Forrester: Microsoft Continues To Have A Stranglehold On Office Productivity In The Enterprise

Office in the enterprise

Even though Microsoft’s stranglehold in Operating Systems for computing devices has faded over the past few years, Microsoft continues to have a stranglehold on Office productivity suite in the enterprise. According to a recent report from Forrester, more than 85% of respondents continues to use Microsoft Office in their enterprise and the only notable competitor is Google Apps which is few percentage points.

  • One in five firms uses email in the cloud. Another quarter plans to move at some point. More are using Office 365 (14%) than Google Apps (9%).
  • Just 22% of respondents are on Office 2013. Another 36% have plans to be on it. Office 2013’s uptake will be slower than Office 2010 because fewer firms plan to combine the rollout of Office 2013 with Windows 8 as they combined Office 2010 with Windows 7.
  • Alternatives to Microsoft Office show little traction. In 2011, 13% of respondents supported open source alternatives to Office. This year the number is just 5%. Google Docs has slightly higher adoption and is in use at 13% of companies.

The report also revealed that their respondents were less concerned about multi-platform availability of their productivity suite. This shows why Google Apps was not able to make a significant progress in the enterprise market even after years of presence.


Source: Forrester




  • Bugbog

    This is just a factual confirmation of what is already known: Microsoft still dominates in terms of Desktop computing, Office productivity, and profits.

    However where Microsoft does not dominate (or curry any favour) is in Mobile computing, and “buzz!” The former is divided between Apple, Samsung and Google, and fully based on reality, whilst the later, whilst partly deserving doesn’t necessarily fully ‘compute’.

    This ‘buzz’ translates in to stock share prices and market capitalization. Let’s examine that for a moment.

    Google, whilst somewhat diversified into multiple markets, most of the products produced thereof are either given away free or at such a nominal price as to only cover the production costs. All factors therefore point to its primary motivation: Advertising, which while highly profitable is extremely volatile.

    Apple, with its ‘single stack’ methodology (producing its own hardware & software) is highly profitable at the moment, and has been ramping up it revenue base for over a decade now, however all it’s profits are promulgated on an extremely narrow product-line base, of which in the last 4yrs now derives over 50% from just it’s iPhone line.

    Amazon, initially at tech company by accident, has some major product lines (AWS, it’s retail front, ebook sales + Kindle {hardware}), however, due to its [massive] expansion program, which it has been pursuing for over 12yrs, produces little to no profit year-on-year!

    Samsung, the most diversified company listed here, has a finger in just about every major pie worldwide, however over the last couple of years (since its major push with the Android O.S.), now derives up to 1/3 of all its profits from its smartphone sales (despite its combined group revenues running close to $200Billion).

    What I’m trying to point out is, of the above companies (with Samsung as the outlier), only Microsoft has multiple diversified product lines ALL of which are profitable and contribute to it having one of the best Profits per revenue management of all the companies listed, and, should it lose any major cash-cow, won’t cause the company (or anyone else for that matter) to exclaim that “the Sky is falling!”

    Unfortunately, as it doesn’t have the “buzz” factor, it also has the lowest sock share-price of the bunch.

    So while having “buzz” is very good, it shouldn’t be the only factor used to judge a company, and, as we well know, although the news nowadays is dominated with constant mentions of Apple/Samsung/Google, Microsoft is still here, and still strong!

    • krayziehustler

      100% in agreement. I prefer this structure over what Apple has where almost all the revenue comes from 3 products (iPhone, iPad, OSX) so a dent in one will drastically affect the company

    • Rikikrik

      Agree totally. Microsoft is the most diversifired company of all and well position for the future. It’s revenue and profit stream are very stable. Microsoft is slowly getting the buzz, because MS products and services are high quality and fully integrated, something that businesses and consumers prefer. WP is growing strong and will overtake the Iphone sooner or later. This is already a fact in South America, India, Mexico, Germany (almost), Middle East, Finland, Sweden, South Africa etc etc. As a business phone WP is gaining in popularity. People more and more are embracing MS devices like tablets and W8 PC’s, replacing Ipads, notebooks, Chromebooks etc for one integrated device. A doctor I know replaced his Ipad and Nexus tablet for a W RT tablet. Another guy replaced his Ipad and notebook for a W8 Pro. Once the world economies start picking up pace, MS products and revenue will sour.

      • Bugbog

        Whilst I understand, and agree with your sentiment :) I suggest you correct the typo in the last word: Soar, not sour! 😀

        • Rikikrik


    • SategB

      I am not sure all product lines makes a profit…online services?

      What more your rudimentary analysis fails to articulate how dependent the current company structure is on Windows and Office, both being threaten in from the post PC environment that Apple, Google and Amazon has embraced while Ballmer ignored.

      • Bugbog

        Try harder troll! 😀

        • SategB

          When they can not attack the principle of the post they attract person who posted.

          • Bugbog

            Again, Nice try with the “attack the person” trope. It [Un]fortunately doesn’t apply to you. You Are a known Troll! 😀

            Just so you know, I won’t be bothering to respond to any further baited responses from you.

        • Guest

          Don’t feed the troll.

          • Bugbog

            Sometimes you just can’t help but provide a morsel! :)

        • Rikikrik

          Do not call him a troll, at least he is trying to make valid arguments and not just thrashing Or badmouthing Mcrosoft for the sake of it. But yes, there are more divisions which bring in a healthy profit. Yes, Windows and Office are the most profitable. But Google is also dependant on adds alone, all other segments, whether they be mobile, Google docs, heck even Android still seems to be a lossmaking endeavour. Google is stil for 90% dependant on adds. And Apple, well we all know that story. A recent article just released showed that contrary to what people might think, of all the big players (Samsung, Google, Apple and Microsoft), Microsoft is the most profitable company of all. So MS is doing one hell of a job juggling a lot of divisions and still remaining the most profitable company of them all.

          • Bugbog

            I don’t make use of the word lightly! Go through his comments history for yourself. This isn’t just him playing ‘devil’s advocate’, it’s just an excuse to bring up ‘Ballmer’

            In an article showing that, despite the buzz making it seem like Microsoft is having it’s lunch eaten, one of It’s major revenue streams is doing better than ever, with the competition falling even further behind, his response is to disregard all of it and just state that everyone is doing better (than Microsoft)?

            That isn’t ‘reasoned’.

    • SategB

      Windows Division: 1.09 billion profit on $4.411 billion in revenue
      Servers and Tools: $2.33 billion profit on $5.502 billion in revenue
      Online Services: $372 million loss on $800 million in revenue
      Business Division: $4.87 billion profit on $7.231 billion in revenue
      Entertainment and Devices: $110 million loss on $1.915 billion in revenue

      Sorry not all are profit generators