The Future of Presentation Software: Can

Prezi Win the Hearts, Minds and Backing of

Presenters?

Ian MacDonald June 2010

Introduction

In this paper I set out to review and compare two presentation software programs,

Microsoft PowerPoint and Prezi, with a view to establishing the probable future

success of the latter. I choose these words carefully because it would be somewhat

misleading to position this as a contest between the two programs. There are

numerous presentation programs available today and it would be wrong to give the

impression that users face such a limited choice. The choice may well appear limited

to most users but this relates to the second reason why it would be misleading to

describe this as a contest. As a match, PowerPoint versus Prezi makes the story of

‘David and Goliath’ seem like an evenly weighted bout. The fact of the matter is that

PowerPoint is so dominant, with over 95% market share and a structural advantage

that makes it near-invincible, that it would be a miracle if Prezi were to depose the

better-known and more widely-used program from market-leading position.

Of course, miracles do happen and this paper will consider the likelihood of that

eventuality. However, ultimately, the measure of success for a program like Prezi is

more likely to be around the possibility of carving a niche in its target market and,

perhaps at some point being acquired (or, should we say consumed) by a more

powerful market player. If Microsoft perceived Prezi as a threat to its domination of

this sector, one might reasonably assume that the company would simply acquire or

‘clone’ the technology and incorporate it in their existing software suite. Therefore,

perhaps a more interesting measure of Prezi’s success might be the degree to which

it influences the evolution of presentation software.

It is inconceivable that one could review the above programs without considering the

evolution of software in general. This is particularly true because in many ways

PowerPoint represents tradition, sporting a heritage that goes all the way back to the

dawn of the computer software explosion of the 1980’s, whilst Prezi represents a new

and progressive approach to delivering software as a service. I therefore opted to

provide an overview of the past, present and future state of the computer software

industry as a prelude to discussion of presentation software programs. This is, in-

Ian MacDonald June 2010

- 2 -

turn, followed by in-depth analysis and discussion of the respective merits of

PowerPoint and Prezi both from my own perspective and that of other reviewers.

I conclude this paper with some ideas concerning how the market for presentation

software might develop in the future. I also make some tentative proposals about

how Prezi might capitalize on its current position.

Computer Software – Past, Present and Future

To those of us who are in our forties and who have experienced the amazing growth

of the personal computer (PC), it can be easy to forget just how far those machines

have developed in such a relatively short space of time. It amuses me to recall

writing computer code in a computing class in 1982 because I was then a student of

Construction and not IT. At that time, it obviously did not occur to those who

formulated our syllabus that IT experts or programmers would produce software and

others would simply use it. Within five years, IBM PC’s were popping up everywhere

and not much longer after that, with the advent of PC cloning (the manufacture of

IBM-type machines at a much-reduced cost), sales sky-rocketed. Between 1987 and

1990, PC sales went from approximately 6 million to 17 million units per year

(Reimer, 2005). One man who recognised this trend, and who took advantage of it,

was Bill Gates, the founder of Microsoft.

Gates anticipated the advent of the PC clone and, when concluding a deal with IBM,

he rather cleverly insisted that the contract allow Microsoft to license MS-DOS to

third parties. IBM agreed, preferring to focus on getting the lowest possible flat-rate

for MS-DOS. Although this was a master stroke on the part of Gates and Microsoft, it

is often forgotten that his company played a significant role in the early development

of software. In fact, some might be surprised to learn that Gates originally worked

closely with Apple and even proposed his business model to that company. Prior to

this, Microsoft had pioneered another program called BASIC, which may have been

the program for which I recall writing code in my university class.

Ian MacDonald June 2010

- 3 -

You don’t have to be forty to remember what it was once like to have computer

software installed on one’s computer. As little as ten years ago this was generally a

task for an IT expert and, particularly if we are talking about versions of DOS or early

versions of Windows, those tasks always seemed to take an inordinate amount of

time. “I’ll need your machine for a couple of hours to install some new software” was

not an unusual request. This scenario seems light years away from today’s situation

when installing software takes minutes, involves no floppy discs, not even CD

ROMS, but is instead done with an online connection under the auspice of an

appropriately named Auto-Wizard. However, the more observant among us will

realise that the installation process did not simply move from the PC to the net

overnight but that there was an intermediate development which was namely the

introduction of local servers. Such servers have become increasingly popular in

offices and other places of work in the last ten years and are perhaps characterised,

at least in a software installation sense, by regular notices of apology concerning the

unavailability of all systems on specified dates and/or times due to the upgrade of the

system. As we look ahead, we can already see the next step in this evolution, with

new software services been offered online without any need to house software on

one’s machine or even on one’s local server – the server is, in some sense, being

taken out of the office to be stored in a bland building that looks more like a

warehouse and our connection to that server is via the internet. This concept of

accessing software online is sometimes known as the computing “Cloud”.

The reader may wonder why the aforementioned discussion is relevant to this paper.

The point is that the various software suites, which I will discuss next, and

presentation software or applications, which I will come to in a later section, are now

distributed in different ways. It is unusual to see software being installed from a disc

of any form these days as virtually all software is either downloaded directly from the

internet or simply accessed there. However, much of that software remains bundled

in what are typically called office suites, regardless of where they reside. The best-

known and most widely-used of office suite is Microsoft Office. The 2007 version of

Ian MacDonald June 2010

- 4 -

that program includes a word processor (Word), spreadsheet (Excel), database

(Access), sharepoint workspace (Groove), electronic form design and sharing

(InfoPath), digital notebook (OneNote), Email client (Outlook and Outlook Express),

desktop publishing (Publisher) and, of course, the presentation application

(PowerPoint). Microsoft Office 2010 basically includes the same functions but as PC

Magazine (2010) points out there are three categories of users who should regard it

as an essential upgrade: those who create graphically rich documents and

presentations; those who buy software for organizations (especially if that business

relies on collaboration and sharing tools); those who need 64-bit compatibility.

Which?, the U.K. consumer choice organization that regularly tests and reviews a

vast range of consumer products, conducted a review of nine Office Suites and, like

PC Magazine, was complimentary regarding Microsoft Office 2010, describing it as,

“the dominant office suite for many years …, an extremely good office suite, offering

huge numbers of really powerful features wrapped up in an easy to use interface”

(Which? on Microsoft Office Home and Student 2010, 2010). Most reviews appear to

echo these sentiments placing PowerPoint within a hugely popular and tightly

integrated set of applications.

Alternatives to Microsoft Office, that have a similar functionality and are structured in

a similar manner, include Corel WordPerfect X5 and Oracle StarOffice 9. Then there

is the open source suite, OpenOffice V3.2.0, which is free and, although not as easy

to use as its Microsoft competition, is often recommended to users who have lesser

demands and therefore require less functionality, data-handling capability and speed.

Google Docs is also free for most users, but not businesses which incur a small

charge. It is perhaps best noted for being totally on-line without any need to install on

one’s server or PC. This is consistent with the Cloud concept of computing discussed

above, where much, if not all, of an organization’s software is accessed over the net

as opposed to being stored on an internal server or on individual machines. An April

2008 survey of 850 enterprise users by McKinsey & Co. demonstrated that Software

as a Service, or SaaS as it is normally termed (Wainewright, 2009), had moved into

Ian MacDonald June 2010

- 5 -

the mainstream with respondents indicating it was the most important technology

trend influencing their companies. Three-quarters of the respondents suggested that

they were open to adopting SaaS platforms (Watson, 2008). Although the most

recent reviews of Google Docs are not entirely complimentary there is anticipation

that big improvements will arrive as the number of users who adopt the program

grow. Despite the less than flattering response to Google Docs, to demonstrate a

point that was inferred in the Introduction to this paper, Microsoft is not waiting

around to see whether its new competitor will succeed. Clearly Microsoft executives

have seen enough to know that Cloud computing is a trend which they need to pay

attention to and they have consequently launched their own online office suite called

Microsoft Office Web Apps (Oricchio, 2010). As always with Microsoft, their

immediate advantage is tight integration with other Microsoft applications.

Compatibility with the Windows platform is, and it seems will continue to be, a major

issue for all software developers and distributors due to the market penetration of

Microsoft operating system which currently stands at 91.5% (Netmarketshare, June

2010).

Fig 1. Netmarketshare: Operating Systems (Source: http://marketshare.hitslink.com/os-market-share.aspx?qprid=9)

Which? also reviewed two less expensive suites, Softmaker Office 2010 and Ability

Office Home V5 but neither did particularly well in their tests. Making up the Which?’

top three behind Microsoft Office Home and Student 2010, were Apple iWorks and

Microsoft Office for Mac Home and Student 2008. This arguably suggests that

Microsoft and Apple, who many would view as the established players, remain out in

front of their competition. The point of interest for this paper is that all of the

Ian MacDonald June 2010

- 6 -

aforementioned suites, and virtually every other office suite on the market, include a

presentation application. At this point in time, Prezi is not part of an office suite and it

seems unlikely that it ever will be given the nature of the SaaS business model,

whereby users essentially subscribe must as one would to a news magazine.

Ian MacDonald June 2010

- 7 -

An Overview of Presentation Software

Most presentation applications are bundled with office software suites. However,

regardless of this point, there appears to be a strong need to ensure compatibility

with leading platforms and to facilitate smooth interaction and integration with widely

used software applications. For example, one of the first announcements that visitors

to the SlideRocket website (http://www. SlideRocket .com/) encounter concerns the

application’s integration with Google Apps. Zoho also welcomes visitors to their

website with a similar announcement. Clearly this is an issue that matters.

As the table below in Figure 2 indicates, the market for presentation software is a

crowded one with numerous players. The analogy of the jungle might be fitting

because perched at the very top of the food-chain is the proverbial king of

presentation software, PowerPoint. A quick exercise searching for the names of

different software using the three widely used search engines (Bing, Google and

Yahoo) leaves one in no doubt about which software stands head and shoulders

above the rest. As the pie charts in Figure 3 show, PowerPoint is overwhelming

ahead of the competition on this particular measure.

Active PresentationAdobe PersuasionAheadAppleWorksAuthorstreamBeamer (LaTeX)BRUNO Hewlett PackardCA-Cricket PresentsClaris ImpactCorel PresentationsDiagramming software Digitalsoft KeypointFlashspring GGoogle DocsHarvard GraphicsHyperCard

IBM Lotus Freelance Graphics IBM Lotus Symphony KeynoteISpring Presenter IWork.com KPresenterLive Presentations Macromedia DirectorMagicPointMicrosoft PowerPointMicrosoft PowerPoint ViewerNeoOffice ImpressOpenlp.orgOpenMindOpenOffice.org ImpressPicturesToExePhoto slideshow software

PowerdotPreziPulpMotionScala MultimediaScreencastSlide EffectSlideRocketSoftMaker PresentationsSongPro Tech Talk PSEVCN ExecuVisionVUE (Visual Understanding Environment)Web based presentation toolsWorship presentation programZoho Show

Fig. 2. Crowded Market: A Range of Presentation Software Programs and Applications

Ian MacDonald June 2010

- 8 -

Fig 3. Hits for Presentation Software Application on Major Internet Search Engines

Although user numbers for software applications are hard to locate, we can look at

how well each of the above companies are using social networking sites such as

Facebook, LinkedIn and Twitter to promote their applications (Fig. 4).

Ian MacDonald June 2010

- 9 -

Fig 4. Promoting Presentation Software Applications on Social Networking Sites.

Ian MacDonald June 2010

- 10 -

If the above figures were to represent an accurate picture of the future market,

SlideRocket and Prezi executives would undoubtedly be very pleased. It can be

argued that these young, progressive, companies are stealing a march on their

competition in this area, perhaps learning a lesson from political fund-raisers and

activists who have used the technique successfully in recent national elections (Carr,

2010).

It is estimated by Microsoft that there are 500 million PowerPoint users world-wide

(Feith, 2009). Elsewhere it is reported that there are 200 million users worldwide, 30

million presentations daily and over 95% market share (Parker, 2001). One might

assume that the difference in user numbers is, at least partly, due to the increase in

numbers over the eight years that elapsed between appearance of Parker’ and

Feith’s articles. In 2009, SlideRocket claimed leadership in on-line presentations but

without providing data to back up the claim one might question whether this is simply

a marketing boast (PR Web, 2009).

Zoho on the other hand presents the chart (Figure 5) on the following page as

‘evidence’ of surpassing one million users for its office suite in 2008. Whilst this is not

the same as saying there are one million Zoho Show users, it is nonetheless

impressive. In a more recent discussion Rao (2010), suggests that there are now

over two million users of the software.

Finally to close this section, we can see from the graph in Figure 6 that Prezi appears

to be enjoying a considerable hike in web traffic since the beginning of this year and

one would imagine that will be reflected in an increased uptake in the number of

users.

Ian MacDonald June 2010

- 11 -

Fig 5. Growth in Zoho usersZoho blogs. 06.07.08 Available at: http://blogs.zoho.com/uncategorized/zoho-1-million-users Accessed on

12.07.10

Fig 6. Website traffic at Prezi.comTechCrunch. 5/28/10 Available at: http://www.crunchbase.com/company/ Prezi Accessed on 12.07.10

Ian MacDonald June 2010

- 12 -

Comparing PowerPoint and Prezi

It could be argued that Prezi’s biggest advantage is the overwhelming strength of

PowerPoint. Most presentation programs are, in the main, a variation on the

PowerPoint model, whereas Prezi appears to be one of the few presentation

software programs that is truly different. As such it provides a counterpoint to its

illustrious, and infinitely bigger, competitor – a rallying flag for those who yearn for

something different. Consequently, there are some, like Wauters (2009), who

believe with, evangelical-like fervour, that Prezi is a genuine breakthrough product

and service. However, to understand this dynamic, it is useful to consider how

PowerPoint evolved from its humble beginnings as a program named Presenter to

become one of the most dominant and pervasive programs in the history of

computing.

PowerPoint

Fig 7. PowerPoint 1.0, PackagingGBU Wizards of Menlo Park: Scans of Early PowerPoint Product Boxes Available at:

http://www.gbuwizards.com/#boxscans (Accessed 13.07.10)

Ian MacDonald June 2010

- 13 -

Presenter was the brainchild of Robert (Bob) Gaskins and in his Sample Product

Proposal of August 1984, he lists the user benefits as follows:

Improves effectiveness of presentation content

Improves clarity of complex material

Reduces time to prepare presentations (dramatically)

Facilitates correct last-minute changes and revisions

Allows compliance with company presentation standards

Provides communication of high-quality presentations

Reduces cost of presentations (dramatically)

Allows the content-originator to control the presentation

Gaskins,1984

Fig 8. PowerPoint 1.0, ScreenshotGBU Wizards of Menlo Park: PowerPoint 1.0 About-Box Screendump (running on floppy-based black-and-white

Macintosh)March 1987 Available at: http://www.gbuwizards.com/#boxscans (Accessed 13.07.10)

Ian MacDonald June 2010

- 14 -

Gaskins anticipated that his product would be useful for managers, professionals,

knowledge workers, salespeople, in small and large companies, and he suggested

that the market for business presentations was worth $3.5 billion. In a confidential

Forethought, Inc., memo dated 22 May, 1986, Gaskins maintains that the Presenter

program was “designed primarily for producing overhead slides”. In the same memo

he clarifies the distinctions between Presenter and normal word processing software,

pointing out the program’s ability to create:

• Paragraphs with mixed fonts, sizes, and styles

• Finely adjustable line spacing and placement

• Wide choice of typefaces and large sizes suitable for graphic displays

• Word-processor-like manipulation of text

• Special formatting support for making bulleted lists

Gaskins et al,1986

Were Gaskins et al being perceptive when focusing so much on textual issues given

the way that PowerPoint has evolved and the way it is often used by presenters?

Admittedly, in the same document, Gaskin and his colleagues go on to highlight the

program’s facility to draw diagrams and incorporate art from different sources.

Perhaps most interesting of all is the sneak look into the future provided by mention

of the “Slide Show” function that allows one to use the computer as a "projector"

whereby images are shown one at a time on the computer's screen, without tools,

menu bar, or other Windows. Presentation of the show manually was achieved by

pressing the mouse button to the change slides. It should be noted that the very first

public use of a laptop to project video from PowerPoint would only take place some 6

years later on 25 February 1992, at the Hotel Regina, in the Place des Pyramides,

Paris (Robert Gaskins Home Page, 2010).

Two documents published in June and July of 1986 give further insight into the way

Presenter was being developed. In a “Product Marketing Analysis” (June, 1986), it is

noted that software should be designed for the content-originator or staff member in

Ian MacDonald June 2010

- 15 -

the immediate department, as distinct from specialist graphic artists and

professionals. Furthermore, it is suggested that the software for this task should be

suitable for Macintosh and Microsoft Windows, as in the words of the author,

Gaskins, “the two environments are very much alike, and becoming even more alike.”

Fig 9. Lots of People Make PresentationsGBU Wizards of Menlo Park: Presenter New Product Summary and Review

July 1986 Available at: http://www.gbuwizards.com/files/gbu-presenter-slides-july-1986.pdf (Accessed 13.07.10)

In the presentation slides, “Presenter New Product Summary and Review” (July,

1986), the slide displayed above sets out in the most specific terms yet who the

intended customer is. Meanwhile, the following slide, sets out a case for the timing:

Ian MacDonald June 2010

- 16 -

Fig 10. Presentations Require Graphics PC’sGBU Wizards of Menlo Park: Presenter New Product Summary and Review

July 1986 Available at: http://www.gbuwizards.com/files/gbu-presenter-slides-july-1986.pdf (Accessed 13.07.10)

The remarkable thing about the content of the available slides and reports from this

period is just how clear the Forethought’ Executives were about their product and

market. However, perhaps even they were surprised by the way that the

development of Presenter and PowerPoint accelerated from this point onwards. By

any measure it was quite beyond belief. However, if there was one slide that hinted

at the things to come it was one on the following page. In retrospect we can see that

if we go from 1 business meeting in 40 using presentation slides (see the second but

last line of the slide) to almost every business meeting featuring them, we were on

the brink of fantastic growth.

Ian MacDonald June 2010

- 17 -

Fig 11. Presentation Graphics has Real BenefitsGBU Wizards of Menlo Park: Presenter New Product Summary and Review

July 1986 Available at: http://www.gbuwizards.com/files/gbu-presenter-slides-july-1986.pdf (Accessed 13.07.10)

In April 1987,Presenter, now renamed PowerPoint 1.0, began shipping to customers.

In the process, it became the first software program to be published with a hardcover

bound book as its manual. In August of the same year, Forethought was acquired by

Microsoft for $14 million, in what Jerry Stevenson of Stevenson Consulting (2003)

describes as “a huge sum at the time, but probably one of smartest checks Bill Gates

ever cut”. The following year PowerPoint 2.0 was launched for Windows and in a

memo entitled, “Results of Microsoft's Graphics Business Unit after Our First Year”,

dated 8 August, 1988, Gaskins listed a series of accomplishments, not least of which

was the sales of Macintosh PowerPoint worth $5million for the 12 months through

July 88. In the same memo, Gaskins quoted Jim Seymour from the July 88 MacUser:

"Say what you will about Microsoft, they did right by PowerPoinf' (p. 72).

Ian MacDonald June 2010

- 18 -

Fig 12. PowerPoint 2.0 Launched for Macintosh (1988) and Windows (1990)GBU Wizards of Menlo Park: Scans of Early PowerPoint Product Boxes Available at:

http://www.gbuwizards.com/#boxscans (Accessed 13.07.10)

Ian MacDonald June 2010

- 19 -

It is not my intention to provide a full history of PowerPoint at this time since, if

nothing else, there would be little comparison to be drawn with Prezi – that company

being in its initial years of development. What I will do of course is make some

comparisons with the current products that both companies market. However, before

I do that, in rounding up this historical perspective on PowerPoint, there are a

number of relevant issues that I would like to highlight. Firstly, if one if is to glimpse

back to the start of this section of the paper, one will find on the rear of the

PowerPoint 1.0 packaging the following line of text: PowerPoint, “Provides smooth

integration with other applications, for including any information in presentations and

for using illustrations in any kind of documents”. This suggests that one of

PowerPoint’s enduring strengths was built into the DNA of the product right from the

outset, before there was any association with Microsoft. A second point that I would

stress is that PowerPoint’s early existence was mainly in the sphere of Apple

Macintosh and its initial popularity was established on the Mac platform. PowerPoint

arguably benefited from the zealous support that was typical of many Apple

followers. Note the above comment of Jim Seymour in MacUser which betrays a

certain level of discomfort, perhaps even distrust, between the Apple community and

Microsoft. We have no way of knowing how PowerPoint would have fared if it had

been a true Microsoft project and not simply a business unit that was acquired.

However, the strong culture that appears to have been cultivated amongst the GBU

Wizards of Menlo Park (the people who created PowerPoint at Forethought Inc. and

at the Microsoft Graphics Business Unit (GBU) located in Menlo Park, California

1984-1994) did not seem to harm the evolution of the product.

I have written extensively about the deep dislike of PowerPoint that exists amongst a

significant number of presenters (MacDonald, 2010) and I therefore do not wish to

repeat myself here. However, as if to underline what I wrote some six months ago,

and to an extent prove that the issues with PowerPoint persist and refuse to go away,

it has emerged that the American military’s dependence on the product as a

communication tool is not without detractors and critics. Consequently an article

appeared in the New York Times in April this year titled, “We Have Met the Enemy

Ian MacDonald June 2010

- 20 -

and He Is PowerPoint” (Bumiller, 2010). The article, prefaced by the most

extraordinary complex PowerPoint slide (Figure13), led Stanley A. McChrystal, the

leader of American and NATO forces in Afghanistan, to comment that, “when we

understand that slide, we’ll have won the war.”

Fig 13. A PowerPoint diagram meant to portray the complexity of American strategy in Afghanistan. We Have Met the Enemy and He Is PowerPoint Available at:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/27/world/27 PowerPoint .html?_r=1 (Accessed 13.07.10)

The article played right into the hands of PowerPoint critics who, not surprisingly,

highlighted the fact that this type of thing had been going on for years. To be more

precise, in April 2000, in a Wall Street Journal article, “What's Your Point,

Lieutenant? Please, Just Cut to the Pie Charts”, General Hugh Shelton, the

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, issued an order to U.S. military bases around

the globe, to cut out the bells and whistles and just get to the point. In the same

article, Army Secretary Louis Caldera suggests that PowerPoint presentations are

alienating lawmakers. "People are not listening to us, because they are spending so

much time trying to understand these incredibly complex slides". In 2009, in an

Ian MacDonald June 2010

- 21 -

essay that was featured in the Armed Forces Journal, retired Marine colonel, Thomas

X. Hammes, expressed many of the same concerns.

To prove that Newton’s Law of Physics also applies to criticism levelled at

PowerPoint, since April there has been a steady stream of writers and critics who

have responded to Bumiller’s article, and the resultant fallout. The reaction centres

around a somewhat salient point – namely, that PowerPoint is not the problem, it is

the people who use, or should that be abuse, the program who give it a bad name

(Nankani and Ojalvo, 2010). If one cares to search, there is broader support for

PowerPoint and occasionally one finds it in rather unlikely places. Take David Byrne,

the front man for the highly successful and critically acclaimed rock band, Talking

Heads. In “Learning to Love PowerPoint", Byrne (2003) not only makes a compelling

case for using PowerPoint, whilst incidentally poking fun at the program, but he also

demonstrates clear understanding of its purpose when suggesting that PowerPoint is

a meta-program that organizes and presents stuff created in other applications. This

resonates with vision of PowerPoint’s inventor Robert Gaskins and is enshrined in

the early planning documents discussed in this paper. Another interesting source of

support for PowerPoint can be found at the aptly name website, PowerPoint Heaven.

Writing about this and other unusual PowerPoint projects that capitalise of the

program’s simplicity, low cost and possibilities for artistic impression, Andy

Greenberg (2010) explores a sub-genre which is far from the typical business

presentation. One particular animation, “Infiltration” (2008) by Jeremiah Lee,

stretches the boundaries demonstrating PowerPoint effects that few would ever have

thought possible.

Ian MacDonald June 2010

- 22 -

Presentations were nothing new when PowerPoint appeared 20 years ago.

Most complaints we hear about presentations today were current then, too:

ambiguous and repetitive bullet points, speakers reading their slides, no

proper audience handouts, and more. PowerPoint didn’t create any of these

familiar ways to fall short.

Robert Gaskins, 2007

In terms of ‘defending’ PowerPoint from its critics, perhaps the last words should be

left to its creators, Robert Gaskins and Dennis Austin. When being interviewed in

2007 to mark the 20th anniversary of PowerPoint’s launch, Gaskins and Austin freely

acknowledged much of the criticism directed at PowerPoint (Gomes, 2007). In

particular, Gaskins conceded that criticism offered by Edward Tufte (2003) was true

before qualifying that people often misuse PowerPoint. In the same article, Austin

likened PowerPoint to the printing press, pointing out that the latter, “enabled all sorts

of garbage to be printed." Ultimately Gaskins believes that the real solution is for

presenters to develop a better sense of what is appropriate and here he includes

knowing when to use and when not to use the features and facilities that PowerPoint

offers (2007).

This latter piece of Gaskins’ advice is something I took to heart many years ago by

opting, in the main, to desist from using PowerPoint. It was often my feeling that the

software stood between me and my audience and rather than facilitate

communication it served to hinder it. However, this does not prevent me from

acknowledging that PowerPoint has its uses and I would not place myself in the

fervently anti-PowerPoint camp, or the “SourPointers”, as Feith (2009) labels them.

So how is PowerPoint shaping up in the present? Is it prepared to face a relative

onslaught of new competition? Early reviews of PowerPoint 2010 appear to indicate

that the program has been improved significantly. One has to keep in mind here that

Microsoft does not have a sterling record in the Update field, often being accused of

under-delivering on their software upgrades. However on this occasion, the reviews

Ian MacDonald June 2010

- 23 -

are very positive concerning the developments made to PowerPoint. For example, on

a personal level I am delighted to see that problems that have existed with

embedded videos in PowerPoint 2003 and 2007 have now been addressed in the

2010 version. Having experienced a rather embarrassing episode when presenting

an account of my 1st year doctoral studies, when the embedded video simply refused

to play, I have a deep understanding of how valuable improvements in this area are.

Software reviewers at m62 visual communications (2010), also rave about

improvements to the animation. Previously jittery and lacking in fluidity, the 2010

version is now quick and smooth. Sharing one’s presentations has also been made

considerably easier whilst the software looks better and appears to be more stable.

All this promises an improved user experience with most of the upgrades generating

savings in time and effort. The changes to video editing functions, including the

elimination of the need to use plug-ins or other software, are considered to represent

the biggest improvement.

We have our criticisms of PowerPoint, but as a package for

professionals it moves ahead of Keynote '09 - and pushes on further

beyond OpenOffice.org's Impress or Google Docs. It's a big step up

from PowerPoint 2007 too . . . May the march forward continue, but in

the meantime the choice is simple: if high-quality presentations matter

to your business, choose PowerPoint 2010.

PC Pro, 2010

To what extent is PowerPoint insulated against competitors like Keynote, Google

Docs and Prezi? One major advantage that PowerPoint has is that third-party

vendors, and even competitors, are virtually forced to ensure compatibility with the

Windows and PowerPoint platforms. Consequently it is quite normal to read on the

competition’ websites and literature that PowerPoint slides can be imported to and

displayed within their programs or, in reverse, presentations can be exported to

PowerPoint. “Yawn-Proof Presentations: Four Ways to Jazz up Your PowerPoints”

Ian MacDonald June 2010

- 24 -

(Inc. 2010) demonstrates the advantage of being the ‘top-dog’. In this March 2010

article, Orrichio showcases some of the new tools that have been developed to

maximize the potential of PowerPoint. No doubt some of these tools will also be

compatible with other presentation programs but one can be confident that they have

been thoroughly tested for use with PowerPoint.

Prezi – A Shining Star or a False Dawn?

Before addressing the above question, the following paragraph will outline what Prezi

is, why it is different from other presentation software and what makes it so special.

The paper will also describe the broad business model that Prezi follows. In trying to

answer the above question, the paper considers the reaction of users and critics to

Prezi’s launch and tries to predict how enduring its current strengths are and how

constraining any weaknesses are likely to be. Finally the paper will try to ascertain

whether there are parallels with the initial success achieved by PowerPoint in the

mid- to late-eighties and whether there are lessons that can be applied to the case of

Prezi from that period.

Fig. 14 Prezi screenshot Available at: http://layersmagazine.com/ Prezi .html

(Accessed 13.07.10)

Prezi is a Flash-based visualization, storytelling, and presentation tool that enables

users to create nonlinear presentations. Using a simple editor, one can insert text,

images, video, Flash files, and draw lines to show relationships between each item.

Ian MacDonald June 2010

- 25 -

The final result is a visual map that lets users zoom in and out and navigate to

content in a clickable environment (Cashman, 2009). The Zebra control can be used

to move, size, scale and rotate objects of any kind.

In my experience, as well as that of others who have reviewed Prezi (for example

Vickery, 2008; Cashman, 2009; Kuru, 2009 and Adria, 2009) it can take a while to

get used to Prezi’s interface and the Zebra, primarily because it is so different to

PowerPoint and other programs that users are likely to have operated in the past. As

a publisher with considerable experience of using drawing and desktop publishing

programs, I found it a little frustrating trying to match my instinctive sense of what the

controls should do with their actual functions. Adria (2009) also picked up on this

point when commenting that, “the controls are not what we are used to from other

software tools”. A further irritation, which will be common amongst those who do not

enjoy a super fast internet connection (although I was using broad bandwidth that

adequately deals with most online tasks including, for example, the viewing of live

online soccer), is the tendency to intuitively click a second or third time on the

controls when there are delays. In my experience, this had the opposite effect to the

one I wished and on numerous occasions lead to the program freezing. I have no

way of knowing whether the underlying cause was my machine or the server but

given that Cashman (2009) reported a similar probem – “sometimes took several

seconds to respond while moving or resizing an object” – it may well be the latter.

The Prezi canvas allows designers to focus on designing. However, a number of

reviewers have commented on whether this might prove to be overwhelming for

some users who, when granted to freedom to express themselves, may not know

how to fill such a canvas (Leberecht, 2009). Just as worrying, a number of reviewers

expressed the concern that some users will simply go crazy with the functionality and

employ all the bells and whistles in an indiscriminate fashion, much as some people

do with PowerPoint. Vickery (2009) points out that Prezi’s somewhat dynamic

movement may prove to be a distraction rather than an enhancement for some

messages and audiences, whereas Pulsifier (2009) also fears that regardless of its

Ian MacDonald June 2010

- 26 -

promise, Prezi will be used inappropriately. Leberecht (2009) shares his experience

of users going overboard, perhaps due to the novelty, whilst presenting at

conferences at which he was a participant.

It is not likely to replace PowerPoint for me, for the simple reason that vertigo-

inducing zooms and pans during an in-person presentation are exactly the

kind of distractions that I strive to avoid when I speak.

Todd Toler, Solid State UX, 2009

Most reviewers highlighted the fact that there is a good level of support for Prezi

including, an online manual, tutorial videos, examples, and a blog.

Why is Prezi different to other presentation software and what makes it special?

Even if the Prezi software contains a few glitches, and to be fair most innovative

software programs do, it remains a rather unique tool. To the best of my knowledge,

all the other presentation software that is currently available effectively forces users

to present information in linear frames as one does in PowerPoint. Brahm (2009)

says, “whether you reply on PowerPoint, Keynote, or another presentation

application, your’re sharing a series of slides that progress in a linear fashion”.

PowerPoint’ users – and I guess this includes almost everyone – will know that this

means breaking down one’s information and narrative into small, manageable parts

and sequencing the content according to how you wish it to appear to the audience.

To a certain extent one must still do this with Prezi, by ascribing a path (as Adam

Somlai-Fischer puts it, in Leberecht (2009), when you present time is linear), but

since one is working from a broad canvas, where the entire content is in view, it is

much easier to maintain a view of the ‘big picture’. In this sense, Prezi provides a

holistic perspective which is missing from most presentation software, although it

should be noted that Microsoft tried to address this by developing a plug-in called

PowerPoint Plex which offers a similar the ability to zoom in and out of preview

Ian MacDonald June 2010

- 27 -

slides. However, overall, the slide structure in PowerPoint remains the same even

with the Plex plug-in.

Many reviewers pick up on Prezi’s zooming facility. In addition to allowing presenters

to create presentations with more panache (Killerstartups Website, 2009) and

represent their ideas in the form of a dynamic mind map (Jones, 2010) zooming

provides what Kuru (2009) describes as a feeling of deepness and the ability to

deliver presentations that feel like they are three-dimensional. Vickery (2009)

expresses this in more straight-forward terms when he suggests that, “instead of

building up slides, Prezi allows you to provide an overview, go down to the features

and then further down to focus on the details, all on one big ‘canvas’”.

Readers may well say, “great but surely this is just one of these trendy functions, the

likes of which we have seen on PowerPoint over the years”. Various sounds and

slide transitions do come to mind. So is Prezi just a gimmick or does it truly offer

something special that can make a significant difference to the way we present?

Leberecht (2009) believes this is the case and that Prezi is radically different to

PowerPoint, suggesting that it requires an alternative mental model. A team at

Purdue University (2010) has collated one of the most extensive websites containing

background information on the development of Prezi and there one can find a

somewhat revealing quotation from Adam Somlai-Fischer, Prezi’s co-inventor, about

his motives for developing the program: "a good tool needs to help you in: thinking,

formulating and developing your message." Together with Peter Halacsy, Somlai-

Fischer, shared a dream to create tools that "allow self-expression to take shape."

This dream has lead to the creation of communication technology that enables

presenters to present in context (Toler, 2009), to show how the details relate to the

bigger picture. As Abela (2010) states, “the way to present details without

overwhelming your audience is to keep the details always in the context of the big

picture”. This he reckons is the key benefit of panning and zooming, the ability to go

back and forth between detail and the context that the big picture and canvas can

provide. As Peter Arvai, Prezi CEO says, “without focus, you cannot create a

Ian MacDonald June 2010

- 28 -

persuasive dialogue” (Market Wire, April, 2010). This is particularly relevant to the US

military diagram shown in Figure 13. The offending slide is clearly not scaled to allow

the audience to interpret the vast amount of data and information that is being

displayed. Such a problem is eliminated when using Prezi as one has the option of

focusing on a specific point and not getting lost in a welter of detail.

The purpose of Prezi is to replace less intriguing presentation tools with a

more captivating and stunning presentation with incredible zooming

capabilities. It is the presentation tool of tomorrow that can be utilized not only

in the business world but also in the diverse world of education.

Purdue University on The Purpose of Prezi, 2010

Like any innovative software, Prezi has some interesting and novel applications.

Without great difficulty, Prezis can be displayed as stand-alone presentations and

they can also be converted to video and distributed almost anywhere (Shepard,

2009). Meanwhile, Davis (2009) believes that Prezi can recreate the dynamic of an

animated, finger-pointing, architect jumping around in front of a wall of drawings and

blueprints. In January of this year, Prezi launched a new ‘Reuse’ feature that allows

subscribers to access and remix presentations from a Reuse Library. This could be

an important step for encouraging people to get involved and overcome fear of the

blank canvas.

From a business perspective, Prezi may be considered an example of a new breed

of software, in that it is neither bundled with other applications nor is it typically

installed on one’s computer (note that there is a desk-top version available to

subscribers). Prezi is normally stored on, and operated from, the server of the

software supplier and as mentioned previously the business model is often called

Software as a Service, or SaaS for short. Adoption of this model is currently proving

to be popular across Europe (Wainewright, 2009). As a hosted solution, Prezi

currently has three primary pricing structures: Free, Enjoy (approximately $58/year),

and Pro ($159/year). The Free version gives you up to 100 MB of storage on their

site, includes the Prezi logo on your presentation, and makes your presentations

Ian MacDonald June 2010

- 29 -

public. For an annual fee, the Enjoy and Pro versions let you create private

presentations and access additional online storage space. Pro allows you to

download a desktop version of the Prezi editing software. Free and Enjoy users

design online by uploading content to the Prezi server. All versions allow you to use

the simple editor; download your presentations and show them from your computer;

create groups to share and collaborate with; import images, videos, PDFs, and Flash

files; and embed presentations into blogs and websites

(http:// Prezi .com/profile/signup/). Prezi also offers special education licenses Free,

Edu Enjoy (free), and Edu Pro ($59/year). In line with the normal licenses, the

education services provide 100 MB, 500 MB and 2000 MB of storage respectively

(http:// Prezi .com/profile/signup/). App Appeal, in a glowing review, praises Prezi for

the ease with which one can sign-up.

Writing for the Harvard Business Review, Umair Haque (2009), Director of the Havas

Media Lab, described Prezi as “the best business model in the world” and “an

insanely great product”. Is this hype or an over-reaction? It is reasonably clear from

the number of positive product reviews and the somewhat unprecedented support

that Prezi is racking up on social network sites, that we are witnessing more than just

a great product. It strikes me that Prezi offers a rallying flag of sorts for those who

have experienced the frustration of having to use PowerPoint for the last 23 years.

Many PowerPoint users have instinctively known that the constraining nature of the

program’s slide-structure makes for ineffective communication that harms dialogue.

Perhaps the secret of Prezi is that is addresses that very ineffectiveness.

Regardless, the reaction is uniformly positive, even amongst those who see some

issues in getting users acquainted and comfortable with the product. Wauters (2009)

declares that Prezi allows one to create amazing presentations that are just plain

awesome. App Appeal, awards Prezi 5 out of 5 and summarises by saying that it “is

a great way to create interesting and great fun presentations which are much more

engaging”. Hart (2009) awards Prezi the top honour in her list of new training and

teaching tools for 2010 informing her readers that it can help them to build amazing

presentations. Kuru (2009) positively gushes, stating that, “Prezi is far more creative

Ian MacDonald June 2010

- 30 -

and innovative than any other tool I’ve used”. Jones (2010) confirms her switch from

PowerPoint to Prezi and says the software represents a “life-saving tool”. Toler

(2009) believes that Prezi is masterfully designed, whilst Abela (2010) claims that it is

one of the best communication technologies to come along in a very long time.

Can Prezi break Microsoft’s domination of the presentation software market? It is

obviously far too early to make any bold prediction but there is cause to believe that,

assuming Prezi attracts appropriate funding, it could at least carve out an important

niche in the market. Perhaps it could also establish a legacy by having a profound

impact on the future design of presentation software. It is in this latter sense that

Prezi’s destiny may be decided. If the major market players are able to incorporate

Prezi’s innovative functions into their own presentation software – be they modified or

totally re-designed – one suspects that it would be very tough for Prezi to grow or

hold on to its market share. The converse may also be true, with every day that

passes in which Prezi is viewed as the true alternative to PowerPoint, its prospects

are greatly enhanced. Can it be that we stand on the precipice of a revolutionary

advance in how we present? Or is there something that we are missing in our

analysis?

What, if anything, can Prezi learn from the success of PowerPoint? Sadly, as I did

not enjoy access to the same level of detail in respect of Prezi’s product and market

planning, I’m reluctant to draw comparisons. However, it is almost spooky to look

back and realise just how perceptive Forethought was when developing Presenter

and PowerPoint. Of course, like all successful businesses, it must be acknowledged

that Forethought also enjoyed the luck of being in the right place at the right time on

a number of occasions. Are there signs that the Prezi team is similarly perceptive or

can enjoy similar luck? We have no way of knowing the second but if we look at the

philosophy of the Prezi founders we can extract a clue to the former. From the Preszi

website, in the section About Us, we read, “at Prezi, we prefer not to follow trends.

Instead, we learn about culture and respond with technology. We believe in

Ian MacDonald June 2010

- 31 -

humanity’s desire for creativity and self-expression.” This leads me nicely to my final

and concluding point of this section.

My own interest in Prezi developed from studies that span country culture,

presentation methodology, technology and training. Based on those studies, I

suspect that Prezi could achieve major success because of its intrinsic appeal to

Asians. In fact, I believe that it is simply not well recognised that a great deal of

PowerPoint’s success can largely be attributed to the tendency of Western cultures

to view the world in analytic, atomistic, terms, just like their forefathers in Ancient

Greece (Nisbett, 2003). Asians, like the Ancient Chinese on the other hand, see the

world in holistic terms. For Asians, there is no obsession with seeking out simplicity

as they regard the world as complex, changeable and driven by interrelated

components. To reinforce this, David Gran, who used Prezi during a film festival

presentation in Beijing, expressed the view that it enabled him to bridge the cultural

gap between him and his audience with ease (Purdue University, 2010). As an older,

wiser, man once told me that it is folly to educate one’s market and I suspect that he

may have seen the natural market for Prezi in the East not the West.

Ian MacDonald June 2010

- 32 -

Conclusions

PowerPoint is undoubtedly one of the great success stories of modern computer

software and to be comparing it to Prezi seems a little unfair on the latter. However,

the mere fact that we can entertain such a discussion represents an accolade for the

Hungarian-invented software.

In a market that is developing quickly, it seems that each of the leading software

programs match each other on technological advances. If one company offers an

online suite for Cloud computing, the rest seem to follow quickly. If one company

integrates its product with another, so the rest follow. There was a time when these

developments would grant a competitive advantage but those days seem to have

gone forever. It is with this in mind that we can say that Prezi truly does offer

something different and that this difference could be the key to accessing growth and

success. Where other software programs offer cosmetic differences to the dinosaur

in the room, PowerPoint, Prezi comes across as the Yin to PowerPoint’s Yan.

Therefore, the sheer strength of PowerPoint as the overwhelming market leader,

serves to convey a major advantage to Prezi, given that it is increasingly seen as the

real alternative. However, it goes beyond this because supporters of Prezi remind me

of the evangelists who largely made Apple Macintosh what it is today. The

commitment and passion of Prezi users, as reflected in the programs popularity on

social networking sites, could become a very powerful tool. Just as Apple has proved

over the years that there is life beyond Windows, so Prezi could sustain a healthy

market share beyond PowerPoint. Yet it could be more than that if one takes a more

enlightened view of the market and, as Prezi’s philosophy indicates, allow culture a

central role in determining where Prezi can generate the greatest marketing

leverage.

Ian MacDonald June 2010

- 33 -

Although I recognise that Prezi could vastly change the way we think about, design

and deliver presentations, there is a counter argument to the notion that Prezi may

advance the way we present to our audiences. Perhaps PowerPoint’s extraordinary

success is actually due to the way it mirrors Western culture and thinking, where

contrary to a popular conception, it is the detail of the parts and not the big picture

which commands attention. If that it is the case, faced with PowerPoint and its many

look-a-likes, Prezi could settle for an Apple-like niche and still be fabulously

successful. However, if Prezi were to become the preferred choice of Asians and

other non-Western cultures, it could, in time, seriously rival PowerPoint.

Ian MacDonald June 2010

- 34 -

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abela, A. (2010) Prezi: the compromise breaker [Online] January 25, 2010. Available at: http://extremepresentation.typepad.com/blog/2010/01/ Prezi -the-compromise-breaker.html (Accessed on 15.07.10)

Adria, O. (2010) Prezi: What’s the blogosphere’s viewpoint? (Parts 1 and 2)[Internet] April 3, 2010 and April 5, 2010. Available at: http://www.rethinkpresentations.com/ Prezi -whats-the-blogospheres-viewpoint-part-1/ and http://www.rethinkpresentations.com/ Prezi -whats-the-blogospheres-viewpoint-part-2/ (Accessed on 15.07.10)

Adria, O. (2010) Prezi: More than Buzz? [Internet] April 13, 2009 Available at: http://www.rethinkpresentations.com/ Prezi -review-more-than-buzz/ (Accessed on 15.07.10)

Bram, T. (2009) Prezi: Presentations With a Twist in WebWorkerDaily: Rebooting the Workforce [Online] September 28, 2009. Available at: http://webworkerdaily.com/2009/09/28/ Prezi -presentations-with-a-twist/ (Accessed on 14.07.10)

Bumiller, E. (2010) We Have Met the Enemy and He Is PowerPoint: Enemy Lurks in Briefings on Afghan War in New York Times[Online] April 10, 2010. Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/27/world/27 PowerPoint .html?_r=1 (Accessed on 14.07.10)

Byrne, D. (2003) Learning to Love PowerPoint in Wired Issue [Online] 11, September 2003Available at: http://www.davidbyrne.com/art/eeei/press/WiredMagazine9_03.php (Accessed on 14.07.10)

Carr, D. (2008) How Obama Tapped Into Social Networks’ Power in New York Times November 10, 2008, on page B1 of the New York edition.

Cashman, C (2009) Prezi: Nonlinear Presentation Tool [Online] November 6, 2009. Available at: http://layersmagazine.com/ Prezi .html (Accessed on 14.07.10)

Davies, H (2009) Breaking away from the slideshow presentation in Building Design August 28 2009. CMP Information Ltd.

Feith, D. (2009) Speaking Truth to PowerPoint in Wall Street Journal July 31, 2009

Gaskins, R. (2007) PowerPoint at 20: Back to Basics in Communications of the ACM 2007/Vol. 50, No. 12. Available at: http://www.robertgaskins.com/pages/gaskins-ppt-at-20-cacm-vol50-no12-dec-2007-p15-p17.pdf (Accessed on 14.07.10)

Gomes, L. (2007) PowerPoint Turns 20, As Its Creators Ponder A Dark Side to Success in Wall StreetJournal [Online] June 20, 2007. Available at: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118228116940840904.html (Accessed on 14.07.10)

Greenberg, A. (2010) The Underground Art Of PowerPoint in Forbes.Com [Online] 11 May 2010Available at: http://www.forbes.com/2010/05/10/ Microsoft -software-iphone-technology-PowerPoint .html?boxes=Homepagemostemailed (Accessed on 14.07.10)

Hammes, T. X. (2009) Essay: Dumb-dumb bullets: As a decision-making aid, PowerPoint is a poor tool in Armed Forces Journal [Online] July, 2009. Available at: http://www.afji.com/2009/07/4061641 (Accessed on 14.07.10)

Hart, J. (2009) A toolkit for 2010 in e.learning age November 2009. Bizmedia Ltd.

Jones, D. (2010) Why I am switching from PowerPoint to Prezi (Parts 1 and 2) [Online] June 30, 2010.Available at: http://www.exec-comms.com/blog/2010/06/30/guest-posting-why-i-am-switching-from-PowerPoint -to- Prezi -part-1/ and http://www.exec-comms.com/blog/2010/07/07/guest-posting-why-i-am-switching-from- PowerPoint -to- Prezi -part-2/ (Accessed on 14.07.10)

Ian MacDonald June 2010

- 35 -

Jaffe, G. (2000) “What's Your Point, Lieutenant? Please, Just Cut to the Pie Charts in Wall Street Journal [Online] April 26, 2000 Available at: http://www.gbuwizards.com/files/wall-street-journal-greg-jaffe-26-april-2000.htm (Accessed on 14.07.10)

Kuru, A. (2009) Prezi early review: Will definitely change your mind about other presentation tools [Online] March 8, 2009. Available at: http://alikuru.com/ Prezi -early-review-will-definitely-change-your-mind-about-other-presentation-tools/ (Accessed on 14.07.10)

Leberecht, T. (2009) Power to Prezi! [Online] August 23, 2009. Available at: http://designmind.frogdesign.com/blog/power-to- Prezi .html (Accessed on 30.06.10)

Nankani, S. and Ojalvo, H. E. (2010) Point Counter Point: How to Use (and Avoid Misusing) PowerPoint in New York Times [Online] May 3, 2010. Available at: http://learning.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/05/03/point-counter-point-how-to-use-and-avoid-misusing-PowerPoint /?partner=rss&emc=rss (Accessed on 14.07.10)

Nesbitt, R. E. (2003) The Geography of Thought: How Asians and Westerners Think Differently . . . and Why New York: Free Press

Orrichio, R. (2010) Google Docs, meet the new Microsoft Office in Inc. p. 47. March 2010 Mansueto Ventures LLC

Orrichio, R. (2010) Yawn-Proof Presentations: Four Ways to Jazz up Your PowerPoints in Inc. p. 47. March 2010 Mansueto Ventures LLC

Parker, I (2001) Absolute PowerPoint in The New Yorker (May 28): 76-87.

Pulsifier, R. (2009) Sacred Cow #4: Using {feature} Or {plugin} Will Make Me Look Savvy. [Internet] April 9, 2009. Available at: http://mike-pulsifer.org/2009/04/sacred-cow-4-using-feature-or-plugin-will-make-me-look-savvy/ (Accessed on 15.07.10)

Rao, L. (2010) Zoho Calendar Steps Out Of Beta with Sharing, Subscribing And More TechCrunch [Internet] Jul 7, 2010. Available at: http://techcrunch.com/2010/07/07/zoho-calendar-steps-out-of-beta-with-sharing-subscribing-and-more/ (Accessed on 12.07.10)

Reimer, J (2005) Total share: 30 years of personal computer market share figures ars technical [Internet] Available at: http://arstechnica.com/old/content/2005/12/total-share.ars/ (Accessed on 29.06.30)

Shepard, C. (2009) Standalone slideshows in e.learning age September 2009. Bizmedia Ltd.

Toler, T (2009) Zooming in on Prezi: A Review [Online] July 21, 2009. Available at: http://www.solidstateux.com/reviews/zooming-in-on- Prezi -a-review/ (Accessed on 14.07.30)

Tufte E R (2003) PowerPoint Is Evil: Power Corrupts, PowerPoint Corrupts Absolutely in Wired Issue 11.09, September 2003.

Vickery, D,(2009) The latest evolution in presentation tools? in Presentation Magazine [Online] 30 October 2009. Available at: http://www.presentationmagazine.com/the-latest-evolution-in-presentation-tools-1123.htm (Accessed on 14.07.30)

Wainewright, P (2009) Software as Services: SaaS adoption swells in Europe [Online] April 16, 2009. Available at: http://www.zdnet.com/blog/saas/saas-adoption-swells-in-europe/736?tag=content;search-results-rivers (Accessed on 29.06.30)

Watson, B. P. (2008) Future of Software Finally Arrives in CIO Insight, May 2008, Issue 93, p20-22 Ziff Davis Media Inc

Wauters, R. (2009) Prezi Is The Coolest Online Presentation Tool I've Ever Seen [Online] Apr 20, 2009. Available at: http://techcrunch.com/2009/04/20/ Prezi -is-the-coolest-online-presentation-tool-ive-ever-seen/ (Accessed on 12.07.10)

Ian MacDonald June 2010

- 36 -

Documents

Gaskins, R. (1984) Sample Product Proposal: Presentation Graphics for Overhead Projection [Online] August 14, 1984. Available at: http://www.robertgaskins.com/pages/gaskins-original- PowerPoint -proposal-14-aug-1984.pdf (Accessed on 13.07.10)

Gaskins, R., Rudkin, T. and Austin, D. (1986) Presenter Specification [Online] May 22 1986. Available at: http://www.gbuwizards.com/files/gbu-presenter-spec-austin-rudkin-gaskins-may-1986.pdf (Accessed on 13.07.10)

Gaskins, R. (1986) Presenter Product Marketing Analysis June 27 1986 (53 pages) [Online] May 22 1986. Available at: http://www.gbuwizards.com/files/gbu-presenter-strategy-document-june-1986.pdf(Accessed on 13.07.10)

Gaskins, R. (1988) Report on the First Year of the Microsoft Graphics Business Unit (20 pages) [Online] August 1988. Available at: http://www.gbuwizards.com/files/gbu-first-year-msft-report.pdf (Accessed on 13.07.10)

WebsitesAppAppeal: Reviews of Web Based Applications. 2009. Prezi [Online] April 26, 2009 http://www.appappeal.com/app/ Prezi /

m62 visual communications 2010 PowerPoint 2010 Review [Online] January 19th, 2010 article62, PowerPoint 2010 Available at: http://www.m62.net/ PowerPoint -training/presentation-software/ PowerPoint -2010-review/ (Accessed on 14.07.10)

KillerStartups. 2009. Prezi.com – A Powerful Way To Create Presentations [Online] July 14 2009 Available at: http://www.killerstartups.com/Web-App-Tools/ Prezi -com-a-powerful-way-to-create-presentations (Accessed on 15.07.10)

Market Wire. 2010. Why the U.S. Military Should Have Used Prezi [Online] January 26, 2010 Availableat: http://www.marketwire.com/press-release/ Prezi -Releases-First-of-Its-Kind-Reuse-Feature-1186836.htm (Accessed on 15.07.10)

Market Wire. 2010. Prezi Releases First-of-Its-Kind Reuse Feature[Online] April 30, 2010 Available at: http://www.marketwire.com/press-release/Why-the-US-Military-Should-Have-Used- Prezi -1156676.htm(Accessed on 15.07.10)

Netmarketshare. 2010 Top Operating System Share Trend [Online] June 2010 Available at: http://marketshare.hitslink.com/os-market-share.aspx?qprid=9 (Accessed on 30.06.10)

PC Pro 2010 Microsoft PowerPoint 2010 Review [Online] June 2010 Available at: http://www.pcpro.co.uk/reviews/software/358408/ Microsoft - PowerPoint -2010/2 (Accessed on 14.07.10)

PC Mag.Com. 2010 Microsoft Office 2010 – PC Magazine Review [Online] 11 May 2010. Available at: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2362923,00.asp (Accessed on 30.06.10)

PR Web. 2009 SlideRocket Marketplace Adds Services, New Content Partners and Easy to Use Portal: New Services Directory Gives You Help When You Need it [Online] 3 March 2009. Available at:(http://www.prweb.com/releases/ SlideRocket /marketplace/prweb2201474.htm) (Accessed on 12.07.10)

Purdue University, ITAP (Information Technology at Purdue). 2010 Prezi [Online] 3 March 2009. Available at: https://wiki.itap.purdue.edu/display/INSITE/ Prezi # Prezi -References (Accessed on 12.07.10)

Robert Gaskins Home Page 2010 Footnotes to history: The world’s first laptop video PowerPoint presentation: 25 February 1992, Paris I [Online] July 2010 Available at: http://www.robertgaskins.com/ (Accessed on 13.07.10)

Ian MacDonald June 2010

- 37 -

Stevenson Consulting 2003, A short history of PowerPoint. [Online] Monday, 19 May 2003. Available at: http://stevensonconsulting.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=50&Itemid=2 (Accessed on 13.07.10)

Which? 2010 Office suites: Compare features & prices, Microsoft Office Home and Student 2010 [Online] June 2010 Available at: http://www.which.co.uk/reviews/office-suites/ Microsoft -office-home-and-student-2010/review (Accessed on 30.06.10)

Which? 2010 Office suite reviews [Online] June 2010 Available at: http://www.which.co.uk/reviews/office-suites (Accessed on 30.06.10)

Which? 2010 Microsoft Office Web Apps: Free online office software. [Online] July 2010 Available at: http://www.which.co.uk/reviews-ns/ Microsoft -office-web-apps/index.jsp (Accessed on 30.06.10)

Other

MacDonald, I. (2010) To What Degree Does Technology Determine How Public Speakers Present to their Audiences? (Essay Paper, 3 February 2010)

PowerPoint Presentations

Lee, J. (2008) Infiltration, PowerPoint Movie, [Online] November 09, 2008 Available at: http://pptheaven.mvps.org/ppt/Infiltration.zip (Accessed on 14.07.10)

Websites: Software

Apple Keynote http://www. Apple .com/iwork/ Keynote /

PowerPoint http://office. Microsoft .com/en-us/ PowerPoint /default.aspx

Google Docs http://docs. Google .com/#all

Open Office Impress http://openoffice.org-suite.com/

Prezi http:// Prezi .com/

SlideRocket http://www. SlideRocket .com/

Zoho Show http://show.zoho.com/Home.do

Ian MacDonald June 2010

- 38 -

APPENDIX 1: Hits for Presentation Software Application on Major Internet Search Engines

Bing %

Apple Keynote 6350000 11.46Microsoft PowerPoint 41400000 74.74

Open Office Impress 7240000 13.07

Prezi 131000 0.24

SlideRocket 64200 0.12

Zoho Show 210000 0.38

55395200

Google %

Apple Keynote 3940000 4.71Microsoft PowerPoint 74100000 88.60

Open Office Impress 1840000 2.20

Prezi 485000 0.58

SlideRocket 2830000 3.38

Zoho Show 440000 0.53

83635000

Yahoo %

Apple Keynote 39300418 9.89Microsoft PowerPoint 347005113 87.29

Open Office Impress 6210103 1.56

Prezi 2030029 0.51

SlideRocket 547002 0.14

Zoho Show 2420013 0.61

397512678

These figures were collected at the respective search engine sites on 30.06.10.

Ian MacDonald June 2010

- 39 -

APPENDIX 2: Promoting Presentation Software Applications on Social Networking Sites

Facebook %Apple Keynote 227 2.47Microsoft PowerPoint 3435 37.41Open Office Impress 0 0.00Prezi 4792 52.18SlideRocket 729 7.94Zoho Show 0 0.00

9183

Linked In %Apple Keynote 26339 21.44Microsoft PowerPoint 96112 78.23Open Office Impress 0 0.00Prezi 42 0.03SlideRocket 37 0.03Zoho Show 328 0.27

122858

Twitter %Apple Keynote 69 0.60Microsoft PowerPoint 140 1.22Open Office Impress 0 0.00Prezi 4761 41.63SlideRocket 6362 55.63Zoho Show 104 0.91

11436

These figures were collected at the respective social networking sites on 30.06.10.

Ian MacDonald June 2010

- 40 -