The truth about Microsoft Office versus Google Docs

Microsoft and Google are doing as much trash talking about Google Docs and Office 2010 as Kevin Garnett does in the fourth quarter of an NBA playoff game. Who's right? Here's the truth about the differences between Microsoft Office and Google Docs.

I've reviewed the latest versions of both Google Docs and Microsoft Office 2010, and despite what the companies say about one another, both are very good, very solid pieces of work. (Here's my review of Microsoft Office 2010, and here's my review of Google Docs.) Google Docs is superior if you're looking for live collaboration, want to save money, don't mind not having offline access to your documents for now (that will be fixed), and don't need many power features in an office suite. Microsoft Office 2010 gives you every power feature you could want in an office suite, offers superior graphic tools and presentation power, and lets you create superior-looking documents. It also costs a pretty penny.

It's really no more complex than that. The comparison is fairly simple and straightforward.

Google and Microsoft, though, are doing their best to spread fear, uncertainty, and doubt about their competitor's offerings.

For example, Google claimed in a blog that there's no need for users to upgrade to Office 2010, because Google Docs can make Office 2003 and 2007 better. Then Microsoft countered in a blog that it's not true because file conversions between Office and Google Docs don't work well.

That only set off more trash-talking. Google emailed this statement to Computerworld:

"It says a lot about Microsoft's approach to customer lock-in that the company touts its proprietary document formats, which only Microsoft software can render with true fidelity, as the reason to avoid using other products."

And then, Computerworld reported, Microsoft countered by sending an email saying:

"This is about how Google has chosen to implement features, not file formats. Microsoft supports multiple ISO standards for file formats, and they are fully and openly documented, [but] Google simply chooses not to implement certain features, which results in poor document fidelity."

No, it's not as graphic as what you can read on Kevin Garnett's lips after one of his dunks or blocks, but in the high-tech world that's what passes for trash talk.

My recommendation: Ignore it all. For real-time collaboration, Google Docs is better. For the best feature set, go with Microsoft Office 2010.