• On BNET: Apple's insanely great marketing
July 10, 2009 4:00 AM PDT

Microsoft's Office head talks Google and more

by Ina Fried
  • Font size
  • Print
  • 32 comments

Stephen Elop is convinced that even in a world of free, browser-based productivity software, consumers and businesses will continue to pay for Office.

Microsoft will bow to reality with Office 2010, adding browser-based versions of Excel, Word, PowerPoint, and OneNote. But, in an interview this week, the head of Microsoft's Business Division says that there is still plenty of life in the full version.

"At the highest level, what we're able to put forward to our customers is not just the best productivity experience, but one that spans the PC, the browser environment, the Web environment, services, and so forth, and the mobile device," Elop said. "So, it's the best productivity experience across the PC, the mobile phone, and the browser."

At its worldwide Partner Conference on Monday, Microsoft will give people a feel for how this works and is expected to start broader testing of the first piece--the desktop applications.

Elop

(Credit: Microsoft)

As for Google, Elop said that most businesses still think of Google as a search company or are just kicking the tires on Google Docs. He shrugged off the fact that Google this week brought the products out of beta.

"I've heard that the word was dropped," Elop said. "I didn't notice that anything else had changed. So I don't know if the software suddenly got better, or they just changed the name."

He also said it is too soon to have an opinion on Google's just-announced Chrome OS.

"We haven't seen it," he said. "We don't know anything other than what has been written in a blog."

In a wide-ranging interview, Elop shared more views on Google as well as his perspectives on Office, business software, and the broader economy.

What are customers asking for from Office? What's the most common thing that large businesses ask you for when you're talking to them about Office?
Elop: You know, when you boil it all down, everything we do essentially in the division, when you're with a CEO or a CIO or whatever the case may be, the base conversation is about productivity. It's about how can you help me solve this problem, and that problem often is about the productivity of some aspect of their business, of something they're trying to achieve competitively, or whatever.

Certainly in today's economic setting, cost savings comes into it. How can you help me save money in getting what we need to get done? How can you help me solve these problems, but do so in a more cost-effective way?

You mentioned cost savings. How is the business environment relative to investment in software and other technology compared to, say, when we spoke in February?
Elop: You know, when we spoke in February, I think there were a lot of people who didn't know what was going on.

I think people may not agree as to what's going on in the economy right now. Everyone has different opinions. But at this point people have opinions. And because people have opinions about what's going on in their business or their part of the economy, on that basis they begin to make plans. The plans will be different than the plans they might have had six or nine months ago, but they can actually establish a plan, and therefore a budget, and decide, OK, in our business we're going to do this, we're going to invest in these ways, and so forth. I don't want to say there's increased confidence as much as there is less ambiguity in people's minds. They've decided what it means to them.

Now, at Microsoft, you've heard Steve (Ballmer) talk a number of times about how we view what's happened as being a reset in the economy, that it's not a bounce back to the way things were, but things have reset, and things need to stabilize here even more, and then we'll see things begin to grow as increases in productivity in the economy kick in.

The product lineup that you guys are going to have going into next year, what does that add to your arsenal, particularly Office 2010?
Elop: I think at the highest level, what we're able to put forward to our customers is (not) just the best productivity experience, but one that spans the PC, the browser environment, the Web environment, services, and so forth, and the mobile device.

When people look at Office 2010 in the broadest sense, and that's both the client applications, it's the services offerings, it's the server products, it's the Web applications, all of those pieces together. Certainly what customers are recognizing as they've had pre-briefings and the early experimentation with the products is that we're at some form of generational shift into this world of software plus services, and Office 2010, I think, is surprising people as it relates to the extent to which we've fully embraced software plus services.

How do you see the balance of Web applications and desktop programs? You guys have obviously talked about it's not just about putting Office in the browser. What are the kinds of things that you think are best done via the browser, what are the things that are best done in a desktop program, and how does that inform sort of the way you guys have designed those two products?
Elop: First of all, it's helpful to look at specific scenarios. I'll just use a personal example. I was at my parents' home recently, I needed to edit a document, I hadn't carted my PC around with me. I had my father's PC connected to the Internet. I was able to use a Web application to quickly look at a document, make some lightweight changes, and pass that document along without interrupting the fidelity of the document, being a part of the collaborative experience with others at Microsoft. There's a specific scenario where the Web application played an important role.

"We think less about the Web applications as standalone word processor things, and far more about it as a complement to the trio of the phone, the PC, and the browser environment. We think about the best experience being the sum of those things working well together."
-- Stephen Elop, Microsoft

Similarly, if you look in the mobile environment, there are scenarios related to, for example, taking a picture as part of some work that you're doing. You're unlikely to take a picture with a Web browser, or a notebook computer.

The second part of the answer, though, is that while there are specific scenarios that are best advantaged within each of the different ways of delivering our technology, the best experience comes from the combination of all of those things. So, we think less about the Web applications as standalone word processor things, and far more about it as a complement to the trio of the phone, the PC, and the browser environment. We think about the best experience being the sum of those things working well together.

Your preference, and certainly the way you guys are investing in the Web applications, is as an adjunct to the desktop, not a replacement. That said, how common do you think it will be that businesses license just the Web applications for at least a portion of their employees?
Elop: Well, we hope that it's very common to the extent that there are, let's say, workers in a business (where) today a company has said, look, there's one PC for 100 employees on a shop floor, or something like that. To the extent that they now license those workers for a lightweight browser experience in some way, shape, or form, and they're now part of the Office family, that's a positive thing for us. It brings them into the whole environment of productivity that we're trying to deliver.

So, those scenarios we think will be relatively common. It could be factory floor workers, it could be retail employees, and outlets around the world, and there are all sorts of scenarios that we think have been under-served from participating in the productivity experiences that some of these applications will serve to support.

I guess the other piece of that question is whether you expect that there will be a portion of customers that attempt to move some part of their workforce that has access to desktop Office to just browser-based versions?
Elop: I mean, by definition there will be some. Do I think it's a huge proportion? No, I don't. And the reason for that is because, particularly in that we're talking about the commercial setting, where we believe that the productivity experiences that we deliver in the rich client applications, with the Web applications as a complement to that, is still going to be a compelling experience that people are going to be saying, hey, I want people participating, for example, in collaborative editing of documents, in collaborative sharing of PowerPoint presentations, as examples.

For example, our multi-user authoring feature. There are examples like that which we believe represent improvements in productivity for these customers that are delivered through the rich client application. So while you'll always be able to point to some examples of someone somewhere making that decision, we don't believe that's going to be the dominating force.

How often do customers bring up Google apps in meetings, and is it usually when you're talking about the product, or when you're talking about price?
Elop: Customers are aware of Google in different ways. Sometimes just from a search perspective, sometimes they're aware of things like Google Docs and so forth. And our experience is it may lead to a discussion around what is software plus services, what is Microsoft's view on it. And the tendency is not, obviously in our conversation, to dwell on their price versus our price, or things like that, because it's two very, very different things.

When you put side by side, for example, the full range of on-premise and in the cloud services like Exchange, SharePoint, (Office Communications Server), and so forth, the full range of rich client applications and soon Web applications and so forth, combined with many years of enterprise support, of an understanding of how we're going to take care of mission-critical capabilities, it's a whole different conversation. And so that's why in the context of a large-scale customer who is engaging these things I think there's tire kicking, or they may look at these things, but there's a clear understanding that... enterprises have some very specific and far-reaching requirements that Microsoft over many years has figured out how to deliver.

Well, they're out of beta now, is that a significant move?
Elop: I don't know. I've heard that the word was dropped, I didn't notice that anything else had changed. So I don't know if the software suddenly got better, or they just changed the name. I couldn't interpret what it meant.

As someone who has been in this industry a long time, what do you make of Google's announcement that they're moving into the operating system realm with Chrome OS?
Elop: Well, let me just challenge the premise of your question. They've announced a couple of times now that they're moving into the operating system business, because there's the whole Android thing, and now there's Chrome.

We haven't seen it. We don't know anything other than what has been written in a blog. So it's very hard for us to know, without seeing what they're doing, to comment on it.

You have architected part of Office 2010 to run in the browser-based Office Web apps. If I'm not mistaken Chrome isn't one of the supported browsers, but it might, in fact, work in Chrome. Do you guys see Chrome as an important browser to develop for?
Elop: It depends on how you define important. From a market share perspective Chrome is very low. So I think we're driven by customers on these things. There are other browsers that have greater market share, and that's where we've concentrated our first efforts.

During her years at CNET News, Ina Fried has changed beats several times, changed genders once, and covered both of the Pirates of Silicon Valley. These days, most of her attention is focused on Microsoft. E-mail Ina.
Recent posts from Beyond Binary
Bing getting a fall refresh
Microsoft moves MSN Video under Bing umbrella
Windows 7 use continues to climb
Microsoft pulls Windows 7 download tool
Microsoft releases Exchange 2010, acquires Teamprise
Ex-Palm trio loads up on Vitamin D
Sesame Street, Droid get Google's love
Microsoft launching health tech video show
Add a Comment (Log in or register) (32 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
by kelmon July 10, 2009 4:52 AM PDT
I haven't seen anything yet in Office 2010 that makes me want to upgrade. This is not to say that Office 2010 looks to be a bad product but rather that Office 2007 is already "good enough" that I cannot see sufficient justification for an expensive upgrade. This surely is a problem that Microsoft understands - the product is already so mature that it is hard to add really significant new features that will encourage people to upgrade and therefore continue to draw milk from this particular cash cow.

However, I may well consider the next version of Office:mac if the Mac Business Unit at Microsoft delivers a good version this time around. The migration from CodeWarrior to Xcode evidentially caused them sufficient problems with Office:mac 2008 such that Visual Basic was dropped and overall performance wasn't great. Next time around we should get a good edition and therefore I'd be much more tempted to upgrade my old version of Office:mac 2004 so that I can run the likes of Word and Excel at native speeds on my laptop rather than under virtualisation. Still, it is nice to see that they are finally sorting out Exchange support in Entourage.
Reply to this comment
by Poulster July 10, 2009 6:40 AM PDT
I just wish they would make it simple, simple, simple... and that it would stop changing what I write, thinking I meant something else.

For me, google docs is looking more and more attractive.

I want basic stuff in a light program ? not software where I use less than 5% of the features.
by July 10, 2009 6:53 AM PDT
I haven't seen anything yet in Office 2007 that makes me want to upgrade.
I haven't seen anything yet in Office 2003 that makes me want to upgrade.
I haven't seen anything yet in Office 2000 that makes me want to upgrade.
etc.

I still write a letter with the same tools I used 10, 15 or more years ago. Format, spell check, print. How many others are the same? All MS office products would do for me is offer a non-stop flow of security vulnerabilities if I was to run Windows.
by kelmon July 10, 2009 7:25 AM PDT
Office 2007 sold itself to me by getting rid of the silly 65,000 row limit in an Excel workbook. On the downside, I still have not really got used to the Ribbon interface and I'd dearly like the opportunity to be left in a room with the person responsible for Access 2007 interface. What is given with one hand is taken away by another...
by rapier1 July 10, 2009 10:03 AM PDT
@Poulster,

If you want a simple lightweight easy to use editor then Word is, pretty obviously, not the right choice for you. Likewise, OpenOffice probably is a poor choice along with many of the other full fledged word processing applications. They are the right choice for people who have more complex documents they need to develop.
by ikramerica--2008 July 12, 2009 10:58 PM PDT
Yep, I'm using the same version of Office .X I've had for many, many years. The processing power of the Macs has improved so even the poorly optimized Word in this version runs fast (Excel was always great), and as long as people don't send files in the new Word format, they open in Word, Pages and TextEdit.

But if MS really wants to kill windows, they will push the Web Office, because it will make Google OS, various Linux versions and Mac OS that much more viable as alternatives.
by a_flores July 10, 2009 4:58 AM PDT
What kind of office in 2050 will we have? I mean, there is just a little upgrade related to the features they can add into the office 2007 as long as it for words/docs or spreadsheet, etc. Let us see what MS will offer us in Office 2010 and Office 2015.
Reply to this comment
by Mr. Dee July 10, 2009 7:09 AM PDT
If you tried the Office 2010 Tech Preview leak, you would see how major of an upgrade it is, the Document Management Life cycle features in it alone are worth the upgrade. Its easier to manage the applications, small features like richer paste options - you just have to use it to believe how awesome of an upgrade this will be.
by kelmon July 10, 2009 7:30 AM PDT
Please describe. Frankly, all we tend to hear about with Office 2010 is the web applications that aren't very interesting if you already have the client applications installed on your PC.
by Commander_Spock July 10, 2009 7:51 AM PDT
Re: "Please describe. Frankly, all we tend to hear about with Office 2010 is the web applications that aren't very interesting if you already have the client applications installed on your PC...."

Did you mean descriptions that will help the American Automotive Manufacturers (GM, Ford, Chrysler....) to achieve the productivity they all need to get them out of what they are all in (the economic mess)!!!
by Commander_Spock July 10, 2009 10:40 AM PDT
Re: "Did you mean descriptions that will help the American Automotive Manufacturers (GM, Ford, Chrysler....) to achieve the productivity they all need to get them out of what they are all in (the economic mess)!!!"

So, what will Microsoft be telling these companies about "Office Productivity...." that they do not now know; and/or, could have been told about long before they all got into the economic mess they are now all in!!!

Cool!
by jumpjetta July 10, 2009 6:21 AM PDT
"Google's comin' for us! Act calm! Send out the talking heads!"
Reply to this comment
by Poulster July 10, 2009 6:41 AM PDT
:)
by Gorgeclimber1 July 10, 2009 6:56 AM PDT
If Microsoft wants to improve productivity in Office, get rid of the ribbon and go back to a DECENT upgrade of Office 2003 ... which Office 2007 was not. How can you say you want to improve productivity when you take a product that has had the same format for over 20 years and completely change that format.
Reply to this comment
by monkeyfun14 July 10, 2009 7:31 AM PDT
Because Ribbon is more efficient if you take 10 minutes to learn it.

The problem with people is if you change one thing people get so damn pissy and lazy about it even though it may be a good change in the long run.
by jessiethe3rd July 10, 2009 10:06 AM PDT
Once you spend time with the Ribbon there's no going back. You have to spend time in it however... you have to be a bit dedicated to the due process. No need to hunt for crap in a drop down. Want quick previews of text? Go to the format, font, highlight over the font - presto - preview without hunting selecting, waiting, changing... wash rinse repeat.

They are little changes that add up... I will say - once you try the ribbon and give it a shot you will not want to go back.
by kelmon July 11, 2009 1:50 AM PDT
No, I completely disagree that the Ribbon is more efficient. I've been using it now for the past 2-years and I can honestly say that I am no more productive with the Ribbon than I was with the old interface and can probably argue that productivity has dropped slightly because the Ribbon takes up more screen space. All that can really be said for it is that it looks nicer. Anyone who uses Office 2007 has had no option other than to "learn it" - if they say they don't like the new interface then who are you to say otherwise?

Perhaps the Ribbon is better for new users of Office but for the "old dogs" like myself it does kinda suck.
by stringboy July 11, 2009 11:01 AM PDT
The 2003 had the horrid task pane that added a click to everything, but I would drop back to it in a heart beat. I have used the ribbon for 2 years and it is, without a doubt, the single poorest user interface, since Microsoft Bob, for an experienced user.

All I want is the option to use the old interface.
by vroomm July 13, 2009 9:07 AM PDT
Personally I like the ribbon. It can be like a new pair of cowboy boots though - tough at first but eventually very comfortable. For those that think the ribbon takes up too much real estate on the page, why don't you just minimize it? Many (not all) of the concerns I read about Office 07 can be addressed through making adjustments to settings Try it.
by jd-sd3 July 14, 2009 1:41 AM PDT
Totally agree - Office has "jumped the shark". Imagine how up in arms people would be if Photoshop completely ripped apart their UI.

I work in for a small software company - about 50 people. And I haven't heard one good thing about Office 2007 from anyone over the last two years. All I've heard is how people hate it and uninstalled/downgraded back to Office 2003.

I have both (being a dev I have to deal with stupid .docx and .xlsx file types for things) and absolutely hate that crap Ribbon stuff. I have no idea how to do simple things in Excel anymore and have just given up at this point.

It's par for the course for MS though - right in line with the "smart" people who designed the shut down/restart/sleep/hibernate nightmare menu in Vista.
by Commander_Spock July 10, 2009 7:27 AM PDT
Re: "You have architected part of Office 2010 to run in the browser-based Office Web apps. If I'm not mistaken Chrome isn't one of the supported browsers, but it might, in fact, work in Chrome. Do you guys see Chrome as an important browser to develop for?
Elop: It depends on how you define important. From a market share perspective Chrome is very low. So I think we're driven by customers on these things. There are other browsers that have greater market share, and that's where we've concentrated our first efforts..."

All of this hub bub, ballahoo.... (whatever) from Google and Microsoft about Office Productivity Software!!!

Remember folks - there can be nothing new under the sun; so, how about a fast forward to the future into the Cloudscape with IBM Lotus Kona. Oops... and the "Winner" will be the Open Standards (no lock in) IBM's Lotus Symphony.

http://symphony.lotus.com/software/lotus/symphony/home.nsf/home

It Is Time To Strike Up The Band And Party With The "Bankers" (Who Have All The Money) Like It Is 1998!

It's Party Time Folks!
Reply to this comment
by daviddohoney July 10, 2009 8:55 AM PDT
It's great for Elop he wasn't outsourced like his fellow employees. What a fraud.
Reply to this comment
by ExWinUser July 10, 2009 9:00 AM PDT
I hate helping people that use MS Office, every freak'n time they upgrade they sit there for hours trying to find out where the buttons use to be. I give MS credit for exploiting their customers.
Reply to this comment
by daviddohoney July 10, 2009 9:46 AM PDT
How about the employees who got outsourced.
Reply to this comment
by rapier1 July 10, 2009 10:00 AM PDT
What does that have to do with anything discussed here?
by jeffgtr60 July 10, 2009 10:27 AM PDT
MS should learn to wait to release an upgrade when they've actually improved the program instead of planning a new release to increase revenue. They have the cart before the horse. Office is a prime example, it was deployed where I work and most people hate the ribbon and wish they could roll back to the previous version. Google Docs on the other hand is simple to use, has all of the functions that 90% of the users need and want. Even though I have the full blown version of Office at work, it's more convenient for a simple document or spreadsheet (which is 90% of the time) to log into Google, plus if I need to tweak it it's anywhere I can find a connection, even from my phone.

If you must have an app residing on your computer most any of the open source free alternatives will serve most folks needs except for maybe Powerpoint and you shouldn't use that anyway, it's the fastest way to put an audience to sleep in a presentation. I don't understand why companies keep shoveling money into office when the features most employees need are like air and water....free. Save Office for the ones that really need it, probably 90% of the employees. They won't suffer and neither will your bottom line.
Reply to this comment
by smalley417 July 11, 2009 6:16 PM PDT
Unless, of course, you work for a company that won't allow any corporate data on any system other than ones controlled by the company... and therein lies the problem with cloud computing. Enterprises don't trust the cloud. Period.
by markosph July 10, 2009 3:19 PM PDT
@rapier1 most people can get by with WordPad as there word processor. Word is a full featured Word Processor; if you want to type basic documents then it is not for you.
Reply to this comment
by anonymuos July 10, 2009 10:44 PM PDT
There was a reason Microsoft didn't put a spell check in Windows 7 WordPad.
Reply to this comment
by stringboy July 11, 2009 10:56 AM PDT
Ina,

The next time you get him answering questions, ask him what Microsoft is doing to address the negative reaction to the Ribbon UI. There has been a firestorm of criticism from the install base and no one in the media has pinned a Microsoft executive down. It is all over the web, it is one of the most discussed issues in the MS blogs. Where is the coverage?

I think the problem is reviewers, exposed to various OS and UIs, become infatuated with new and ignore the advantage of consistency (in this particular case, a standard consistent since at least the 80s). Yes, if you are new to Word, the Ribbon is probably very helpful, but those few do not represent over 80% of users.
Reply to this comment
by mbenedict July 12, 2009 9:32 PM PDT
Ribbon is here to stay. From a usability perspective it's a much better design than traditional menus. More and more apps will adopt the ribbon.

E.g., when Jakob Nielsen ("the guru of usability") published his "10 Best Application UIs" last year, a surprising number of them used Microsoft's ribbon approach. You can read more about it from:

http://www.useit.com/alertbox/application-design.html

Of course there are people who are "set in their ways" with Excel, Word, etc. While some old dogs can learn new tricks, there will always be others who can't.
by stringboy July 15, 2009 9:43 PM PDT
mbenedict

"Of course there are people who are "set in their ways" with Excel, Word, etc. While some old dogs can learn new tricks, there will always be others who can't."

Thanks for being snot about it. Really, your thoughtless consideration of alternatives explains your limited understanding of the fundamental problem. A decade of experience has been made obsolete because MS decided to do it. I have used the ribbon for 2 years, and I would like it gone. I was faster before, and the desire of almost everyone I talk to about this is the same: bring back the classic as an option, and keep the ribbon for you kiddies. That is compromise. That is reason. Obviously neither are required to run Microsoft into the ground or to post on Cnet.
Reply to this comment
(32 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next

As alternative energy grows, NIMBY greens

With more renewable energy projects trying to come online, the country grapples with the balance between local land use and a national push for clean energy.

Google to remake programming with Go

A Unix co-creator is among those behind a language Google hopes will speed computers and programming. Today, Go becomes open-source software.

About Beyond Binary

During her years at CNET News, Ina Fried has changed beats several times, changed genders once, and covered both of the Pirates of Silicon Valley. These days, most of her attention is focused on Microsoft.


Beyond Binary is a look at how technology is changing our lives and the people behind all that life-changing stuff, with an extra emphasis on that which emanates from Redmond, Wash.

Add this feed to your online news reader

Beyond Binary topics

Binary Bits

    Follow Ina on Twitter (Twitter name: InaFried)
    advertisement
    advertisement

    Inside CNET News

    Scroll Left Scroll Right