Joe Wilcox of Jupiter Research has a blog post entitled Google My Spreadsheet where he talks about Google's recently announced Web-based spreadsheet application. He writes

So, Google is doing a spreadsheet. On the Web. With collaboration. And presumably--if and when released--Google Spreadsheet will be available for free. I predict there will be crisis meetings at Microsoft today. I totally agree with Colleague David Card that "Google is just playing with Microsoft's (hive) mind. Scaring the troops. Sleight-of-handing the managers."

Perhaps the real Google competitive threat isn't any product or products, but the information vendor's ability to rustle Microsoft corporate paranoia. To get Microsoft chasing Google phantoms, and in the process get Microsoft's corporate mind off its core business. News media will be gaga with Google competing with Microsoft stories--two juggernauts set to collide. Yeah, right. I'd be shocked if Google ever released a Web browser, operating system or desktop productivity suite. Those markets aren't core to Google's business, contrary to speculation among news sites and bloggers.

As for the spreadsheet, which isn't really available beyond select testers, what's it really going to do? David is right, "Consumers don't use spreadsheets. No thinking IT manager would sign off on replacing Excel with a Web-based spreadsheet." Google's target market, if there really is one, appears to be casual consumer and small business users of spreadsheets--people making lists. OK, that competes with Microsoft how? So soccer mom or jill high schooler can work together with other people from the same based Web-based spreadsheet. Microsoft shouldn't really sweat that, although Microsoft might want to worry about what Google might do with extending search's utility.

I agree 100% with Joe Wilcox's analysis here. This seems more like a move by Google to punk Microsoft into diverting focus from core efforts than a product category that is well thought out. I thought at the recent Google Press Day, Eric Schmidt mentioned that they have not been doing a good job of following the 70/20/10 principle (70 percent focus on core business, 20 percent on related businesses and 10 percent on new businesses).

If I was a Google investor, I'd be worried about the fact that their search engine relevance is detoriorating (Google Search for "msdn system.string" doesn't find this page in the top 10 results) and they are wasting resources fragmenting their focus in so many myriad ways. As a competitor, it makes me smile. ;) 

Update: From the Google blog post entitled It's nice to share it looks like this is an offerings from the creators of XL2Web who were acquired by Google a year ago. Another example of innovation by acquisition by Google? Interesting.

 

Tuesday, 06 June 2006 18:38:30 (GMT Daylight Time, UTC+01:00)
"No thinking IT manager would sign off on replacing Excel with a Web-based spreadsheet."

Now replace Excel with Siebel and spreadsheet with CRM system and it doesn't sound so absolute with the prevalence of web-based CRM systems eating away at installed enterprise software.

pn
Tuesday, 06 June 2006 20:20:49 (GMT Daylight Time, UTC+01:00)
Searching for msdn2 system.string (that every .net 2.0 programmer should use) finds it as the 1st hit.

It's still better for searching msdn than msdn search.
Mark
Tuesday, 06 June 2006 20:21:53 (GMT Daylight Time, UTC+01:00)
I think you're missing the point with the "msdn system.string" example. Google isn't a reference book, as such it doesn't decide how to structure information on the web, the web does.
With "msdn system.string " the web (or rather Google's interpretation of it) has decided that most people don't search for System.String when looking for the .Net String reference. (I would agree, I've never referred to String as System.String ). Google seems to have figured out that people searching for System.String are likely pasting in an error message (Which is one of the few places I've seen the fully qualified name for String).
Another adhoc example is "msdn string.format".
String.Format has a better chance of returning a MSDN reference result, but again google returns a non msdn result.
The result google returns is more useful than the msdn reference.
Mal
Tuesday, 06 June 2006 20:44:20 (GMT Daylight Time, UTC+01:00)
I was rather astonished at all the claims of this being an "Excel killer". Lordie, doesn't anyone know what happens in companies?

This isn't even a threat to OpenOffice. Who is their right mind would want to put their spreadsheet data into Goole's central store?

When I saw the Ziff-David writer discuss the awful ramifications of this to MS, the only awful ramifications I saw was to ZD for having such an airhead on the staff.

Shelley
Wednesday, 07 June 2006 05:53:51 (GMT Daylight Time, UTC+01:00)
A video tour of Google Spreadsheet is avialable
http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/teadams/2006/06/06
Andrew Carney
Wednesday, 07 June 2006 06:37:43 (GMT Daylight Time, UTC+01:00)
"Who is their right mind would want to put their spreadsheet data into Goole's central store? "

Who in their right mind would want to put all their company data into salesforce.com's central store??

Oh, lots of companies who aren't in the business of running databases and full text search engines and fault tolerant servers. oh yea.

pn
Wednesday, 07 June 2006 10:52:28 (GMT Daylight Time, UTC+01:00)
You mean lots of companies who would buy Microsoft server products anyway?
I find it bizarre you compare the fate of a desktop based spreadsheet product to that of a server based CRM solution. Exactly how many single user CRM installations do you imagine there are, compared to single user spreadsheet installations? I work in an office dominated by Microsoft Office, and I can count on one hand how many spreadsheets I've had to collaborate with. Is that because of a limit in Office? The lack of collaboration software available to me? Or the fundamental lack of necessity to collaborate?
Doug
Wednesday, 07 June 2006 23:02:53 (GMT Daylight Time, UTC+01:00)
"I agree 100% with Joe Wilcox's analysis here. This seems more like a move by Google to punk Microsoft into diverting focus from core efforts than a product category that is well thought out."

And God knows MSFT can't afford to divert what little focus it apparently has in its core efforts. :-) I also agree with Wilcox that a lot of this stuff seems to be nonsensical from an overall business POV and more about distracting MSFT. I also agree with him that MSFT goes for it every time - kind of like a cat when you place a string in front of it. MSFT needs to take a deep breath, forget the distractions, and focus on what it used to do well.
Bob
Friday, 09 June 2006 08:19:43 (GMT Daylight Time, UTC+01:00)
I think you're somewhat missing the point - the killer feature of Excel is actually keeping lists. There may be some people on earth who actually have complex applications and calculations in Excel and do the "what if this, what if that" thing with it - but over 95% of all Excel spreadsheets are lists. Google has obviously understood that.
Sunday, 11 June 2006 13:34:10 (GMT Daylight Time, UTC+01:00)
"[Google] are wasting resources fragmenting their focus in so many myriad ways. As a competitor, it makes me smile. ;)"

True, but I've been watching Microsoft do the same for quite a number of years. The investors haven't caught on yet ...
Mjinga Wawa
Thursday, 15 June 2006 17:51:28 (GMT Daylight Time, UTC+01:00)
I have a different thought but similar to yours...I think they are punking Microsoft. However, I think their Skunkworks project is something really huge...

Check out my analysis on my blog at axwack.wordpress.com
Comments are closed.