Over the x-mas break I spent a massive amount of time researching and investigating the latest online office tools and spreadsheets in order to put a number of projects / documents that we use into a shared environment from where several team members can work on them at the same time. Knowing full well that Office 2007 is about to hit the market (bringing with it similar capabilities albeit shared on a server instead of the wider web) I wanted to get a grip on what was out there in order to understand how the new Office technologies will compare.

Since the emergence of Ajax technology - a tool that allows web pages to become more interactive with virtually live changes taking place that are displayed almost instantly - a number of online tools have hit the market promising a new era of online working for companies and indiviudals.

This presents a number of advantages when compared to normal document creation including i) an excellent way of saving memory ii) constant updates and back-ups and iii) the afore-mentioned ability to collaborate with colleagues and friends online.

I managed to whittle a long list down to two main contenders to the throne: Google (shock!) and Zoho.

The first I looked at was Zoho - a very powerful tool with all of the functionality I was looking for. In fact, its innovative and simple Creator system and CRM package appeared to be exactly what I was looking for. Then I started using it. After about 5-6 hours of having built the online application that I wanted I simply gave up on the system - the reason = SPEED. It was soooooo sloooowwww. Having looked on numerous forums I was hoping to find an explanation of why this might be? One forum suggested that this might be due to the IE6 browser I was using? So I tried Firefox - but alas, it was just as slow. I also found that the page would slow down so much that the page would eventually lock itself. So reluctantly, I moved on…

Next up was Google’s Docs and Spreadsheets application which combines Writely and Google Spreadsheets together to form one simple yet powerful interface. The simplicity of this application was matched by its speed in which it easily outperformed everything else in the market. For application power, it didn’t match Zoho’s functionality, although I have little doubt that it will before long. On the off chance that those clever people at Google don’t manage to replicate these, they can always buy Zoho and add it to their own portfolio.

It’s clear that the long term struggle is shaping up to be Microsoft v Google on this front. If that is the case, Google’s model of free tools will clearly have a competitive advantage. After all, who wants to pay for something that you can get for free?

There’s a great deal of talk at the moment about whether Skype is now ready to go from a fun tool that connects friends for free, to a serious corporate tool that companies are happy to include as part of their communications arsenal.

I can only speak from my own experience of this technology when adding my bit to this discussion. Working in a small office, with a dedicated set of consultants, some of whom are based remotely has led us to use Skype frequently to keep in touch, thus saving on the cost of traditional phone bills. The quality has not always been great, but generally, it’s a service I would recommend. However, would I dare use this service with some of our bigger clients? The answer is probably no, not yet. The problem, as I see it, is that the Skype logo itself is and possibly always will be viewed as a fun little tool that one would use with their friends, but not necessarily on the professional front. In the same way that I would direct a friend to e-mail me on my hotmail account, I would generally try to keep my Skype account for less important calls.

Having said that, I do have a Skype-me icon in the signature of my e-mails and have started to add a few clients to my list of Skype contacts, so things could be slowly changing. With over 50million users worldwide, I guess it won’t be long before this does move into the corporate world.

The newest version, Skype 3.0 (currently in beta), appears to be making good on the goal of attracting business customers. In fact, it boasts a business version that’s easy to deploy to multiple machines on a network using Windows Installer packages, and companies can centrally manage multiple accounts with the Business Control Panel. The administrator can then allocate Skype phone numbers and voice mail to users.

There are other VOIP packages out there but Skype has the advantage in that it is free to download and use. This could actually work against the company as the IT Managers that I’ve come across don’t have issues with paying for software (mainly because it ain’t their money). In fact, they would rather pay and know that they are receiving a higher level of service and support as opposed to get something for free and be almost solely responsible when the sh*t hits the fan.

It will be interesting to see how this develops…

Ok so the vote for most irritating advert goes to American Airlines for their highly patronising “And if we can keep them happy” campaign.

Have a look here.

For those who haven’t seen it – they show Mr. Soprano James Gandolfini stuffing his already well fed face with food and wine, even grabbing a bottle, probably bound for someone else, from a passing air stewardess/flight attendant/trolley dolly/actress, aboard an AA (no pun intended) plane.

The voiceover states in no uncertain terms that if they can keep New Yorkers happy, then the rest of us shouldn’t present any problems at all.

Now I’ve got no issues with NY’ers at all – but I do have a problem with the insinuation that us Brits have, by default, far lower standards in life than our American counterparts.

Fair enough if we sat around dribbling in our underwear, picking stale bread crumbs from our navel and drinking our own…. Anyway, that’s not the case (except for a couple of my colleagues) and I personally don’t like being patronised by a smug airline who are clearly on their last legs/wheels.

Their tag line is “We know why you fly”.

Wow – they’ve finally cracked the industry’s secret code. I wonder what the answer is. Could it be “To get from A to B, in the air” ?

Seth Godin talks about how top innovators create first and turn their inventions or ideas into profit later.

In fact, the more I think about it, the more it seems that pioneers are almost never in it for the money. The smart ones figure out how to take a remarkable innovation and turn it into a living (or a bigger than big payout) but not the other way around. I think the reason is pretty obvious: when you try to make a profit from your innovation, you stop innovating too soon.

It’s nice to think that people create for the good of mankind/sheer enjoyment of it but Seth’s view seems to support the kind of thinking that inflated the first web bubble and (some would argue) bubble 2.0

All inventions / innovations reach a point when they need a hard cash injection and if there’s no way of repaying your investors through a solid revenue stream your new widget or web app might never leave the garden shed.