Office 2007 is Inevitable
 Joe Wilcox
News Analysis. Many enterprises planning Office 2007 deployments will do so on new hardware. |
That's the key finding from a new survey, which results Forrester Research made publicly available today (from report "The State of Office 2007 Desktop Adoption"). Forrester surveyed 259 IT decision-makers at enterprises in Germany (25 percent of respondents), France (13 percent), United Kingdom (21 percent) and North America (41 percent). I got the data last night, but held off blogging because there were two posts citing other Forrester data yesterday.
Forty-three percent of respondents said that enterprise-wide Office 2007 deployments would be "tied to investments in new desktop workstations and laptops." The same percentage plan Office 2007 migrations or upgrades within six months. A near equal number, 41 percent, plan to deploy SharePoint Portal Server in the same time frame.
The survey found that 43 percent of enterprises already use Office 2007. That's a big number, and already Microsoft PR has pounded my door to tout the data.
Qualification is needed. There is a shortcoming in how Forrester asked the question that mitigates the current usage finding and makes it appear larger than likelihood. Forrester didn't ask when enterprises would start implementing Office 2007: "What version(s) of Microsoft Office are currently in use in your company?"
"Currently in use" could refer anywhere from one to 10,000 copies or more. Also, enterprises tend to run multiple software versions, as Forrester's survey indicates. Let me illustrate the problem by stating the data another way: More businesses run Office XP than either Office 2003 or 2007 (see above chart). That 43 percent usage isn't so big after all, because it could mean any number of copies and more businesses use much older Office versions. Forrester may have other corroborating data, not available in the published findings, that remove any ambiguity.
The same shortcoming applies to future implementation data: "Which of the following best describes your organization's timeline for implementing or upgrading to the Microsoft Office 2007 desktop applications?" Is that start implementing or roll out everywhere? Forrester doesn't ask, and there is a huge time gap. Options start at "immediately" and go to "within" different time frames. The answer option should have been something like "immediately to within three months" and "three months to within six months, etc." There also is a big gap between 12 months and two years and no option for "never"—for Office 2007, anyway.
The questions and their supporting answers could actually make adoption seem to be bigger than what it might otherwise be, in the wrong hands. No doubt, Forrester analyst and report author Kyle McNabb would rightly couch the data. Microsoft PR might coo over that big 43 percent number and shout it to the moon. Way I see it: Without impartial analysis, the data doesn't fully reflect real-world Office 2007 adoption.
That said, cross-referencing of questions yields valuable deployment insights that could be quite beneficial to Microsoft channel partners, including OEMs and solution providers. The data indicates that:
- A large number of enterprises plan to at least begin Office 2007 deployments within six months, anywhere from 43 percent to 64 percent depending on how the data is interpreted.
- SharePoint Server 2007 deployments are closely aligned with Office 2007 migrations. Anywhere from 43 percent to 65 percent of enterprises plan to at least begin deployments within six months depending on how the data is interpreted.
- Office 2007 migrations are closely aligned with, but not exclusively tied to, new hardware deployments. By inference, SharePoint Server 2007 migrations should similarly align with new hardware deployments. If correct, the channel could look for many enterprises to upgrade PCs and server hardware.
From this different perspective, the data is perhaps even better for Microsoft than those door-pounding PR people might think.
But there is a dark cloud looming over migration mountain: The economy. The more new Office and SharePoint Server migrations align with new hardware deployments, the greater sales risk should economic woes sap PC and server sales.
Create, Communicate, Collaborate with IT Professionals at Ziff Davis Enterprise IT Link.
Comments (10)
I'm just your basic medium smart computer user who has spent years messing around with computers because it keeps my brain busy. (idle mind is the devil's workshop and all that...)
My experience is...if only all or even most of Microsoft's products were as good as Office, and especially OneNote!
Take MS Money for example. An unbelievably convoluted and confused product that defies comprehension. Another of those "what were those people smoking?" products out of Redmond.
Take the Office creators, especially the OneNote team, give them a gigantic raise and have them train others at MS on how to do things really right, and do it right almost the first time out the door.
Posted by mgo | April 1, 2008 9:36 PM
Office 2007 because my favorite app as soon as I started making full use of One Note. I find it to be one of the most usefully applications I have ever used. Along with Office's new Ribbon interface I can't find one problem with the whole package.
mgo
I just give Microsoft Money Plus a spin though and found it too work extremely efficiently. It's rather inexpensive too. But if you were referring to earlier versions of it then yes, I agree, they were crap.
Posted by Jim | April 1, 2008 10:35 PM
Office 2007 is so good, I have a hard time believing it is a Microsoft product. It's as if they outsourced its development to another company.
Posted by Bob Maine | April 2, 2008 9:56 AM
Money Plus 2008 Deluxe actually is a good product. But the activation on it can really cause a huge problem if you decide to move it to another computer. It makes XP and Vista activation look like a walk in the park. You have to call and give them your hardware fingerprint. They will email you a code, you enter the code, but you better not have closed out your screen because that code will no longer work and you will have to call back for a new code. Now if you decide to reformat your hard drive down the road, you will have to call again to activate.
I don't know if Quicken has the same arduous activation scheme, but if it doesn't, I will buy that next time. The two products usually rate the same when reviewed. Quicken usually costs a little more, but like I say, if their activation isn't as bad, I would pay the extra.
Posted by bem | April 2, 2008 10:04 AM
@bem
I understand your problem with Money Plus 2008. I used this product only for a very, very short time. I have a small business and seeing what it truly lacks, I went with Intuit Quickbooks 2008 and never look back.
Quicken uses the same activation processes that Quickbooks Professional 2008. When you purchase it, register right away. No matter what machine you put it on, no matter how many times, as long as you paid for a single license, and as long as it is a single license, that means; As long as it is only one single installation, activation is a snap!
Posted by Douglas S. Taylor | April 2, 2008 11:51 AM
@Douglas S. Taylor
Thanks. I usually upgrade my personal financial software every 2 years. I have used Money since the 2002 version. The last time I used Quicken was v2000. It had no activation at that time. Money also did not have activation, at least until this latest, 2008 version.
Just a few questions. Does it allow you 2 installations (desktop and laptop)? What would happen if you did like I did and want to change the desktop the installation is on? In my case, I gave my wife my computer and built a new one for myself. I wanted my copy of Money 2008 on my computer and that is when the problems began. So, how does Quicken determine that it is on only 1 (or 2 if allowed) PC's?
I appreciate your advice. I may even go to Costco and get a copy of Quicken. They are the cheapest by far. If Quicken is less trouble, I may just go for that.
Thanks again.
Posted by bem | April 2, 2008 5:20 PM
Hey, when I bought my copy of Office 2003, it had a web authoring software called FrontPage. I know it sucked, but I used it because, well, it was there. The templates included were so unprofessional and cartoonish, but I used them to get started. Well, I got used to using FrontPage. Now I bought Office 2007 Ultimate and it has no web publishing software. No version of Office 2007 does to my knowledge. I see they have Expression Web now. Wow, that is expensive, especially since you have to buy it separately from Office.
My question is: Has anyone used Expression Web? Is it any good? Is it worth $260?
Thanks!
Posted by Bob Maine | April 2, 2008 5:29 PM
@Bob Maine
There is a +-$99 upgrade offer for any user of an earlier version of Office. Done't remember the details.
Posted by roger | April 2, 2008 5:41 PM
"There is a shortcoming in how Forrester asked the question"
Gartner/Forrester ALWAYS ask the wrong questions. That's why their work isn't worth the trees that were killed making it.
Posted by roger | April 2, 2008 5:44 PM
@Bob Marine:
You can opt for Visual Web Developer Express which is free. But you should know that it is for web developers. I am not aware of all the features it has or lacks.
Take a look at it here:
http://www.microsoft.com/express/vwd/
Posted by Sayied | April 3, 2008 12:28 AM