Google Cloud Connect: The limits of a Microsoft makeover Google's new Microsoft Office plugin is meant to woo existing Microsoft users onto Google Apps, Mountain View's suite of (completely) web-based business applications. But the bridge it lays between the two competing platforms goes only so far. Though the free plugin synchronizes Microsoft Office files with Google Apps, letting …
"One Reg reader took issue with the plugin's inability to provide cross-platform collaboration, arguing that Google isn't giving users what they expect from the service. "After using [Google Cloud Connect] for a while, I see Microsoft has nothing to worry about," he said. "Classic bait and switch!""
Yes, how dare Google offer you a free service that doesn't do everything you wanted. You should demand back every penny you spent on it, you tit.
Be very clear about Google... They do not offer free services, the services are paid for by you viewing their advertising or in some way giving up data which they want from you. Their services may be free to use, in that you don't hand over cash for them, but they cost in your viewing adverts or handing over (usually) personal data.
If you're happy with that, it's fine, but you do have to give Google something in one way or another.
(Oh and before the adblock lock chime in - you may not pay in ads, but you're still handing data over to them. Also, if everyone does this Google (MS, et at) will simply develop countermeasures, at the moment too few people run adblock to bother them.)
You could use microsofts own sharepoint online service rather than assume google is the only player. Though if you feel the urge to give google and Microsoft all your companies sensitive documents (and you will, because you employ people who have no concept of security on line) then you go right ahead. Give google access to my companies documents you have to be kidding.
So the headline here is that Google's free product has a catch, except, as the Google product manager explains, Microsoft's offering has the same catch - neither company can handle the issue of a browser-based app having less functionality than a desktop app.
Of course there is 'bait & switch' here: Microsoft's business model is predicated on having fat desktops with far too much functionality/complexity/resource utilisation. Google's business model is for you to stick everything on the web, where it has to be simpler, but also less secure and, yes, more exposed to Google's advertising. The difference is that Microsoft's web offerings still expect you to use (== purchase) Microsoft desktop technologies (at least the browser, which means the OS too, these days). Google's offerings have no such limitations and are typically free. So why shouldn't they try to connect them to Microsoft's bloatware?
This article points out one problem with Cloud Connect. But there are workarounds:
Offisync(offisync.com) is just like Cloud Connect, but locked collaboration.
There's an app called syncdocs (syncdocs.com) which does enable live collaboration between Google online and Microsoft Word. But Word only, no Excel or Powerpoint.
Box (box.net) also lets users collaborate like Dropbox.
...the Google suite excels beyond MS and Sharepoint. Not the least is the real time collaboration which still can't be achieved by Sharepoint.
Not to mention Microsoft utterly mediocre cloud offering to enterprise businesses. Whilst with Google you can have your information spanning many data centres around the world with MS they will only host in one country. The end result is for a large multinational company you have unacceptable latency issues for sites distant from their data centres. It makes no sense to host data in Ireland when your staff are in India or China or for that matter Australia.
MS have a business monopoly and as per usual they are only offering a half assed solution and expecting us to pay more than five times as much. Not only that but now you 'rent' the full MS Office 'experience' from them rather than actually owning the licences.
MS Office and Drop Box? - What are you smoking?
This article points out one problem with Cloud Connect. But there are workarounds:
Offisync(offisync.com) is just like Cloud Connect, but with locked versions.
There's a Google app called syncdocs (syncdocs.com) which does enable live collaboration between Google online and Microsoft Word. But no Excel or Powerpoint.
Box (box.net) also lets users collaborate like Dropbox.
As Steve Ten points out none of the other solutions offer real time collaboration in the same way as GoogleDocs. When that feature is useful it's *really* useful. Add to that rock solid (and invisible) version control and Google Docs really stands out.
The issue with online document suites remains latency. Even with a fast connection (my home 20mb ADSL sustains 9mb) editing large documents, particularly spreadsheets, can be frustrating. I tend to do creation of any document of any size, or major rewrites, in MS Office and upload for sharing and editing.
You could deploy LibreOffice (or OpenOffice.org) and an NFS server. If the server also does YP and you know about the group sticky bit on folders, so much the better .....
(BTW: I actually tried OpenOffice.org over openSSH with X forwarding one time, just for a bit of a laugh and carry-on. It ran usably fast with just two remote terminals on the go at one time; didn't have enough people spare to try with any more.)
According to Google, over the first 24 hours of its release, someone installed the plugin every four seconds.
What they don't tell us is how fast people were uninstalling this plugin. Brilliant idea, and quite useless as well, unless u want two diff documents pretending to have all your data. Try important a document with anything other than text or pictures and you'll see exactly how mediocre Google Docs is
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
