]

OO is a nice proof of concept, but its moving anywhere. Its not even comparable with MSWorks or Office97, sure it has a lot of dense high tech bling here and there, but its also bloated and suffered greatly from being too much too soon.

It reminds me of Mozilla before Firefox

Re:Is this new?

[prelelat]

The reason its a threat to microsoft is that the applications are becomming web based(or multiplatform) and less OS dependent. Where 3 years ago you had to have the OS that the software was made for its now run on a server where the software is run on. So say word was web based you would be able to use word in OSX, Linux, Unix, Windows. This means big problems for Windows as an operating system if it caught on. I really doubt it would change the industry over night, but I can see why someone would be saying it might.

Article is meaningless, msft has same stranglehold

[walterbyrd]

1) There are more desktop apps than just office. A lot more. It only takes one must-have windows-only app to kill the deal for any alternative OS.

2) Aside from running apps that most desktop users want, windows also works with the hardware that most users want: multi-function printer/scanner/copier things, win-modems, ipods, etc.

3) Lots of popular web site will not work correctly on anything except msie.

4) DRM & multi-media.

As much as I dislike msft, I prefer to be realistic and admit that linux has no chance of being popular on the desktop for the forseeable future.

Re:Online apps

[someonewhois]

Free and free upgrades - You don't have to worry about paying for this or keeping it up to date especially if you use multiple different computers.

What prevents these services from cutting you off from your data and requiring you to start paying monthly charges to use it plus an $400 "sign up fee", effectively holding all of your data for ransom?