R.I.P. Microsoft Office.

This is part of what Net Nuetrality is all about. The Cloud. I kind of understand why they want parts NN now. But I still do not agree with it. I do not agree with forcing the cloud on the general population either.

But, the General Population will see it as a novelty at first and not see any problems with it, the whole
"I have nothing to hide" Syndrome. and that Syndrome is a HUGE issue in our society, it is what builds tyrants.

Just because you have nothing to hide, doesn't mean you should agree to an invasion of privacy.
can you say TSA, anyone?

The cloud, in and of itself, can become, a huge invasion of privacy when you no longer have Control of Your Own Data.

jimbo45 said:

Hi there
I think some people get carried away with "New Technology" -- for example people can spend almost the whole day twiddling away with their thumbs texting to their 97,000 Virtual Friends on Rubbishbook or whatever but when they actually have to speak to a REAL person or address an audience then they haven't got a clue and probably exhibit the Social and Contact skills of a horse and that's being disrespectful to the Horse.

The use of this type of technology really stops people from making proper and understandable corporate type of communications when they need to -- some Word documents I have to look at are so badly mis-spelled and put together they aren't fit for anything but the waste bin. Written and spoken communication skills were actually FAR FAR superior 30 years ago.

In other cases some applications need to run in SECURE networks that have no Internet connection whatever.

You could run these in an Internal Cloud but that's conceptually the same as a server in any case.

I think that whatever the convenience of the Net etc local applications will continue to play an important part until we don't need computers anymore.

Cheers
jimbo

Sad, but so very, very true. Even so called stories from the wire services contain grammatical and spelling errors. I don't know if it's haste, lack of proofing, or just an "I don't care atttitude", but it's disturbing.

Of course, I'm saying this with only one year of college in my long life.

So, Microsoft is going to dissolve the Exchange division of it's operations? I think not. Exchange 15 is already being planned and I don't see them stopping there.

Sharepoint too.

Maybe not in the Enterprise side,

but consumer side, I think everyone is going to start pushing heavily for the cloud.

abuttino said:

So, they Microsoft is going to dissolve the Exchange division of it's operations? I think not. Exchange 15 is already being planned and I don't see them stopping there.

Sharepoint too.

Correct Microsoft is not going to get rid of Exchange; however we are talking about Office and Outlook (client). Microsoft wants to completely get rid of Outlook (client) and use web based clients only. That move is completely apparent in Exchange 2010 where the web based outlook is fantastic.

http://www2.essex.ac.uk/cs/images/OWA1.jpg

I agree with OWA being pretty good.
Problem is, Archive Support. This may not sound like a big deal.
Companies would then need to invest in HUGE data stores to accommodate OWA Archives.
So, double or even triple plus on multiple mailbox sizes is going to be a huge killer.

Or, you will be telling some clients they are crap out of luck and have to save individual emails (HUGE PAIN IN THE A$$).

This would be a big step backwards in my opinion.

The whole point is to utilize the huge local hard drive free space for archiving on individual machines and train them in data back up. If the inforamtion is that sensitive, they shouldn't be archiving locally anyway.

Tepid said:

I agree with OWA being pretty good.
Problem is, Archive Support. This may not sound like a big deal.
Companies would then need to invest in HUGE data stores to accommodate OWA Archives.
So, double or even triple plus on multiple mailbox sizes is going to be a huge killer.

Or, you will be telling some clients they are crap out of luck and have to save individual emails (HUGE PAIN IN THE A$$).

This would be a big step backwards in my opinion.

The whole point is to utilize the huge local hard drive free space for archiving on individual machines and train them in data back up. If the inforamtion is that sensitive, they shouldn't be archiving locally anyway.

Humm, I guess I don't see the issue with this, I have one account that has 2000 users on 1 Exchange Server with 10 years of email on it and complete archives. Nothing expensive about it $10,000 server including all the disk space and $8000 server for archives. Total is $18,000 for one company that is a drop in the bucket for most, especially when you look at payroll being 45.5 million a month.

I guess this is a "We will have to wait and see" moment.