Slashdot Mirror
It's Official: MS Office 10 Subscription Version
F.Prefect writes: "Microsoft is going to be releasing a 'subscription version' of Office 10. This version will actually stop allowing a user to create new documents after the subscription period ends. Read their press release. Although they will still offer a non-subscription version for more money, I can't help but think that Office 11 or some subsequent software package will do away with non-subscription versions entirely ..." Seeding of the .NET "cloud of services" has officially begun, it looks like. Press releases, of course, try to make you want to buy the products they're pushing, but this one is a head-scratcher. It boils down to "It works like the regular version, but you get to pay for it again this time next year, too, or it breaks!" Won't IT manager types get tired of this?
--
So Microsoft offers an additional option for people who want to use their software in terms different from the existing ones, and everybody just comes out and denounces them for giving their customers a choice. Yup, what a bunch of bigots on this site.
:-)
Ah, but you're assuming people choose to buy Office; it's something most PC buyers need and assume will come with a new computer system when they pay for it. The system bundlers are going to love this, because they can bring down the immediate cost of a new system, making it more attractive to potential buyers, but this initial saving is offset by the MS subscription fee. This is Microsoft shifting the traditional Wintel tax from the high initial purchase cost of a system to a more `spread out' model of payment.
So prices come down for computer buyers, system builders get to sell more systems, and MS assure themselves a revenue stream without having to stuff more bloaty features into their software to sell it. I'm not really sure what I think about it really
Matthew @ Bytemark Hosting
no way in hell .. MS will make subscription only MS office
... issueing those bills every month week or whatever will cost money and will need workers and stuff
plus for those who pay ...they will need to make the trip to the bank or MS office or whatever ..
else they will have to pay online (which is not secure and many ppl will not do it ) plus not all ppl who use MS office have bank accounts or visa cards ( students )
..in most countries outside usa ( egypt, india , etc ...)
...if you dont like renting software ..dont ..i thought many slashdoters are proud to be MS free ..and dont use MS software .. i paid 6$ for my MS professional with a lincense ..thats because my university had a deal with MS to sell copies and lincenses for our uni students for cheap prices ...never got such an offer from linux ??????
for 1 its akward to pay mothly bills
renting software is just to akward to do and not even possible technically
anyway
plus
any way
so thanx MS
sheep for the sheep human for the human i just wonna keep my soul alive
we open-source advocates are always talking about the virtue of OPEN-SOURCE!!!!!! M$ isn't offering anything for free, they're offering a different fsckin' way to pay for closed-source software. You think we're gonna sit here with our thumbs up our butts goin' "Hip hip hooray for for a new way to pay for buggy, proprietary software!" I'm amazed that you even care...and suspicious of the fact that you apparently care so much. If open source is going to be so much better, then MS will be gone (or reduced to a minor player) anyway in 10 years. The variety of payment methods they offer won't make a bit of difference, if there are a multitude of clear advantages to someone else's software. Personally, I expect that nothing much will be different in 10 years... MS (and the other commercial software houses) will still be raking in the money, and open source software will still be little more than the hobbyist's playground.
I have been a long time supporter of Microsoft. I worked in several heterogeneous networking environments, using Solaris, Netware, Linux and NT. This new wave of licensing starting with the current 'Office' product, is irritating. Speaking from an 'IT Type's' point of view, it is making me seriously consider moving users to Linux. Sure it may take a bit more time to configure the desktops to be a little easier for them to use. Sure they may have to 'actually' sit and learn what it is the software does on the computer.
;-)
Oh wait that's right, that isn't possible. I forgot, Microsoft holds us by the balls. Why? Because in today's world and society, sales people are hired for their selling skills not their computer and technology skills. Administrative people would rather use a notepad and a calculator than learn how to use a computer properly. And it isn't like we IT guys are asking them to learn how to use Linux (yet) just windows.
They can't even 1) take the time to learn the second most brainless OS there is, #1 still being MacOS without the shell. 2)Have the want or desire to learn the OS, at least basics. Again I am not asking them to start scripting, editing the registry, or creating custom kernels.
I think where the problem starts is at the corporate level, there should be a requirement that sales people and administrative folks that work in the IT industry, ought to have an interest toward that industry, otherwise go work at a law office or a retail co.
Make way for the people that have a passion for this industry, the people that seek out learning and growth. If you are one of those people but are making an effort to learn and grow, kudos to you. Good to have you. If you are one of those people and are not making an effort and are instead helping to make our industry mediocre and ineffective, and are doing nothing to learn and grow and you don't think this pertains to you, read it again.
Sorry all, felt like ranting and raving like a madman!
Yack it up. If you go to www.Sun.com and click on StarOffice you will see "download the source".. that link is broken.. yah! I wanted to see the internal Sun tree of StarOffice and the GPL Opensource tree.
How we know is more important than what we know.
It's sure all but forgotten, but that's a very concrete 50-year license... and Ashton-Tate doesn't exist anymore.
I'm not advocating Microsoft's new licensing scheme, just shedding a spotlight of another color on the whole mess. Fun, fun, fun... not.
--
Don't trust your Government. (Update:
*kerchunk* *beep* "...Operator."
last time I checked our society wasn't built by God, it was built by man and it was built to withstand the lowest of human scum. If we were all to become conivingly self interested overnight (like some great advocation of capitalism) it is desired that society will still survive. Foundation is the key word here. Who wants to live on a concrete stump? But without it your beautiful house won't survive.
Now there are some people who don't like to hear the word virtue. They beleive that it associates the word "good" with "special" people and "ordinary" with everyone else. Is a begger a bad man because he does not give to others? No, then why should I be considered a bad man for not giving welfare? But these people go one step further. As far as they are concerned giving to the poor just removes the begger's motivation to improve his lot in life.
How we know is more important than what we know.
Microsoft was fair though and gave those who subscribed a free upgrade to version 5. This isn't what is happening with Office 10 though. Re-read the posts. I am hoping this model doesn't work for them. Otherwise we'll see it be applied to their operating systems. Imagine going to boot your PC and getting a message that your subscription is expired and that's that. I am hoping for an Office alternative (I know there are some out there but face it they SUCK.) Office is easy, Office is intuitive. Why can't these Open Source alternatives be that way?
'Same speed C but faster'
They'll probably wonder why their computer isnt getting wiped out by viruses a couple of times per month too, and miss those phonecalls from friends telling them they have gotten blackholed out of the friends mailbox for spreading macro viruses.
If they price it correctly, consumers will start using this. As soon as the first glitches appear (ie: someone that have paid and is not able to write its document, a machine that crash and the application that is unusable after the OS re-install, someone that honestly forgot to renew its subscription, etc, etc) customers will be increadibly upset.
This won't stop so-called 'piracy', but will annoy regular customers, like protection on old software.
And given the great compliance of successive versions of Orifice, it will be fun, whern someone have to dig an old version of Office2K in 5 or 6 years to read a document, and find that it won't work anymore.
The last, and most frightening, problem is that at any time, M$ will be able to stop renewing the subscription and push customers onto a different product in a rigid time frame. And if your documents are not supported on the next version, then though luck: you won't have much time for the migration... Imagine if M$ was able to make all current installs of NT to stop working to force people on W2K...
Cheers,
--fred
1 reply beneath your current threshold.
It is if you alias it (ie .cmd file in the path) as all true UNIX disciples will do after their first 20 minutes with the NT shell.
Now if we could only substitute "\" with "/" all would be well.
.
If I buy a copy of Office, it is an Asset I have acquired. (I know, this is slashdot, so some of you will say its a liability, but I'm talking accountancy speak now) So it goes on that side of the books.
However, if I rent a copy of Office, then that's an expense I am committing to with no gain in the value of the company. It goes on the other side of the books.
Now, suppose I need to buy 5000 copies of office. That is one hell of a lot of money to move from Asset to Expense. The suits will say "woah!"
And what benefits does it offer me? Companies rent stuff because:
They can't afford to buy it outright (e.g. office space)
They aren't really renting, just outsourcing the whole operation (e.g. company cars)
Neither of these applys to office software, does it?
Perhaps this would be useful for strat-ups, or small special projects, or where you wish to bill everything associated with a project to the customer...
~~~~~ BigLig2? You mean there's another one of me?
Well I believe the reason the world still has some decent places is because of those who are selfless, have integrity, the pillars of society aka "salt of the earth" types. These are the real foundations of our society. They keep things going _despite_ the various idiocies, evils of real life, they stick their necks out for the rest of us, often at great cost to themselves.
:) ). You can have a society with 100% of these sort, but it won't be a great place to be, it would tend towards rot and decay, towards decadence. Because they'll generally just attempt to behave only "as decently as the rest". Some slightly better, some worse - on average = average - after all in 70 years or so, they'll be dead - so why aim for much higher?
:).
The purely self-interested are just "fillers" in our society, the "dime a dozen" (granted some are quite entertaining
It's because of your body cells selflessness that you exist. They might as well have stuck to being viruses, protozoa and bacteria, there'd be trillions more of them, and they'd be more likely to survive most cataclysms for the next billion years or so (all that selfish gene crap is just that - crap).
But instead they're bunched together to form self-interested idiots like us.
The least we could do is to occasionally justify their path of selflessness and greater life. If not we might as well speed on towards entropy and be just lifeless bundles of quarks.
For the path of entropy is always easiest and the most statistically probable (inevitable many say).
But I think God has got better ideas than the boring old statistically probable
Have a nice day!
Link.
How is this "blackmail"? If you know that your subscription is going to running out, what would keep you from saving your Word document to the Wordperfect format? What would keep you from opening this same document in Staroffice? Nothing! Your document file is still there!
/own/ the car that you are leasing? Puhleeze.
And please, explain to me how you do not own the Microsoft software that you buy? Unless I've been missing something for the last six years, I think I have the right to continue using all of the Microsoft packages that I've bought. As for the new licensing terms of Office, this is not called _buying_ the software, it's called _renting_ the software. There's nothing wrong with that, either. Are you going to go off on Ford now because you don't
You guys are realling killing me!!! lol
Some people here are making a good confusion between services and applications. Let's put the points in the ii's ok?
One point is that Microsoft pretends to deliver a connection to a service. You wanna write a PowerPoint doc and the program is 15 hops away in a "application provider".
The other one is that you have a program running on your hardware that Microsoft delivers to you.
There is a big difference on what ownership means here. On the first point it is someone else who's doing the job you need. You send commands and get results. That's the same as the old Time-Sharing services, once popular with mainframes and terminals. Someone offers you resources and you pay for them. Either by the completness of the service or on a time fee basis. And that was practice until PC's came in. Here Microsoft has absolute right to charge you this way because you only use their property - hardware and software. this thing delivers you a service and you pay according to owner's offers.
Now on what concerns the second point. You own a piece of hardware. And someone delivers a program to be used on it. A program is mostly a set of commands that give your computer instructions to act in a specific way. Now you own this piece of hardware. And someone delivers you the instruction set in a time fee basis. Isn't here some nonsense? You are paying a rent so that your computer may perform a task? Why you can't buy it? Why you should be obliged to pay fees to have the right to use something you own? Why you should stick to their rental plans to use your own property? Here Microsft is tremendously wrong as it is sticking your right to use your own property to its conditions. It would look much like someone renting your the right to use toothpaste so that your toothbrush does the job it was meant to.
What Microsoft is doing is to kick us back 20 years ago when PC's came up. When the PC came into stage it was considered as the freedom of the user as finally people had the right to own computers. Now Microsoft is revoking you this right, as making the instruction sets a rent, it is forcing you to disown, somehow, your computer. Yo don't control it anymore. You either accept Microsoft's terms or you have it as furniture. A very smart move. I wonder if suddenly Microsoft would start to claim that you own no more the box on your desk...
How many buffer overruns does it take until it becomes clear that the QA and testing that Microsoft does on its products is perennially insufficient?
And you think that StarOffice is better in this regard how exactly?
Does anyone know how subscriptions are handled by business and corporate accounting? Is there a financial incentive for them to subscribe instead of buying?
Wow, you must be using a different copy of Office than I use - I can count on two fingers the number of times its crashed in the past 3 years.
Well, given the time value of money, there is an argument for making 3 payments of $1000 over time versus one payment of $3000 up front
>subsequent software package will do away with
>non-subscription versions entirely[...]
The Eleventh Edition? Whatever would Orwell have said?
>"The Eleventh Edition is the definitive
>edition," he said. "We're getting the
>language into its final shape -- the shape
>it's going to have when nobody speaks anything
>else. When we've finished with it, people like
>you will have to learn it all over again."
GROGGS: alive and well and living in
Actually, the press release says nothing about Windows, so I'm making the assumption that it will apply to all supported platforms. Since I use Mac OS X as my primary desktop OS, I imagine I'll see MS supporting that (even if it's just the Classic environment) sooner than I'll see Word Viewer or Star Office. I don't have much use for Office-type software anymore (free or otherwise), so this is probably the only chance MS has to get money out of me.
Guys, Oracle offers the same deal for their application licensing. You can pay for x years of licensing after which you must pay to renew your license.
Of course it has a lower introduction cost for a product that is unbelievably expensive (8i for example), but you end up paying more in the long run.
This is not new, but a trend towards the ASP model. Everyone from Oracle to Mercury is offering it in some form or another.
Business as usual.
Mail? Put "slashdot" in the subject to pass the spam filters.
It's amazing the extent to which the big guys, Sun, IBM - don't get it when it comes to downloads. Did they ever try eating their own dogfood? I doubt it. There is no excuse for not providing regular ftp links.
--
Life's a bitch but somebody's gotta do it.
Uh, can't Sun change the license? They do OWN it.
You should learn a little more about software management in a university setting. Most universities have site licenses for their commonly-used applications like Microsoft Office. Some site licenses renew anually, some are good for the life of the version. Some site licensed apps rely on a central license server to automatically manage their licenses.
IE wouldn't render (completely) our corporate database-enabled web page, but would hang half way down, so our entire company used Netscape anyway. Netscape, Opera, Mozilla, Konquerer, there are many choices for companies that wish to allow Web Browsing.
I think it's a tremendous leap to move to Linux on the desktop today, and I would say you are probably right that it is not quite ready, but I agree with the original poster that many companies are becoming fed up with the forced-upgrade path Microsoft uses to generate revenue.
Want to install Exchange Server? "Oh, we've discontinued Exchange 5.5, you have to buy Exchange 2000 and to run it you HAVE to buy Windows 2000 in spite of the fact that your NT 4.0 server is running just fine". We wanted to add an additional SQL Server system, but found out that Microsoft pulled all the SQL Server 6.5 and 7.0 packages and nobody could sell us one, we had to wait for SQL Server 2000 and it would only run on Windows 2000, so now we had to upgrade a server (or build a new one). Then you have to look at the Primary Domain Controller, since a Win2K machine isn't happy with an NT 4 PDC, and so on and so on. It's THOSE continuous fees that companies are fed up with. The product we HAVE works great. We want another just like it, but we can't get it, we have to get it's newer replacement, but oh yeah, you have to upgrade all your other systems to interoperate now.
They'll turn "Windows Update" into a revenue stream
I don't care what anyone says. Windows ME just sounds way way WAY too much like Sodomize ME in my head. At least, the translation to 'real person' from 'marktroid speak' makes it sound exactly the same.
Bite my yammer.
Get the regular version, instead of the subscription one, in the first place.
- I don't care if they globalize against free speech. All my best free thoughts are done in my head.
So unless they make a drastic change, they will never control 99%, or even 90%, of the internet and software markets.
So if people use it, and like it, great for MS, and great for the people. If no one likes it, or people see that alternatives exist, then those alternatives will be used. Its a rather simple thing, the way I see it.
What I said about 'lock-in-power' is a more localised process than what you're saying. So I have to agree with both of us... that a. there may be some people 'forced' into MS dependence, and b. that in the bigger picture, which you are stating (if I understand you), is that, as one MS lawyer put it, "the internet is too big for anyone to control it".
And I definetly agree with the bigger picture view. If anything, culturally (what little I've read on the subject), we are moving away from "Fordism" (see The Condition of PostModernity) where a single standard way is deemed best and dominates, to a more "pluralistic" acceptance of many points of view, and many different needs, and an honoring and integrating of these differences.
Which in the IT world translates nicely to Linus's quip about wanting people to go into a shop and choose an OS (be it Windows, Linux, Mac etc.)
Sorry about the long winded speel, but I'm basically saying that not only are you right, but the way things are going, you're going to get more right :-)
The market is stagnant. What new/brilliant/whatever features has any word processor put out in the last five years? The only new things I can think of are import/export filters, and a new document format that's incompatible with the old one. Word processors are essentially a commodity product now. The only problem is, there aren't being charged like one. Microsoft isn't the only one to blame, either. All of the proprietary word processors are like that. Anyway, the upgrade cycles on these things are nuts, and totally useless anyway.
Engineering and the Ultimate
And have you ignored the fact that MS requires companies with site licenses to pay for their software *twice*? Once for the concenience of having it pre-installed, & once for blowing it away so that the tested, & corporate-approved version can be installed. A quick search on Gogle turned up this URL: http://www.canada.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-2427307 .html
Inter esting point...but I think companies could probably purchase PC's without Office or even Doze pre-installed. I think this is just corporate BS, they are wasting their own money.
Question: Have you ever worked in a real office environment?
No. So I can only imagine the file format Wars you describe.
What I meant was, people will still just buy whatever ends up being cheaper. And if the cheapest thing is infernally expensive, then everyone who has no alternative but to pay is screwed.
The point of my mostly usesless post was that this Microsoft Office subscription thing might in some ways not be a bad thing. But I can also easily agree with you that it could suck for many people and businesses.
-------------------- the list is long. dirac angestung gesept
because what the other guy is doing has a direct effect on us.
half of open-source software (or closed source *nix software for that matter) is just trying to emulate windows software. As i'm sure you know, projects like WINE have a VERY hard time with this because windows has so many bugs they actually have to emulate some of them to make apps work properly.
hooray for the kludge.
btw - i use windows at home for 1 thing. counter-strike. were it not for this game, there is no way in HELL i'd have windows on my box.
FluX
After 16 years, MTV has finally completed its deevolution into the shiny things network
"It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -David Hume
Actually, there aren't "two source trees here." There's one source tree here, openoffice. Then there's Sun's Staroffice tree, which isn't here, because it contains proprietary technology (the spell checker and other things) that Sun does not own.
But for all intents and purposes, openoffice and staroffice are one in the same:
"As promised, Sun Microsystems and CollabNet have worked together to build the infrastructure to put the StarOffice code into the open source arena on October 13th. The CVS repository is up and running, and the code is now available for checkout and download. A complete set of tech documentation is available, including a guide to the projects, whitepapers, a "build guide", and a porting guide. "
Office 95, 98, 2000. The way I see it, if they divide the price into less than half, they are ripping themselves off.
Presently Office is included in many PCs sold - this would become a 'free for the first year, $20/month thereafter' (price negotiable.) Rather than trying to convince people to upgrade via new features, they instead get paid the exact same amount whether or not any new features or bugfixes come in.
Get the regular version, instead of the subscription one, in the first place.
Get the GPL'd Star Office instead. It seems to work pretty well, handle M$ files, and doesn't heve either the annoying first charge or the update charges.
This makes me wonder whether or not offices will be switching to Star Office, There is a windows version, and it appears to be very similar to Word, so retraining should be minimal.
There is a civil war coming in the United States. Remember which side has most of the guns
Maybe now they'll also allow it to stop crashing after the subscription period ends.
"I have not failed. I've simply found 10,000 ways that won't work." --Thomas Edison
Compared to the rising popularity of open source software that you can OWN for FREE this will soon look like the poor deal it is.
no sig.
I think this won't last long. You'll see the same type of apps build on top of Mozilla for free, and people will realize what they are missing....
-- Jason@mozillazine.org
Let the experiment begin.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
Not much to add, but this is pretty lame. Why would anyone want this? Maybe it will help get the DOJ looking at their real monopoly: The Office Document
http://www.naildrivin5.com/davec
The difference, of course, is that your RedHat system won't stop working if you refuse to pay up. It will stop updating itself automatically, but it won't give you the game over light when you try to save changes to your existing documents. You could even upgrade the box yourself, by hand, if you needed to.
People who stop sending money to Microsoft will find that they have turned their computer into an expensive boat anchor. They will also find out that their data is now locked into Microsoft's proprietary format, and the only thing that the can do is open it (for viewing) and print it.
Free Software doesn't give your software provider nearly the leverage that closed source commercial software does. RedHat can't do anything that would take away your right to run the software that you are currently running. Microsoft, on the other hand, will soon have that power. This is fine with me. As the copyright holders of the software they have the right to license it however they want. However, I can't imagine putting my data in Microsoft's hands, especially considering the fact that there are alternatives.
Now before you people get all pissy about M$ ripping you off, and how they force you to buy Office, I am telling you to grow up. Yes, lots of people use office. But you are not forced to use it. Compatibility is a feature of Office, if you want that feature, then buy office.
Office is the "industry" standard. Many, obviously not all, people buy MS Office solely for that percieved reason. Schools buy MS Office because that's the software pupils are most likely to have at home (Since it is bundled with so many computers). So then those students who do not have Office go and buy it so they do not get left behind. Students become used to Office's idosyncracies. Later on in life they always choose Office since it is what they are used to using.
This seems to be a resounding theme throughout Microsoft's marketing strategies.
A diplomat is someone who can tell you to go to hell in such a way that you will look forward to the trip. (355/113)
collecting data on you without your conscent would be illegal, I'd say
Since when? There are some legalities involved with collecting data on "minors", I believe, but I do not think there is law stating that they cannot collect data on adults (with or without consent). I'd like to be proven wrong, though.
"It's overkill, of course. But you can never have too much overkill." - Anonymous Slashdot Coward
You don't lose access to existing data....just the ability to create new stuff. It's in the article. . .
-Just because you're not paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you.
I wonder if there will be different types of subscriptions? By that I mean subscriptions with different feature sets. It may be annoying to have to wait through a dialog that says "Wait while downloading requested feature" but it may make an argument for rental-ware. I would only ever have to pay for the actual features I use.
.NET reeks of absolute control of a user's desktop. People will not like their machines being help ransom by MS.
I think that perhaps another lawsuit is on the way. This coupled with
I wonder how long it will take AOL to buy Corel and start offering AOLOffice?
Touche.
;-)
This typo may explain why some people responded to my post as if I had called them Godless heretics doomed to rot in Hell. Using MS software won't do that to you.
Yet, anyway.
Geoff
I think I see a trend here. Maybe for them it really would be easier to muzzle the entire internet than to produce p
most, but not all IT managers IMHO go more for either: A) the thing they have heard about, but know very little about (the marketer's dream) or, B) pick something that will satisfy (A) for the customer. Either way, they are not really interested in functions, logistics, or even effeciency. Rather, they seem to just want to make popular decisions.... although who it is popular with must be more marketroids. That is why you end up with mission critical systems being run on M$, whether in e-commerce or the DoD. If managers didn't micro-mismanage but rather delegated, this would be greatly reduced. But then again, if peoples mind sets of controlling other people and everything they do or decide along the way, the government would shrivel up to next to nothing and we could go on living our lives as we choose...
I seek not only to follow in the footsteps of the men of old, I seek the things they sought.
i don't like MS any more than the next programmer but your argument is weak and does nothing to advance your position. its ironic you should use the word 'arbitrary' because it describes your own argument quite well.
how is this blackmail? MS doesn't prevent you from accessing your data. they prevent you from generating new content.
no one is forcing you to give money to MS so download Star Office and quit your whining.
Red Hat's innovations are being used at Microsoft now?
Why does the lack of honor by Microsoft never cease to amaze me?
"If customers do not renew or install an upgrade product, they can still open, view and print their existing documents." - from the article
again, how is this blackmail? you are not prevented from accessing your data you are only prevented from modifying it in native *Word* format or creating new documents.
btw, MS sucks but strawman arguments against them only make us look weak as a community.
We just buy a buch of Licences, we dont have to buy the entire program all the time at my ofice,The upgrades are painless and not as expensive as you think for companies I hope MS comes up with a decent model for buisiness or they will loose buisness
If we refuse to be flexible, we are in effect opting out of the game of life. The world moves on without us.
...receiving product upgrades released during their subscription at no additional expense...
Except of course that should I need to a 'service-pack' I'll be downloading 500Mb over my slow phone line - which will cost me a small fortune.
of course not everyone will be running win2k - at first. But if MS makes it a REAL pain in the ass to upgrade on an NT machine, that's more incentive for the customer to buy a win2k license. AND, a new box, of course, which keeps their buddies at Intel happy.
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
where did i say that M$ would make office 11 subscription only???? you can talk all the trash you want to me, i don't mind, but when you misquote me, you only give your "foes" more ammo. But i'm banking that when Office 11 comes out M$ will make users pay for the privilege of the upgrade. My evidence: precident. When you buy win95, you get free upgrades (serivce packs, if you'll grant me the liberty), but Win98 is still gonna cost you a butt load of money. Same with any M$ product. You want to take M$ at face value, that's fine...but i've seen them pull some pretty sneaky shit and i'll believe it when i see it, untill then....i'll just base my judgements on what microsoft has been known to do time and time again. If you think they're basing this new pricing scheme on a "hey, we should really do more for the customers" then you don't know business.
FluX
After 16 years, MTV has finally completed its deevolution into the shiny things network
"It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -David Hume
"say, your resume, [is] in Word 10, and next year you don't renew, but you DO change jobs, sorry, you can't modify that resume. You have to buy a new product to make a change to an existing document."
or download StarOffice and convert the doc.
its getting dull watching people ignore obvious solutions just to bash MS.
if you don't like it, don't use it.
i don't and i don't.
Actually, the GPL means that software is to be treated like a commodity, and that software modifications and development are to be treated like a service. Proprietary software treats software ideas as a tangible thing, which you are allowed to use in certain ways only, if you pay a defined fee.
Engineering and the Ultimate
They've been coming up with a new version every 2 years, and companies feel compelled to upgrade just to get the bug fixes when the new version comes out. Divide the money for office over 2 years, and you have a yearly fee.
Who it's gonna hurt are us poor schmucks that use it at home...
Oh wait... Isn't that an argument for StarOffice?
-- You can't idiot-proof anything, because they're always coming out with better idiots.
Seems to me what were talking about here is forced upgrades. I'm sure we've all had a situation at one time or another where upgrading a piece of software was a bad idea, due to incompatibilities with other packages, feature changes, or whatever. With the traditional licensing model, if you don't want to upgrade, no problem. Just keep using the old version. With the subscription service MS is talking about, your old version will stop working. To keep things going you'll have to renew your subscription, and knowing MS they'll ship you whatever the current version is whether you want it or not.
However, we all have different tastes, so I'm sure this system will work for someone.
In my country, broadband internet is still quite expensive, .NET comes too early.
Bizar technology?
Excuse me for bringing up this analouge, but isn't this was selling drugs is all about? First timers free, but then -- when addicted -- you have to pay. And if your local pusher raises the price, you will have to pay anyway, no matter you like it or not.
Nono, don't get me wrong. I think it's a good idea. Perhaps now all the ignorants, who waste their time using MS products will finally understand what bleeding nazi f*cks they're supporting. And perhaps change OS. Perhaps..
This amounts to forced upgrading, and presumably, clients should not be required to pay repeatedly for using data they generated themselves.
So why, do you think, so many people are angry. Why? Because a lot of people on Slashdot these days tend to be want everything free. And if they can get something they want for free, they steal it.
Well, yes, and there's also the basic anti-MS sentiment. I for one wasn't anti-MS until it seemed like "Windows-Absolutely-Friggin-Everywhere" was looking likely to happen, including turning the net into MSN.
Perhaps people worry that a subscription system will give MS even more power. At the moment not everybody upgrades. Perhaps in some future subscription model, we'll be accepting "upgrades" (as we've already paid for them) regularly, including all the new lock-in "features" the clever MS boys can think of.
I'd take this deal too, but I demand the option to not pay for a renewal but still use whatever current version of the software that I had, indefinitely. Without that, I'm forced to buy upgrades forever, even if the current version meets all of my needs perfectly well.
That's lame.
Especially if their next upgrade is so bloated that I have to buy a new box to run it on -- I might as well keep the old version running on the old box if I have to do that --
-- or --
-- the new version is so bug-riddled upon initial release that I have to wait a good six months or so for them to patch everything and make it reasonably stable.
I prefer to stay a few months behind the curve and buy consumer-tested, patched software, often at less than the premium cost they charge you for just-released software, and remain productive with slightly outdated but perfectly serviceable versions of the same program. With this subscription service, will I still have the option to upgrade to a new version when I want to?
Bottom line: I want software to run as-is on my computer for the projected lifespan of the hardware components.
You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
The first software package to come complete with blow cards.
ridiculopathy.com
MS enforcing their licensing agreements will only help open source. Finally someone who see's what I am saying.
Yes. If I can suggest one of my pet-theory-observations about people, it's that 'we' don't take our agreements seriously.
I mean, I don't see the average consumer asking to even see the agreement before they buy the software. I guess they think, "it's just some agreement thing, it doesn't concern me, I'm no crook".
They don't stop to ask how the "agreement" violates their basic rights. Or how, by purchasing, and therefore approving of the product, they are probably eroding the rights of others, who will be more inclined to buy said software, due to the network effect.
I expect that nothing much will be different in 10 years... MS (and the other commercial software houses) will still be raking in the money, and open source software will still be little more than the hobbyist's playground.
yes....thank god for hobby programs like Apache, Sendmail, and MySQL.
know what you're talking about before you spout. open-source is the backbone of tech. closed-source just gets the press.
FluX
After 16 years, MTV has finally completed its deevolution into the shiny things network
"It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -David Hume
One reason why is that in the golden day of free, unlimited, toll-free support calls, a word processor cost about $500 as did a spreadsheet as did a database. If MS charged $2000 for office like it was in those days, you'd see a LOT of free tech support!
how about cut-paste, or save-as-rtf/html?
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
As an interesting aside to this post:
Some while back, some of you may recall Microsoft was making a few back-page headlines with their development plans for a card swipe for credit cards that is integrated into the side of the computer, and would be part of a future version of Windows.
The purpose of this device was to aid in simplifying secure online commerce transactions. Now it seems it would be also a convenient way to renew M$ software subscriptions. A coinbox is likely forthcoming, though in a digital format.
---
"And the beast shall be made legion. Its numbers shall be increased a thousand thousand fold."
-----
Cast a Cold Eye
On Life, on Death
Horseman, pass by
--W.B. Yeats' gravestone
You miss the point. With Eazel, the software doesn't cost money. The service costs money. If Microsoft came out and said "Office from now on will be free, but we have a service you can buy on a yearly basis to keep up-to-date", that would be a totally different story. All free software services are services in addition to the product - things that are (1) a commodity, because anyone can perform them, and (2) something that users would have trouble doing on their own.
Engineering and the Ultimate
------
If MS made this cheap enough, it would be better than the current situation. Cheap enough would have to be quite cheap, though, since I can keep using an old version of Office forever currently, making the annual rate almost arbitrarily low, depending on how long I'm willing to put up with it.
I think the growth of open source alternatives to Office will eventually exert great price pressure on Office. Also, clearly the thought of having to pay over and over again for what was once a "use for a lifetime" product will shake a lot of users out of their inertial rut. If they make the subscription rate anything other than cheap, customers will rebel and switch to less capable, but free open source solutions in droves. Eventually, those open source solutions will be the best products and Office will either be free or dead.
"Those who have never entered upon scientific pursuits know not a tithe of the poetry by which they are surrounded."
Is it me.. or is this .NET thing starting to look alot like MS is trying to rid itself as windows... I know this may sound nuts. But lets say in the event that MS Splits. .NET would be part of the buisness Tools. Now... The Nature of .NET if I read correctly is Served Applications much like Turning our own computers into Thin Clients. Or remotely running an App. Wouldn't this then lead to independence from Windows and alow .NET to actually become a very wealthy property. Given the fact that Office is Undeinably one of the most heavily used Buisness Product that provides some sort of Productivity (Minesweeper and Solitaire are not Productive.) Anyways. Enough of my Ramblings. My Prophetic views are starting to scare myself. A day when the rumours a year ago were true. That Microsoft will start charging subscription fees for their products.
--------========+++Dont Feed The Lab Techs+++========--------
I dropped into this thread halfway, so maybe I'm missing the context. I'm not in the closed-source-is-evil thing.
You talk about basic rights, like software was one of them.
(Do you mean me, or the person I replied to?) I don't mean that "I have a right to every line of code on the planet". I agree with you that people are commiting themselves by agreeing to the Agreement.
I read a report of a study in a pyschology class once that illustrated this effect in the form of an experiement. A group of people...
Wow. That's really interesting. Have you seen this week's New Scientist's "Look Closely" feature? Also an "unsettling" psychology experiment. So yes, there's the network effect.
I guess you've put it more clearly than me. Yes, people are willingly entering the agreement. And the network effect makes it more likely that others will enter into similar agreements. And that's just my point (which is your point). If enough people think it's "ok" to lease software, then that's what most of us will be stuck with. Like we're stuck with the car. I can choose to not own one, but I'm pretty hard pressed to choose not to be at the effect of the environmental consequences -- ok ok offtopic already :-)
And quit complaining that other peoples acceptance of the product takes away your rights. It doesnt.
Ok, it doesn't take away my rights. You are being strict about this, and I can't disagree. What other people accept merely "shapes my environment" -- which is a diffrent sort of argument (ie. one about 'influences' rather than 'causes'). I was off the mark using the word "rights".
...it will be too easy to backup everything, then restore modules and registry entries...
yes, those users who are helpless without trippy the paper clip on acid will have no problem editing their registry when the subscription runs out.
Karma only matters to me now and zen.
So, what's to stop me from making a copy of an existing document, opening the original, wiping the contents clean, and creating a new document with different contents, and resaving it?
Like this:
I just create a document called GENERIC.DOC while my sunscription is still good. Open it, write something, save it. Copy GENRIC.DOC to FOO.DOC. Then I re-open GENERIC.DOC, wipe it clean, put in new contents, save it, and then copy GENRIC.DOC to FOO2.doc. GENERIC.DOC remains my valid, temporary, subscription-compatible document.
Later, rinse, repeat....
Now that it really matters, though. I use Linux, and last I checked, MS Office didn't run on that OS without using WINE or plex86.
But... wouldn't this work?
SirPoosalot
I have a copy of MS Office 97 Professional. I have had it for 4 years. I have not updated to the new versions. Why ? Because the newer versions do not offer any compelling reason to update. I mainly use Word and Access. Powerpoint is for managers who can't articulate without the use of visual aids. Excel is not very usefull outside of number crunching. Word is very limited when the number of pages in a document go above 100, or you start pasting pictures in the document. Access is a neat little tool, that is a wiz-bang for home and SO users, but that is all. It is refreshing to see that they only want to target home and SO users. I can see my mom trying to figure out once a year if she really needs Access to keep track of her recipies (at a overinflated rate), or she just pulls out the 3x5 card box, and uses what is most familiar. I wonder, under their new model, how much it would of cost me to use Word, Excel, and Access for 48 months. Probably a lot more than what the CD cost me in the first place.
All comments are my own (Unless I am having a out-of-body experience).
You make it sound like Microsoft are putting a gun to your head and forcing you to buy Office. They developed it, they can make you pay for it by whatever means they like. That is their right. You don't want to pay for it, you don't use it.
You assume that people are stupid and won't work out if they are getting a bad deal. People *are* stupid sometimes, but rarely when money is concerned.
Besides, most people already work with the idea that you stick with the version of Office that you get supplied with your PC until you upgrade. If I hadn't built my own PC I would never have bought Office outside of a package. As it is, I got a student copy of 2000 at a pretty good reduction.
OEMs don't want to supply 'subscriptions' to Office - they want prepackaged deals that the customer just buys and has done with. That alone, I believe, will ensure that a non subscription copy is always available somewhere.
--
' Ore stabit fortis a fine placet ore stat '
- found on a park bench
' Ore stabit fortis a fine placet ore stat '
- found on a park bench
Why upgrade then? If you are happy with Office 97/2K then why upgrade? I don't care for it at all if you as me© Because I won't be paying for something like that© Something like that is pointless but what could you do? 90% of the Desktop users are Windows base© For the clowns that want to pay for it good for them© I see no point on flaming M$ over it©
P©S: Yes, I'm a Linux user with a Windows boot© I only use it for work and beta testing©
P©S©S: Plz don't flame me© =
From Zero to Hero... Starbuck Zero
...but not save. Thus you can't create new documents, and you can't revise old ones. How useful is that? How often do you find yourself opening up old documents just to look at them? Personally, I never do -- I might open an occasional oldie so I can rewrite part of it or something, but I never just reminisce over old documents. Locking out that feature *does* cripple the software -- I'd say people *did* read it, and are rightfully annoyed by what they saw.
DO NOT LEAVE IT IS NOT REAL
Sure, geeks might switch to open source, if they haven't already, but the average user doesn't even know what linux is, or that there even *is* an alternative.
:) Simple text files are looking pretty good too.
We are dealing with people who are lucky if they know the difference between an Athlon and a Pentium III. These are the sort of people who reply to the question "what kind of computer do you have" with "its a compaq" or "its an emachine".
No offense, but I'm guessing that the average user stays with Microsoft, and doesn't even blink an eye. Perhaps this is best for them. Microsoft keeps changing their file formats, at least this way the average joe is forced to upgrade. No more confusion about why the file they created at work/school can't be opened with an older version of the software at home.
As for myself, I've switched to Star Office about a year ago and haven't looked back.
Am I the only one who thinks this may be designed to fail? It sounds to me that they are really talking about the "rental" option to satisfy the PHBs and the analysts, who have been talking about this for many years, but they are pricing it in a way that will incent people to go with the standard license. Remember Windows Terminal Server, which was priced much higher than Winframe and really designed to steer people away from the "thin client" architecture? I think this is the same idea.
sulli
RTFJ.
Yes! High-end UNIX applications do operate on this licence. But two crucial things:
(1) These are quality applications. No terrible bugs or security holes or bloat like the MS version
(2) these are not mainstream applications.
To say a "lot" of applications use this form, is being disingenuous? A more accurate description would be a few niche markets.
Another thing is the capabilities of these packages. Even MS Office in all in its bloated glory is not capable of the features that these other applications are. These applications are far to huge to sell at one price. You could argue that MS Office is too huge as well, but there are competitors which still manage too, so why can't they?
How much is a truely good program or piece of work worth? But is MS Office truely good?
You already can get a productivity suite delivered to your browser using PHP and applets...try
http://www.myfreedesk.com
Now I know why Gore demanded the recount. He doesn't trust winblows to count numbers right !!!
The willingness of humanity to follow without question is the fall of them.
You answered your own question: they use a liberal copy protection scheme to establish market share. Once the market has been converted to the proprietary file formats and users are conditioned to only expect one interface they're ready for a new princing model that looks something like Office 10.
The only point I'd like to dispute is the 10% figure you tossed out there: I'd wager that it is well above that. It isn't as bad as it was when Office fit on a single CD, but the current combination of simple key protection and not shipping media with most new PCs almost looks like a formula to maximize "sharing".
Wow, that was a cynical thought. Every once in a while I catch myself thinking like this and realize that such low expectations are Microsoft's single largest legacy. It's the worst harm they've brought to the industry.
Cris E
St Paul, MN
Then, for god's sake, use another recruiting firm. If they insist on Word, they are probably idiots, and while I don't know about you, I for one will not work for idiots!
I think it's on the Windows CD. It's a free Word document viewer (for Windows of course). I'm sure you can also download it from M$'s site.
Hmmm, when I went, the educational discount on Office was still over $100. Here is a little hint, those gold discs you bought, those are called pirated copies. Next time, when a guy has a hand painted "University Bookstore" on the trunk of his car, he is NOT legit.
Bryan R.
Bryan R.
The price of freedom is eternal vigilance, or $12.50 as seen on eBay.....
You are an ABSOLUTE LEGEND.
"Smart companies save money by deploying MySQL instead of Oracle." - slashdot post
Finally, I challenge you to point me to working hack of the Terminal Services Internet Licensing connector. I dont think one has been made. And the system has been around since day 1 of Windows 2000 server. Thats not "instant".
Crackers only crack programs that they want to use. I don't think the average warez kiddie will want to use Terminal Services. However, they will want Office, so they'll most definitely break it.
i'm not sure that you ever get points for being metamodded by someone else, though.
Sun could re-license OpenOffice all they want. However, they can't take away my right to distribute the version of OpenOffice I downloaded under the terms of the GPL.
In other words, they could theoretically release the next version under a closed source commercial license. However, they couldn't force all of the people that had the GPLed version to give back the source. So development would almost certainly continue on the GPLed branch, and it would compete against Sun's proprietary branch. In fact, Sun's branch would probably be ignored altogether.
That really is the beautty of the GPL. In essence the end user has nearly as many rights as the copyright holder. You are no longer at the mercy of your software vendor. If you don't like the service, you can switch to a different vendor, and your new vendor will still have access to the source code.
People got tired of playing the expiring-license game on VMS. Looks like MS hasn't figured out that the only reason why people dropped VMS for their products was the cost of maintaining licenses...now with MS doing it, the world will migrate somewhere else...
KOffice.
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life."
"You're gonna need a bigger boat." - Chief Brody
That bloody dumb@ss cannot comprehend what the F*** he's messing with. now more people will use the old american pircacy full versions. what's stopping the user from filling up his hard disk with a million word documents, whose body consists of the letter "A"?? "use office by subscription" rich moron says...maybe it won't work either. i wonder if i can get windows 2000 professional server in subscription form...
I heard them tell me that this land of free was now. I told them I had ridden shooting stars and said I'd show them how.
We don't pay twice for software. We buy all our machines license-free, then apply our corporate Ghost image (NT 4 with IE 5.01 and Office 2000) to the box. Enterprise licensing lets you do that if your hardware vendor will cooperate.
Your ability to get license-free systems, though, depends on the size of the organization you work for. Larger companies generally have that option, but using the "small business" division of a major manufacturer (like Dell, Compaq, or Gateway) will force you to take OEM software.
Of course, virtually all white box systems are available stripped of license as well.
In the end, the best revenue maximization for Microsoft would come from a mix of retail and subscription-based licensing - it ensures steady revenue with the addition of revenue spikes clustered around new releases. A subscription-only model prevents the revenue lows (when all your new products are delayed and there's no new upgrade revenue in sight), but it also prevents the highs for the same reason.
- -Josh Turiel
-- Josh Turiel
"2. Do not eat iPod Shuffle."
Why? They will not win©©© That's all I have to say©
From Zero to Hero... Starbuck Zero
Who I see this working for is the giant Borgesque corporations who don't want to worry about rolling out upgrades. These type of corporations don't live and die by their IT budget like middle and small sized companies do, so they just add the 'subscription fee' to their budget and life goes on.
But seeing that steady income really won't amount to too much compared to the middle-sized company market, I see this as a service that gets tucked away somewhere and is barely used (sort of like leasing a phone from the phone company, you can do it, but why would you?)
I don't care one way or the other, as I am an avid wordpad user. If I need nifty features, I can pop into Kinko's with my .txt file and do the whiz-bang on it and print. Otherwise, it isn't a big deal.
I've used StarOffice for a bit, but I really didn't like it. Just a bit too cumbersome, but I like the concept.
This is not the way to build a lasting empire.
Some may argue that this way they get better on-going technical support. Has anyone ever tried to get technical support out of MS? we tried, we paid for their 1-900 support line for corperate accounts, plus pay for the service contract. and you basically get squat. any advanced question will get you no answer. and every other answer is out of their knowlege base that you can browse for free anyways. (Why do users think that because you run the MS network of NT machines here that you know how to do some obscure function in powerpoint?)
Microsoft support is 100% worthless. I've tried it the pay through the nose way and it is not any better than the free way. The only thing I can see MS doing by reaching for this modal is to try and swing everyone into it by force (MS windows 3.2K will not run any application from win98/200 days (specific code to break word/etc...) and they are just starting the transition now.
but on another note.... it will take crackers exactly 3 seconds to make a crack for it.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Software is not like gasoline. Microsoft does not have to do more production to give me another year's use out of my software. With gasoline, standard oil has to produce every single bit of gas I use. With software, its totally different.
If you truly think this is a bad model of doing business, please don't pay that cable/dss bill this month. Yet again, this is totally different. A valid comparison would be "if you think this is a bad model, don't pay for watching videos you've previously recorded". I record T.V. shows. If I cancelled my subscription to cable, I would still have all of my existing T.V. shows, and be able to fully use them. Making faulty comparisons is at the heart of the current problem with software an "intellectual property" in general.
Engineering and the Ultimate
Simple: use notepad to create blank word docs, you can do this as many time as you like. Or sendmail me an email and I'll send you as many as you request.
"The ways to get around this ill-conceived scheme will be common knowledge about a week after the first "leases" expire. "
A week *after* the first *leases* expire? I'll have to resort to astonishment if this isn't cracked a week before the first leases begin. This isn't an anti-piracy scheme, it's a way to increase profits. It's hard to say who this will appeal to. Bleh, no matter how you look at it, it's accelerating Microsoft's already "damn quality, full speed ahead!" development pace.
On a related note, I think MS has finally jumped the shark. There's a "second generation" CEO in power, and the company is showing all the signs I've seen from this situation before. It's all downhill from here, as far as individual human beings go.
Mix the failings of Usenet with the shortcomings of the World Wide Web and the result is slashdot.
I was wondering how subscription software, like this, will effect a companies "IT" staff?
I'm not a manager (I'm playing devils advocate), but I can see how something like this may be seen as a cost saver for companies. Why? If subscriptions upgrades (or software packages themselves) are available online and Windows does all of the installation/upgrading, won't all the "bean counters" start weighing the cost of subscriptions vs. the cost of maintaining an IT department? Won't they also see this as a way to lower the total up front cost?
Sure, you'll still need people to maintain the network itself, but they will no longer need people to maintain software. When they eliminate employees, they not only eliminate salaries but also the cost of benefits (medical, dental, 401k match) and over-head. I don't know how much time is spent maintaining software but even if its minimal you have to believe that their looking at the cost savings.
I'm not saying this is a good idea and I can't see how this will ever catch on for home use, but it may appeal to some businesses. So, I was wondering whether anyone thought this would effect their employment?
Actually Microsoft has a free PowerPoint viewer (and Word viewer, and Excel viewer) for that kind of purpose.
Frankly, I don't see the need to upgrade from '97 to any future version, since they finally standardized on a file format. There's a push at my employer to upgrade everyone to Office 2K... despite the fact that maybe one or two people will use a new feature in Office 2K.
Sigh, damn lemmings...
Moof!
Some other software companies have done simillar in the past, with a form of activation key to make the software work. The ones I've worked with have been annoying, particularly when attempting to recover from a system failure. They always cause annoyance when some software you need to use doesn't want to work anymore, usually when not needed.
I once had my SMTP system stop runnning due to it expiring, and the supplier was in a timezone 8 hours behind, meaning I was effectivly out of action for a day. There was nowhere indicating when it expired, and the person who installed it hadn't made notes.
Timebombed software (except demonstration or pre-release) is pure evil, and must be destroyed.
"With the release of 'Office 10,' we're taking a significant step toward our vision of an Office.NET subscription service," said Steven Sinofsky, senior vice president of Office at Microsoft.
Bundled.
The plan is not getting users to buy subscriptions. They'll sell this to computer makers, to be bundled with desktops and notebooks. This way, they force the users to either renew or buy Office after one year.
And this won't be a problem for the computer makers, because they won't _have_ any option. First, it will be cheaper, naturally. Second, Microsoft will railroad any opposing makers into accepting it. For instance, by simply not offering the unlimited version at lower prices.
It's brilliant.
/me pats pats his FreeBSD
(8-DCS)
they'll hook people with this the same way they hook people on the rest of their stuff: when you buy a new PC, it will come with the subscription version already installed and the first year will be free. who the hell upgrades MS software (specifically, Office) currently? everyone i know just gets new versions when they upgrade their machine.
--
Smokey the Bear says, "Strip mining prevents forest fires!"
It must hurt shooting yourself in the feet. I think MS is stupid for beleiving that people would be willing to pay a subscription to write documents. But in a way it's good. It will promote freeware (if not open source,) alternatives, and will change the way we look at business (just like with licensing software.) I'm sure MS will make lots of money off of this initially, but they're gonna have to stop it sooner or later. You can be sure someone's gonna crack the code and make key generators, unless MS requires you to verify it over the net. Which would make you buy MSN service. But I'm sure there'd be a workaround for that too. MS would then become a security expert, and dominate digital security and the such too. No, Microsoft didn't shoot their foot. They blew their head off. I'm sorry, but this isn't business, it's just plain greed.
:wq! DOH!
Roy Miller
--Roy
When I grow up, I want to go to bovine university!
What is it with this herd mentality and the human race? Can't anyone actually THINK about what the hell they're doing, instead of blindly keeping up with the joneses?
What functionality is present in Office 2000 that you don't get in Office 97? WHAT?! WHAT?!?! 99.9999999% of all Word users don't use even 1% of Word97's functionality, and will never, ever, ever, touch upon a new feature of Word 2000.
But, hey, you just go ahead and upgrade, and enjoy your pretty icons, and that warm fuzzy feeling you get from knowing that you're "in the in crowd"... just don't be surprised when that hammer comes down. And, dear god, don't whine about it - that's the life you wanted, that's your fate. Deal with it.
For sure, if the *only* option was to lease and you could no longer buy, then it's not leasing so much as some kind of slave contract. This hasn't occured yet...
"It is not necessary to change. Survival is not mandatory." (W. Edwards Deming)
And let's face it, there really aren't many realistic alternatives available. Alternatives, in order to have any real chance of taking off, need to fully -- not partially, not almost, but completely -- support MS Office's current file formats for Word, Excel, Powerpoint, and Project, at the very least. I've seen users attempt to use embedded and standalone file format converters, get mad when something like formatting gets corrupted and just switch to the real thing. Alternatives must run on the systems folks are currently using, namely Windows and, to a lesser extent, Mac OS. I know this'll probably upset the average Linux user and open-source advocate, but the average user or the average IT manager is not going to switch to a new operating system -- something as complex as Linux or even something as simplistic as Mac OS -- just for a new office suite. The average home user doesn't understand and is ignorant of computers and operating systems; they might know that alternatives to Windows exist but see no real reason to consider them given their lack of popularity, publicity, etc. The average company is not going to undertake an OS transition because of the disruption it'd cause, because of the investment in current systems, standards, contracts they have.
In the end, Microsoft wins again because folks will upgrade, because of cheaper costs, because office standards force an upgrade, or because there just isn't any other real choice available. And the same will hold true if Microsoft does away with the pay-once model later on. And just think of the privacy concerns and DMCA enforcement opportunities available to Microsoft if they do, in fact, do away with the pay-once model! Yippee...
You want MS to reconfigure all your desktops automatically? At their discretion? Do you think this will be that simple? What about keeping yours ghosts in sync? How do you keep your people from doing it on their own (to manage your network load)? When you eventually start the upgrades do you honestly think they'll be flawless? How many full hardrives are there in your organization? Do you have a busy season in your business year? Does M$ care?
We skip plenty of "upgrades" because the cost in time and effort to get a configuration stable is far higher than any benefits we get from new software. It's a constant fight to tell users that we're not getting them the newest and coolest, and that's when they want to spend more money. How much harder will it be to stand fast when they want to upgrade to something they've already paid for? If M$ comes up with a release every 18 months and two or three other major fixpacks a year that means we'll be changing our ghosts two or three times more often than we do now. Tell me how that saves on staffing.
This is good for large organizations on a payment and licensing basis, but not on a staffing and workload basis. It isn't a clear win for anyone, and everyone will have to do their own analysis, but I really don't see the savings you're talking about here.
Cris E
St Paul, MN
microsoft is acting like this for years !
this is what they call : debbuging
and i know what i'm talking about because i'm microsoft certified engineer :)
and the question you're asking can be applied to a lot of things :why do they try to make money with problems instead of trying to stop them ? medicine (cancer research for exemple) health security, insurance... you want more exemple ?
you can call this liberal democraty :)))
It's amazing to see the hatred in all these messages. Down with Microsoft, the Evil Empire, blah blah blah. I used to feel that way too. But I stopped and thought about it for a few seconds and then wondered, "Why?" What do I care?
I think a lot of corporations will find the new software 'rental' scheme a good idea. You pretty much upgrade every 3 years or so anyway. As long as the subscription fee is the same or less than what you would expect to be paying anyway.. there's really no difference. It would sure make upgrading a large network easier. You have a much lower initial capital outlay to rent a program for a year, than to buy it outright.
Microsoft is being intelligent for itself and it seems like it really makes everyone else mad to see that. Someone said that once everyone is on the new plan, MS will stop innovating. Well, to be honest, has there been a really significant innovation in Office in the last 10 or 15 years? I don't think so. But companies keep moving forward to the next version.
Everyone seems to have missed the whole idea here.. that software is becoming available for rent -- not just by purchasing it flat out. What if I'm sitting at home, and I think.. oh, I'd like to make a newsletter. So I go rent a copy of FrontPage for a week and develop my newsletter.
Now I paid maybe $5 versus $100.
Not only an IT dept. dream. I'd love to have a legit copy of Word on my box at home, but alas, I can't afford it. Depending on how low their reduced price is, I wouldn't mind shelling out the dough every year to get a newer version. A $20 a year subscription to Word that must be paid yearly is much easier on me than several hundred dollars at once for something that will be old next year.
The best way to accelerate a windows box is at 9.8 meters per second square.
Are you some kind of troll? This is patently false. MODERATORS, PLEASE MOD PARENT DOWN TROLL -1 NOW! That is if CmdrTaco doesn't bitchslap you first. Furthermore, you don't have to
--
--
You want to play a fucken game?
you question the legality of their action and then suggest that they "must be stopped." i fear, though your meaning is somewhat ambiguous, that you intend that the government should prevent this sort of thing. please. no government should have that much power. let freedom ring. if folks don't like it, there are alternatives. if they're too stupid to choose something different, or make something different, why should they be stopped? it's a dirty business, and it shouldn't be so hard to shame m$ into rethinking strategy, but using the power of government is dangerous, since it necessary restricts freedom.
No, because they're already locked into a virtual subscription service with the constant upgrade cycle.
A subscription service kind of implies that you'll get patches/updates as soon as they're available too, but we'll see...
I doubt ordinary home/small business users will like it though.
Office 11 will be subscription only
... it'll be good for the customers b/c they'll always have the latest version." It's scary, but I bet Microsoft will move to the subscription-only model soon.
Actually that is my big fear. Not because I'm a conspiracy theorist, but because I've read documents that describe the subscription model as the future of software distribution for Microsoft. I can't find a link to the article, but from what I remember, it was written by a Microsoft employee and it described some of the changes Microsoft was making. The primary reason for switching to this model was to stabilize the revenue stream. (Stabilize at a very high level, that is.) The supposed benefits to the customer were included almost as a sidenote. Like "Oh yeah, uh
Seriously dude, as someone who runs a student-oriented website you should have a little more empathy for students. I am taking computer classes at Houston Community College and I had to buy Win98, Office 97 and Access 2000. Most students usually do not have a lot of money, and having to give over $500 to Bill Gates just so that I can pass a few classes is a bit much.
The consequences are failing the class. Are you saying that I should not take ANY computer classes at HCC if I an not willing to pay tribute to Chairman Bill? And if I do sign up for classes, I should be prepared to fail them because I do not want to make the world's richest man a little richer?
I did not buy Visual Basic, preferring to use the "Learning Edition" that came with the book. Bad move, as the "Learning Edition" does not come with help files or documentation, which help a lot when you are trying to learn a programming language. Of course, much of the material is on Microsoft's website, but tell that to my 56K modem!
Luckily I could use gcc for my C++ class, but having to teach the instructor stuff about Linux sucks, especially when this same instructor teaches a UNIX class that uses Linux! Of course most of the instructors are Microsoft "certified" so they can teach you how to pass the certification exams but not much else. To tell you the truth, I probably would not be taking courses at HCC if I didn't get free tuition and fees there...
P.S. what are studying? Obviously not English, as your spelling and grammar are atrocious! Try previewing your posts and try to remember that Merriam-Webster is your friend...
--
You think being a MIB is all voodoo mind control? You should see the paperwork!
A man who wants nothing is invincible
Is it just me, or has anyone else had this problem? I click on the "press Release" link and get a completely blank page. "View source" shows that there is a little something there, but I'm not sure what it is.
I'm using Netscape 4.75 on AIX, is Micro$quish hiding their press release from people not using M$ browsers? (If so, fsck them!!!)
I don't know why I care anyway, I'd much rather use Star Office!
Teen Angel - a Ghost Story
This just shows the deals MS must have now made with the hard drive manufacturers. With all the GB disks being made, the sales are slowing down. Maxtor and Western Digital seem to have succeeded in convincing software designers to find a way to keep customers from deleting their creations.
And is a "New" document? Changing a letter in the first word/field written would be a major percentage of the document. It could be enough to require usage of New Document credits. I guess you best have your intents cleared with management before starting anything with Office at work.
--
You may note that I was saying that Microsoft has left a gaping wide opening for a savvy alternative to enter. Star Office may or may not be that alternative, that's for the collective market to decide.
All I'm saying is that IT managers are much more open to MS alternatives that meet their needs than is often let on at Slashdot whine fests
DB
I ocassionally need to edit PPTs. Considering MS gets a full freight seat for me at work, I'm not crying for them too hard. A reasonable cost like $10/hour would actually save us money here.
since they finally standardized on a file format
Finally? They've already promised new XML-based formats for Office 10 along with various groupware and Exchange integration hooks. If I was your shop, I'd sit tight for another year until Office 2002 hits the market and just skip 2000 at this point.
--
Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
My Company has over 25,000 desktops.
Right now we are paying a monthly payment per desktop of 20 dollars. This payment licenses one copy of Microsoft's Office suite, NT 4.0, and norton utilities.
I am not sure how much money is given to Microsoft, because the money is also used to fund some number of employees (10-20?), whose job it is to represent our interests with Microsoft, research new versions of Office/NT, write-up common problems/solutions for our 'knowledge base', implement migrations to a newer version, and help our in-house technicians/developers who have Microsoft-specific questions.
That's funny, I believe that is almost precisely what the old IBM Mainframe gurus used to say about PCs. For years the mantra was "nobody ever got fired for buying IBM." And then suddenly the old mantra was 100% completely untrue. Even closer to home we probably all remember a time when WordPerfect was the undisputed king of word processors, and Lotus 1-2-3 was the spreadsheet.
If there is one thing that is a truism in the world of computers is that the least expensive option that is "good enough" eventually wins out. Linux probably isn't to the point where it is "good enough" for most people, but it is getting there fast, and it certainly is inexpensive. OSes and operating systems will eventually be a commodity, despite all of Microsoft's tricks.
Oh, good points, all. I wouldn't anticipate Corel doing this with an expiry date on the product: if you want to use version 8.558 forever onward, just quit paying your license. If/when you do decide to upgrade, you end up having to buy the retail package at full price.
So for the $100/yr, I get web access to upgrades as they happen; better be a few of them each year, if they want to keep me paying. I don't *need* to install them; I have the option of skipping them.
The Ventura software runs about $700 full retail. Upgrade pricing is somewhere around $300; that's why I figure $100 per year, and not $300.
--
--
Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
What'll they think of next?
-
-----------------------------------------------
Microsoft unveils new license
REDMOND, Wash., Apr. 1, 2000 - Microsoft Corp. (Nasdaq: MSFT) today released the details of its new Active License, which eases license administration for IS administrators.
The new Active License replaces the old End User License Agreement. The key feature of Active License is its ability to add new access licenses as necessary. Instead of having to type an installation key when installing the Windows operating system, system administrators simply type in a credit card number. This information is then sent to Microsoft, which will bill the credit card appropriately.
For users of Windows 2000 servers, this also eliminates the need to purchase add-on access license option paks. As each additional concurrent user is added to the system, the credit card is automatically billed for that access license. "The cost will be quite reasonable for each concurrent user. And there will be a price break for web servers: we are planning a somewhat lower price for each incoming HTTP connection," said Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer.
When asked how Microsoft expects to compensate for the expected loss of revenues to competing operating systems, CEO Ballmer responded, "we have integrated a module which automatically detects the presence of Linux/Samba servers in the corporate network, and bills the credit card for each connection to those servers as well. This will ensure the recovery of costs associated with the development of our proprietary Server Message Block protocol."
About Microsoft
Founded in 1975, Microsoft is the worldwide leader in software for personal and business computing. The company offers a wide range of products and services designed to empower people through great software -- any time, any place and on any device.
NOTE: Microsoft, Windows, Windows 2000, and Active License are either registered trademarks or trademarks of Microsoft Corp. in the United States and/or other countries. Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.
SOURCE Microsoft Corp. (NOT! You don't REALLY believe this, do you???? But I wouldn't put it past them)
/NOTE TO EDITORS: If you are interested in viewing additional information
on Microsoft, please visit the Microsoft Web page at
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/ on Microsoft's corporate information
pages./
/CONTACT: press only, Sue Duvall, 425-637-9097, or sduvall@wagged.com, or
Rapid Response Team, 503-443-7000, or rrt@wagged.com, both of Waggener
Edstrom, for Microsoft Corp./
Give me my freedom, and I'll take care of my own security, thank you.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Most people fail to see past the tip of their nose (OK, maybe as far as their pockets) when it comes to rights. When you try to explain to a good upstanding citizen how they can't play DVD's without either using an MPAA-approved DVD player or by violating the DMCA, the next logical question for that person to ask is "How can I tell if my DVD player is MPAA-approved?" Of course, you and I both know that probably all hardware DVD players are MPAA-approved, but when you say that, your good upstanding friend will be prompted to say "So what's the problem?" Their is absolutely no attention paid to violations of principle.
Perhaps this new Office "lease program" will be the first agreement that comes back and bites people in the ass hard enough to make them notice. Or maybe it'll happen when MS comes knocking on everyone's doors looking for licenses.
It's 11:00, do you know where license agreement is?
I like to play children's songs in minor keys.
"We're all sons of bitches now." --J. Robert Oppenheimer
> hat's right. The video arcade. .NET is actually "MS Return of Arcade," without pacman.
Who says Office won't come with pacman?
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
That's right. I only use word for the import filters when abiword won't handle something right, and I'm going to spite MS by waiting until that 50th application start to . . . uninstall and reinstall. I've estimated that at about 100hours uptime, assuming I start word once per reboot (amazing! It takes about 100 hours for w2k to become seriously fubared), I won't have to worry about it for another 6 months.
High-speed Road Trip (18.000KPH)
Bill just figured out how to karma whore himself up enough points to get mod points today (well, it looks that way anyway.)
There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.
it starts with an Option to get a subscription product, and then subscription only features begin to creep into the standard Office suite read the following: "if you subscibe now you can use 100 mb of free online active server directory to extend the capabilities of your M$ office solution" "to view this document you need to have an account with M$.NET, Auto-register now?" "To use the security auto-update feature, you must first have an account with M$.NET, try out this feature and others like online document sharing with a Free Guest account with M$.NET, to Auto-register now, Click Continue" [OK] [Continue] residual revenue streams and reliability on the Network Services offered by a remote server is the whole strategy here. I'd like to see a "desktop" type of file sharing environment as part of both KDE and Gnome or even as an extension to the kernell ala "freenet" where the open source environment allows you to contribute your machine to the network in exchange for the ability to use the online network for acces to -services,documents sharing... this way, instead of paying M$.net to make things work you could 'contribute' some clockcycles, bandwidth, disk space to a redundant open secure network.... problem fixed. the world is ours :-)
"The Most Fun Possible on 4 wheels" is at SunBuggy in Las Vegas
If customers do not renew or install an upgrade product, they can still open, view and print their existing documents.
Your data will still be yours
Not that I think this is a good idea. I can't see how some marketdroid wrote "which will provide customers with an exciting new opportunity to subscribe to the world's leading desktop productivity suite for an annual fee" with a straight face. How could forking over big $$ to MS every year possible be construed as exciting?
I agree, but try selling that concept to parents and governors who don't really understand (yet think they do).
--
---
---
---
---
> Dont accept documents made in Office. Dont work with partners who use Office documents. Dont take customers who use Office.
And how long would you work for a company if you took that kind of attitude? I was referring to a business environment where being uncooperative is usually frowned upon. I'm not a consultant who can afford to piss off customers, nor the CEO of a company who can dictate the standards. So I use what I need.
For me personally at home, I use the Word viewer, etc, and that works just fine.
But my original point was that Microsoft was arrogant enough to make OFfice 97 documents break Office 95 documents... I wouldn't put it past them to do something like that again, especially when the subscription model becomes a lot more common.
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
First Vapor Ware, now MS has developed...(drum roll please..) RANSOM WARE
"That's no moon"... Obi-Wan Kenobi
Try an opening an Access 2000 database in Access 97.
(I was only an egg, but then I cracked)
"Because up until very recently they haven't been really all that interested in discouraging personal piracy. Personal piracy made them the Standard and has kept them there."
This is why I doubt it will happen. You "up until very recently," but what caused it to change? If they seriously threaten software piracy, I think they'll do some serious damage to their market share.
--
The real question is, who is it exciting for? The aformentioned "marketdroid" is probably thinking about how much his Christmas bonus will grow and found that to be pretty darned exciting...
Life has many choices. Eternity has two. What's yours?
--
You think being a MIB is all voodoo mind control? You should see the paperwork!
A man who wants nothing is invincible
Absolutely not, and it was a big controversy at the time. There was absolutely no reason for it other than Microsoft screwing with customers. Not only that but they also slightly altered the OLE Automation interface, so code to operate Office 95 apps wouldn't work on Office 97.
Again, they did this for no other reason than to force some people to upgrade.
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
Just because its "old" material doesn't make it any less pertinant to a discussion about MS liscensing strategies.
If they bait and switch once, they'll do it again.
Also, you seem to leave out the fact that distributing Office over the web does have its overhead costs. Bandwidth, servers, software, support personnel. Cheaper, sure - but still expensive.
I/O Error G-17: Aborting Installation
You seem to forget that many people don't even load Windows/Office. They get it preloaded on their PCs...
--
You think being a MIB is all voodoo mind control? You should see the paperwork!
A man who wants nothing is invincible
Whenever I go to a computer show, I notice an awful lot of the copies of MS software clearly say "For distribution only with new computers" read, OEM software. However, we all know that these versions work just as well as the full proced versions.
This new scheme of theirs would probably put a big dent in the "Gray Market" for OEM versions of their products
Of course, before you jump on me, I personally feel this "subscription based" Office is really insulting, and it is yet another straw on that camel's back... Linux here I come.
+++++++++++++++++++++
The Digital Sorceress
If you're a school or other educational institute (except for a 'Microsoft Office school'), I see no reason why you should use these expensive products in your curriculum. Schools should not teach how to use a specific product (be it Microsoft Office, StarOffice or Emacs for all I care), they should teach how to indicate 'problems' ('how do I get this information to the intended recipient'), find the means to solve those problems ('why, I can write a letter to do that'), find tools which can be used ('hmmm, Emacs looks like it can handle this job :-)') and use those tools to solve the problem (write letter, save file, print file).
So why not use a cheaper, more open toolset in school? If business feels a need for Microsoft Office courses, they'll gladly provide them to their employees. Why standardize on Microsoft Office in school? I learned to read from simple books, books which I never read anymore. I learned to use a computer using a Commodore 64 and could easily adapt the gained insight to other systems.
Give your student a Microsoft Office course, and (s)he'll be able to use Microsoft Office. Teach them to use information processing equipment and they'll be able to use anything and everything...
--frank[at]unternet.org
Comment removed based on user account deletion
-Elendale
IANAT (I Am Not A Troll)
It will be the case while the economy is good, and there's plenty of money to throw around. A lot of people don't like to change what they're used to, and they're especially willing to spend other peoples' money so they can continue using the only office applications they've bothered to learn.
Yikes! I'm not sure you can compare Microsoft Office 10 to the Oracle 8i database system. I agree that lots of companies are adding subscription models to their software licensing choices. AFAIK, most of these companies are using the subscription (ASP) model to push large-scale, extremely expensive systems. The jury is still out on whether (or how well) the ASP model will work for this type of system, I think its less likely that it will work for a commodity product like an office suite.
I think that MS's new subscription model will work fine for many people. I also think that the question of whether Office 11 will be subscription-only won't be answered until MS can see the subscription vs. non-subscription revenue of Office 10.
To understand what's right and wrong, the lawyers work in shifts ...
It would be worth offering the word processor from StarOffice separately (as StarWord?) for people who don't want the rest of StarOffice or its attempt to be a desktop.
don't know if anybody else thought of this, but this also neatly prevents piracy. after all, in order to access the software you have to have a license. after one year, no doubt the software dies so you have to get another license. well, gee, in order to get a new "continue subcription" license you have to have the old one, which somebody else already used to get their new "continue subcription" license. so now they KNOW you are a pirate and will come after you.
I'm good with numbers -
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they ain't out ta getcha.
--- Jump!! Fire!! Bullet time!! - Lego version of the Matrix
Basically, it's all a big boondoggle to sell ActiveDirectory, and unseat Novell. (NDS).
Once ActiveDirectory gets established in this role, it will be nearly impossible to shake it loose - even if they split MS 8 ways till Sunday.
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
You NEED their software! There is no other option for what you need done.
Microsoft's Office has been a critical application for the past 5 or so years, but they have been selling the perceived benefit to managers and executives, and this just exacerbates with the newer releases of Office - What does it really provide? - what are the real benefits?
Is this going to replace another software product, or just add another licensing cost, while adding incompatibilities (or force everyone to have a license) and time-wasting internal prcocesses?
Ill pay for Solutions, not marketing.
Rant: I once worked for Hewlett Packard, where I would extract a data set from an Informix database, and email this off to a manager of another group in another location. This "manager" would demand that I send her an excel spreadsheet, even though the extract was only 6-7 columns (and tab delimited - can you say "import"). She would then "work" with the data for WEEKS, and when she was done would email an immesurably complex excel spreadsheet (with embeded links, bells and whistles) to our DBA. He would suffer for a few days to try to get the data back out into tab delimited form - just to put back into our DB!
We did this for MONTHS, neither of us knowing where our extracts were going or where the imports were coming from! All thanks to the fucking crap microsoft drones (middle-management) add as "perceived" benefit, she really thought that she was an important step in the process. Most management/executives believe that Office is a critical part of their internal processes, this is just plain wrong. I feel that the Office suit is one of the most overemployed, most extraneous of software products! END RANT.
- michael
any company that stands squarely behind UCITA is ``venial''
Hmmm.... This is an interesting charge. I am not used to dealing with subtle theological issues on slashdot. Is the author concerned that a company does not estrange it's soul from the grace of God? (i.e. Bill Gates)
or perhaps the author meant
"one treats others with courtesy not because they are gentlemen or gentlewomen, but because you are" --G. Henrichs
Exactly. I still have my *registered* copy of Office 97 on my home machines. I use 2000 at work, and see no differences at all (though I'm not an admin type, so use Office very basically).
I'll use Office 97 at home for as long as I can. Gave MS money once- not gonna do it again (which is perhaps why they went the subscription route!).
Kinda like Moe, but just a little more Kool
I guess - if you pushed them - the posters in this thread would state their belief that they think MS has a big problem: why should users continue to pay to upgrade MS applications, when there is as near as damnit no difference between one Word version and the next. We guess that MS thinks, "a ha! if we can get the user to hire the application rather than buy it, we have revenue for life".
Even the press release - bless it - gives the game away. They speak of "at a lower initial cost" which begs the thought that the lifetime cost will be greater.
And the conspiracy theory? I think it is reasonable to speculate that MS would like to be a service company rather than a product company - especially in a marketplace in which the commoditisation of products is driving price.
We don't think MS is stupid. We know they are very clever indeed - especially at the business of business models. And the subscription business model is clearly more attractive than the "I'm happy with my Office 2000 and don't feel inclined ever again up pay to upgrade".
What is the big problem with subscription-based software like Office 10? I mean, it's kind of like the idea of leasing a computer, except you aren't just throwing money away through not being able to resell the software when you're done with it, because you wouldn't be able to (legally) resell the software anyway. New version comes out, your lease just happend to expire yesterday, go buy the cheap new version. Could someone explain what the problem with that is?
Friends don't let friends use multiple inheritance.
Didn't Sun do this a long time ago with Solaris?
Now look at it. $75 for the whole shebang plus.
Of course, a few more people "need" Office than Solaris...
Glückwünsche, haben Sie Slashdot ermordet, indem Sie zum korporativen Druck beugten und Subskriptionen einlei
If Word's center and bold features haven't been improved that much, I see no reason to upgrade.
I will, however, keep my eye on the "Office Assistants" introduced in the new version...
Then the one obvious thing jumps out. It's going to be easy as hell to crack. By simply using a proxy or screwing with the system date, one could easily by pass all of this non-sense.
This seems like a dumb move even for M$...
int func(int a);
func((b += 3, b));
My thoughts on this are similar. Choice is generally good. If anyone doesn't like it then they don't have to buy it; don't the old versions work well enough anyway?
Besides, if the subscription cost is sufficiently low, then for the people who for some strange reason must have the lastest MS-Office-foo thing, a subscription service might end up being cheaper.
If the subscription cost doesn't end up being cheaper, well then, don't buy it.
I don't see any reason why MS shouldn't charge as much as it thinks it can get away with for software.... if it ends up charging to much, it will just hurt itself.
-------------------- the list is long. dirac angestung gesept
o A reasonable price would deter people from pirating the software
o It's an immense value-add for MSN
o It's the perfect entry for a "desktop anywhere" feature, which would put your documents at your service via ANYPLACE you login.
Here's the best part: make this available for X-Box users. Suddenly, the kid's toy becomes a VERY inexpensive replacement for the computer. AND Microsoft will get a handy stream of revenue. If they sell 10 million X-boxes in a couple of years... and even 5% of those end up with a subscription to MSN and Office at $25/mo, we're talking about $150million/year. US alone. AND they'll dominate the browser, 'cause it's their platform.
There's more: How fast can HP or Epson write a app for the X-Box to use their digital cameras with it? Scanners? Will it have a firewire port? How about hooking up the camcorder? DVD player, right? I've heard it's going to support HDTV resolutions - so if it's done right, it'll be on every videophile's list too, especially if someone writes their own HD-DVD format - just upgrade the software DVD player!
The possibilities really are endless with this one... by Microsoft creating the hardware, and the OS, they're doing what IBM wish they had done back in 1980-81 with the IBM-PC. By providing the subscription to the software, they're giving themselves a constant revenue stream for years to come.
It gets more and more interesting EVERY DAY.
I just realized that J. blow can read the docs after the payperiod is up, but the point remains - there should be a buyout option.
.NET/asp targets a specific market which I don't deny probably exists. That being said, I do not believe this type of solution will be now or ever the one-and-only.
.NET/subscription model rely on internet connectivity to check to see if it's allowed to run? can we say, nightmare? internet bandwidth issues, connectivity, and your reliable problems with the proxy server or the firewall or some schlob stepping on the pipe into the router will not only effect normal levels of productivity--in/outbound email, refreshing slashdot, reading the Onion, etc., it will also kill-if this is how it works[1]-kill all productivity--no Visual C++ compiling, no word processing, no powerpoint. (hey, maybe this will be a good thing...). This won't be popular.
First, the headache for maintaining so many damned subscriptions, keeping them active, managing accounts and passwords will drive IT managers nuts
Second, it's the DivX dilemma--see how useful all those DivX pay-per-use DVDs are now? Great coasters. If MS ever stops supporting this model, everyone will be up a creek without a license key. Admittedly, probably not a terrible concern with MS, but it will limit the ASP model.
More importantly, this will last in each company until the exact time that some Exec is travelling and his license expires over the atlantic on the flight out while he's drafting the next business plan or whatnot. After some serious shouting and lawsuit-threatening, each company will give the subscription model a one-fingered salute.
Does the
This also brings up an interesting idea--I type up a work in Word 10/subscription, then my subscription runs out. Can I still even read my work? Will WordPad handle it, or has MS rescinded my access to my own work??
[1] and I can't think of another reliable way. I imagine a digital-sig based handshake that avoids the problem with local settings controlling access (easily crackable/patchable), and if it defaults to allow, well, duh.
Returned Peace Corps IT Volunteer
> Open source advocates are always talking about the virtue of choice, but when MS offers choice, they cry foul. How convenient.
7 .html
So, either you can pay MS once, or you can pay them every year. Gosh golly Captain Wizzbang, what will they think of next??? Maybe they'll add a paperclip on crack as their next feature . . .
Being told ``you can pay us so much now, or you can pay us the same amount each year" is not a choice. Unless you are braindead & need more than 5 seconds to decide between the two options.
> And don't come out with the crazy conspiracy theory that "Office 11 will be subscription only". First of all, it attributes to MS a
> level of stupidity they simply lack. And there is simply not basis for that statement.
Interesting. Leaked memos have been available for a couple of years showing that Billg & Ballmer have seriously entertained this concept. After all, their End User Agreements state that you have NOT bought the software, just leased the right to use the binary. And if UCITA passes in your jurisdiction, be sure that they will change the terms of the contract.
And have you ignored the fact that MS requires companies with site licenses to pay for their software *twice*? Once for the concenience of having it pre-installed, & once for blowing it away so that the tested, & corporate-approved version can be installed. A quick search on Gogle turned up this URL: http://www.canada.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-242730
As for the charge of ``stupidity", I think the better word describe any company that stands squarely behind UCITA is ``venial".
MS is seeing the numbers of sales begin to slide; migration from NT to Win 2000 is far less than what Gartner & others predicted. So MS has to get the revenue from somewhere. Which means this braindead licensing choice. And if they DON'T force theri customer base to migrate to a subscription basis, then they ARE stupid.
Geoff
I think I see a trend here. Maybe for them it really would be easier to muzzle the entire internet than to produce p
Microsoft has been doing a pretty good job of tweaking their products just enough to get people (and businesses) flocking to upgrade even with very little new development. Windows 98 SE and Me upgrades from Win98 cost the same as the Win98 upgrade from Win95, but there is much less development in them. Same price, less work, higher profits. Nothing new. Although in many cases the "less work" usually comes with higher productivity (so the end product is the same quality), but it doesn't seem like this will be the case.
Anywho, the advantage of services instead of products for the consumer is that (theoretically) setup, installation, upgrades, support, etc. are easier. However, (as mentioned above) services come at a significant loss of "rights" for the consumer. Ownership is very powerful, and in many ways very desireable. When you rent something you loose control over it and it's no longer yours entirely. In the next few years there will be a major "shakedown" of what people choose to be services and what people choose to own.
Personally, I think the service model (for some uses) is very valid, but I also worry about the transfer of rights and powers from the public to the big corporations. I think that ultimately most people won't want to give up their ownership of basic software, and (perhaps more importantly) there will be a large base of free or purchasable software out there keeping the big guys' services in check to keep things from getting out of hand. I suppose we will just have to wait and see, but it's bound to be interesting no matter how it plays out, let's just hope it's not too interesting.
But the choices offered are fundamentally different. Microsoft is offering customers a new way to pay for their software. They are still not allowed to do anything that they couldn't do before with a different method of payment. With open source software, the choice is not how to pay for it, but what to do with it (although there are arguably more ways to pay for open source software than for Office).
I like to play children's songs in minor keys.
"We're all sons of bitches now." --J. Robert Oppenheimer
You'll never have to pay for the upgrade fees to go from one to the other (which, seemingly, would cost more money).
- I don't care if they globalize against free speech. All my best free thoughts are done in my head.
All righty then, Mr. Smarty Pants, why is it good? What extra service does the "rent" (vs. own) get you? What is it that would make me "buy" this rather than a version that doesn't auto-destruct? MS claims this is "an exciting new opportunity" -- for who? Their bankers?
There's exactly one reason this will be accespted in the market, if it is at all:
So, I get it cheaper, but I gotta pay next year. I suppose this is actually Microsoft trying to compete with the Warez market. They ship "works" with a lot of prefab PCs these days. So what happens then? I'll wager that, a lot of the time, people bring home Office CDs from work and/or get them from friends. For free. With no subscription fee. So, if they can go legal and get upgrades automatically for less than paying retail for the thing, then they might. Plus, I can see the MS playing out this way: "Computers are hard to keep working right! Upgrades, patches, work, work, work! Pay us and they'll always work right. Friendly MS agents will visit your computer through your spiffy DSL line and make sure you always have the latest, greatest, bug-free stuff." They'll turn "Windows Update" into a revenue stream.
I wonder what the per-seat issues will be for business and/or homes? Renewal is annual, not one number-of-documents, as far as I can tell. So, if I install in on my wife's laptop and my desktop, so I subscribe twice? I don't subscribe twice to cable, or the newspaper.
Open source advocates are always talking about the virtue of choice, but when MS offers choice, they cry foul.
Oh, puhlease. MS is offering the same software in either case, merely with two different payment options. One, the traditional "costs too much" payment option, and two, the "ransom" option. The whole idea of software as a service is sort of ludicrous.
________________________________________
Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
Whoa, hold on! I think the problem is that a subscription service violates many things that the open source community stands for. This action by MS really turns software into a 'service' rather than a tangible product. If you 'buy' the software, you should be able to do whatever you want with it. (including using it for an indefinite period of time.) It doesn't really matter anyway because some talented MS programmer will create a crack and enable the software indefinitely. And when he/she does, I'll applaud him/her, maybe even write him/her a letter....using StarOffice.
"I threw up my hands in disgust and wondered if it had been such a good idea to have eaten my hands in the first place."
The article reads that you can't create *new* documents, not that you can't continue working on and reading existing ones (which would be real annoying, maybe even a little bit too annoying for a Microsoft Product. However, after Clippy the Paperclip you can never be sure: they might as well pull off this one!)
So supposedly, if you create 100 empty documents (or containing just some bogus text) you can continue using/editing those?
Every expression is true, for a given value of 'true'
If this application is doing network validation every time it is launched, i wonder how long it's going to take before someone comes out with a Napigator type app that redirects the request to bogus servers? I give it a week... tops
Hammer of Truth
- When are Microsoft going to ship Office 11?
- What's the cost of a years subscription, relative to a full license?
- Where's the break even point?
- If I choose to subscribe to Office 10, do I auto-subscribe to Office 11?
- Can I subscribe individual components (say Word and Excel, but not PowerPoint?
Microsoft seem to be hoping that people won't work out how long they'll resubscribe for, and may make additional funding on the difference. You know many people aren't going to do the long term thinking here - they'll just see a lower initial price.See Rob's comments in Geeks in Space as regards rental of his TiVo - he's coming up against a break-even point of rental vs purchase - he'd hoped that a better version would be available so he could change for less money....
... and today's pet project has
--
All men are great
before declaring war
A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC
Oh yes, IT departments do get tired of this.
You must work for a rare breed of IT department. Most IT managers tend not to think for themselves, or evaluate alternative products. "If microsoft makes a product, it must be the best, lets go buy it."
I wonder if this will always be the case, or if organizations (especially governmental, or non-profit) will stop wasting money when there are equally viable products for cheap, or free.
--
python -c "x='python -c %sx=%s; print x%%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))%s'; print x%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))"
A few weeks ago, the hard drive in my Windoze NT machine at work went tits up and had to be replaced. When it was replaced, we installed Windoze 2000 and I opted to not install Office... choosing to go completely with StarOffice. I've been pretty happy with it- I've been using it off and on for about a year and it meets alll of my needs. In light of this article.. I'm glad that I made the choice that I did. I hate to see companies "punishing" customers for not wanting to upgrade to the latest version of their software. If something works for you.... and you have no real need for the new "features"... why change??
If customers do not renew or install an upgrade product, they can still open, view and print their existing documents.
Open, view and print. Nothing said about editing.
"The legitimate powers of government extend only to such acts as are injurious to others." Thomas Jefferson.
My, God, man! Are you insane? How is this different than paying 3 times as much for something you'll eventually have to upgrade anyway? If you pay, say, $1000 per year, or $3000 up front, is it really that big of a deal?
Otherwise BUY the software... the price will soar. Basically it's a ploy to make _everyone_ upgrade every year!
They see everyone who upgrades say... every other version as *potential* for more sales. With a subscription based service, they don't even have to convince people to upgrade, they HAVE to to keep using the software, and therefore HAVE to keep paying a subscription fee... the equivilent of buying a new version. This will also allow them to slow down development a bit... because the money'll keep rolling every year even if they don't release a new version.
Its strange that you seem to miss the whole point of what Open Source is and the distance between OS s/w and what MS is putting out here. Open Source is all about choice. It means you have the choice to do what you wish with your software.
Micrsoft however, are always looking for ways to restrict the choice of there customers. They restrict it by making their software more and more restrictive so that in reality they have a "cinema ticket". You pay, use it once but have to pay again to keep on using it. This isn't choice. It is yet another idea to restrict your freedom.
If you look around you, you will see that this is what is happenning everywhere. Continuously companies like Microsoft are inventing new ways to restrict customers' choice and tie them down to their products. Don't be blind, you can see the result of this action, in the way that so many Microsoft products dominate the market. The average user is left without choice. He is tied down to an operating system and an office suite that he keeps paying for every couple of years (95,97,98,2000 etc.) yet there is little innovation. That is because MS don't need to innovate. So where's your choice now?
perl -e 'print $i=pack(c5, (41*2), sqrt(7056), (unpack(c,H)-2), oct(115), 10);'
If customers do not renew or install an upgrade product, they can still open, view and print their existing documents.
that's open, view, print.
yes, by "open" we assume that means "open to editing", but when someone's trying to sucker you they'll permit this kind of assumption and then fall back on a narrow, literal intepretation when it comes time to apply the thumbscrews.
---
the problem with teens is they're looking for certainties
Hollywood, Television, has become the dream machine. We need to take that back; each of us is a Dream Machine
not sure I could even get a single homework paper done before I have to pay again..
--
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
Hey folks, this is nothing new in the software business. Go try to buy a copy of Oracle and you'll have an option to buy a perpetual license, a 2-year license, or one of a few other options.
And, you know what? If I were running a startup, or a medium-sized business that wanted to do a massive roll-out all at once, I'd much rather use a subscription model than try to come up with all that cash at once.
The people who really risk getting another blow are the retailers and resellers who currently sell MS software. They've already been hit really hard by direct sales, direct downloads, and online merchants, but the subscription path builds much more direct ties between the vendor (MS) and the consumer, so that the buyer doesn't have to go to any store to renew or upgrade in the long run. For now, they're offering an option to buy another subscription license at retail outlets in an attempt to keep up some relationships with these folks. But the whole business plan, in the long run, really cuts the middleman out of the market.
Eliminating the middleman would, in general, be positive for consumers, but the lack of competition just gives Microsoft a chance to sop up those margins for itself. Right now, for instance, buying direct from MS is usually the most expensive option, since they sell almost everything at full MSRP.
Of course, it's too early to predict what exactly their pricing strategy will be in the long run. Corel and some other potential ASPs have been floating rumors about pricing on a feature-by-feature, use-by-use basis rather than a simple annual model.
--JRZ
Most Microsoft apps are broken within a year due to M$ BitDecay anyway ;) What they need to do is buy out Norton or something, and make you pay through the nose to reformat your HD and reinstall everything ;)
Zahlman Q. Namlhaz, esq. {:> "Zahl Incorporated - the Last Word in Everything(TM)"
It need not be on a *nix platform. Moving an office package costs one hell of a lot less than changing workstation OS's - but I think you're right, this would cause a LOT of IT depts to consider StarOffice, Lotus ... maybe even WordPerfect (is it still around?)
Ah, but you see, the PC2001 specification will include a credit-card reader! The box will actually say "INSERT COIN TO CONTINUE" and will have a progress meter* counting down the seconds. You see, Bill actually wants to return us all to they heyday of computing he grew up in. That's right. The video arcade. .NET is actually "MS Return of Arcade," without pacman.
*counts backwards in years
________________________________________
Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
how many of those phones needed to be replaced after a year?
So day 1 you make an empty document of each type and archive it ..... from then on you just duplicate empty documents on the desktop rather than using office to make them for you .... or better yet - download those warez empty documents from the net ..... can you just see M$ going to court trying to ban the giving away of empty documents .... :-) "but your Honor - they're a device designed to 'subvert an access mechanism'" - "in rebutal - 'we made them with Windows - it's time it was banned'"
Good thing they waited till after the year 2000 cos if the y2k bug had cought up with the timing code we'd all have 20 free years of ms products.
Microsoft operates as a series of individual business units. While that gives them the maximum flexibility to try new things, it also means they often have to learn the same lesson more than once.
Take subscriptions for instance. MS Visual C/C++ wanted to go that model, as many programmers here may recall. "Buy 4.0 and subscribe to MSDN, you'll get 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, every three months like clockwork." Well, the versions came out... 4.0, 4.1, slip, 4.2, slip, slip, slip, uh, 6.0!
By going to a subscription model, they give the user false impression that the product will continue to advance on a rigid schedule. There's no way to win:
if it doesn't come out on time, the customer will feel seriously jypped at the renewal dues;
if it DOES come out on time, the customer has to churn all those desktops' installations to keep step with the advances, or relegate the expensive updates to dusty shelfware.
If they use some sort of lockout like cheap nag shareware, a la "It's February, you can't use the Save feature until you renew your Office subscription dues..." some people will definitely find alternatives. They'll have to keep increasing the dues as the flock of docile sheep dwindles.
[
ARGH!
This reminds me of the Divx DVDs from last year.
People want control over the CD they buy.
It may be not that much of a difference compared to their current licensing system since Office and Windows tends to be upgraded every 2 or 3 years anyway.
But, it is already too expensive *right now* and that is the reason that we will try to migrate, an annual software fee probably won't change that...
Every expression is true, for a given value of 'true'
Actually there are a lot of companies which prefer this type of contract. It's nothing new to software... McAfee virus scan has been doing this for quite some time, as well as most of the Mainframe/Unix software houses for the past 20-30 years or so if not longer.
A number of companies I've had dealings with in recent years have gone to leasing of equipment rather than purchasing it. While there is some increase in overhead in maintaining inventory lists, it decreases the overhead in accounting.
Leasing costs can be written off immediately as a business expense, whereas capital costs have to be depreciated over a period of time(I think it's 3 years on computers?).
I don't know how tax writeoffs work with software, but I assume similar rules might apply.
Another thing to factor in is that this would be a guaranteed yearly charge, versus a variable charge every couple of years. Again accountants find it easier to budget around yearly charges.
This is also why Microsoft prefers this model, as it would provide a steady revenue stream for them. Which means that Wall Street will like the plan as well.
It's all going to depend on the price points. Most companies upgrade their office suites about once every 3 years. If the yearly lease cost is 1/3rd or less of the full purchase price, it may very well make sense. If it's only 1/2, there will be some questioning. If it's higher than 1/2, I don't think many people will accept it.
Another benefit to IT managers is that a yearly maintenance cost on software insures you get the latest version upgrades without having to debate it much. Meaning for example, our $300k/year maintenance contract to Oracle gives us access to the latest Oracle 9i. To the IT manager, that means not having to fight a budget battle any time there is a problem that needs to be addressed by a software upgrade.
I can't see very many small companies going this route, but to larger corporations there are many compelling reasons why they will be receptive to software leasing.
This allows microsoft to even further lock in thier customers in thier products.The real issue
will be what methods will they use in order to set the date at which the suscription ends we all
the setting the clock back trick. SO would it require the customer to dial up the internet or
even better yet for them to dial up directly to them. What kind of backdoors will this introduce
into office. Could you imagine if someone found out how to stop Office from working (Well when it
works) and say that you owe M$ money. But the scary thing to me is that now Microsoft could
hold you "data" and computer hostage. But also is was your choice to get in that contract with M$
You made your bed now you have to lay in it.
________
Does anyone actually have a Java program designed to control air traffic, or for the operation of a nuclear facility?
Alternatively you could also buy MS Office cheaply and get a patch from your friendly WaReZ site; if MS thinks it can circumvent the cracker's they are kidding themselves. This is the company whose idea of a serial number is seven digits whose total is divisible by seven remember?
UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
Finally what I predicted some time ago happened. Now you don't own software. You own a piece of code much like a rent-a-car. Soon, you may become nothing more than a simple nigger, even if your blood is of "blue origin", your skin a shiny white and your hair carries more gold than anyone else. From a Namibian (they have some of the most black skin africans in the continent), which your values may consider a nigger, you will not make a difference in usefulness/purpose. Because for Redmond, users will be all niggers/slaves/servs. Offended?
.NET as muc as taking people in chains into a world where only a few ruled the life and death of people. Unbelievable? Then tell me you'll have a job/family/home if the owners kick you out of the .NET. Tell me that your active rebellion will not throw you in real chains into a chamber.
You have no more the right to own your documents for an undetermined period of time.
To avoid loosing years or monthes of hard work you will have to pay, pay, pay.
You can be deprived from your rights without any other chance rather than to humbly bound your head to the system. Or EULA if you like more this name.
You cannot sell, lend, provide, transfer the software you have in possession. You don't own it at all. You have only the right to use it. Under very restricted conditions btw.
If the owner (read master/lord) changes the rules you have to follow them. Or loose your place...
Considering other things like UCITA you even have no right for privacy or control of your own possessions, if they are indirectly related to the owner's software.
Now tell me that this is not happening. Tell me that I too flamoury to call all Office users as niggers/slaves/servs. Tell me that this is not the most blatant case of feudal revival since 1789. Tell me that Microsoft will protect you when corporations are not obliged to fully follow Constitutions and state laws. Tell me that they will keep Democracy alive while considering software as feudal land. Tell me that this is not turning people into slaves/servs. Tell me that this is not the same as knights took land from peasants. Tell me that this is not the damned "tenth" churches charged in medieval times. Tell me that this is not throwing users into
And the most important: tell me that your race, culture, religion, politcal views will always be independent from this.
Do you think I'm too radical? Look at the sandclock, it just turned. It is big and large, so it will take no less then ten years to run. "Human, if you are a fool then stay and wait to see all sand in the bottom..."
PS: Today, M$ may count that, in several places, people will start destroying their M$ copies. At least that is the first thing I'll command in one place. FareHell Gates. From now on, I will avoid, as much, your feudal leprosory. Personally I don't use it for 2,5 years.
This is no different from the existing terms. In fact, it's worse. Now M$ can force you to pay an arbitrary fee, and the program (and thus access to your data) won't work if you don't continue to pay. In other words, they blackmail you with your own data, and worst of all this is actually legal.
This, more than anything, only proves that Microsoft must be stopped. They're advocating the very monstrosity they basically created: a model where you don't even own the software you buy. In the end, this is going to result in one of two things. In the most optimistic outcome, people finally realize what Microsoft is doing, and they abandon it. More likely, however, is that more corporations -and not just in the software industry- will adopt this model, and in the end we all become little more than a sort of slave class, except that instead of being forced to give them endless labor, we're forced to give them endless cash for something we've already bought and paid for.
----------
What?
I don't think anything of the sort will be happening. The subscription service is optional. Despite all the crap you read around here, MS will never cease to sell the software outright. Businesses won't put up with it, and that is where they make their money.
They've probably come to the realization that home users are not going out and buying Office because it's really expensive. If they do actually buy it, they're not likely to upgrade when the next version comes out. Despite 'upgrade' pricing, it's really expensive. Most home users can hardly justify the upgrade from WordPad.
This is an attempt to get them to buy it, and to buy future versions.
Some other large software packages work like this already. Personally, I think it doesn't make much sense for a product you run on your personal computer, as opposed to something where you are actually buying services that require ongoing expenditures from the manufacturer. Still, you can see that with windowsupdate and officeupdate, they are moving to a more service oriented model, even for their pre-.NET products. The more interesting questions will be cost of a subscription, and if subscriptions include new versions. I'm sure it will cost more, but it could be that it will not be a whole lot more, and if they put in infrastructure for tracking subscriptions, it could save a lot of effort when they ask for assurance of license compliance.
If you are modding me down because you disagree with me, use the "Flamebait" category, not the "Troll" one.
Who cares. Most of Microsloth's overpriced shit can be obtained from your nearest newsgroup anyway.
Remember when you could lease a (touch-tone) phone from AT&T for a few dollars a month?
Now, after many years, all these old ladies have paid hundreds for a $10 phone.
Sad...
--Nicholas
Lots of folks are satisfied with old versions of software, but some folks aren't. Just like some folks lease cars, but some buy.
If you're one of the folks who need the latest and greatest features (either because everyone you work with uses them, or because of some other reason), this may be a viable option.
It sounds like this is one step to making the upgrade process even easier. All you have to do is give up the ability to stay at a given version of software.
I wouldn't do it, but I can certainly see the business case for MSFT. It'll be interesting to see how many other folks think it's beneficial enough to participate.
Dan
Is not to play.
If "subscription", AKA, software that you have to buy over and over and over, sells, then that says a ton about the stupidity of "consumers" and MIS managers.
I honestly don't think this idea is going to work, and if MS goes with higher cost "unlimited use" versions of office and other products, then eliminates them, I think this is where StarOffice and Corel WordPerfect can get market share.
In 2000 America, is a non-lawyer truly free?
1. Distribute a REAL(TM) Workstation version of Linux. As it stands now, every computer can potentially be a webserver, DNS server, mailserver, etc. Joe User doesn't need the these on his computer. Where I work, this has been a big reason why Linux was not replaced the desktop (yes, you can choose not to install them, but try convincing the PHB).
2. Provide a secure by default install. No need to go into further detail. Now that Jay Beale is working with MandrakeSoft, hopefully they will set an example for others to follow.
3. Polish up the Desktop. It doesn't matter whether it's KDE or Gnome, as long as it is functional and somewhat BugFree(TM).
4. Polish up the would be replacements to MS Office. This is the key converting a majority of the consumers and managers. Unfortunately, the world is addicted to MS Office. They need to be shown that MS Office can be replaced.
Go not unto/. for advice, for you will be told both yea and nay (but have nothing to do with the question)
yes he has thought of that. and he has solved the problem like so:
C:\>cp c:\mydocu~1\generic.doc ~/generic.doc
'cp' is not recognized as an internal or external command,
operable program or batch file.
C:\>
I don't know about anyone else, but the software packages I manage all have subscription/maintenance agreements. Basically you have the option of paying a certain amount per year and you get the latest versions whenever (and if they ever) come out.
So far we have these agreements on any MS and non-MS software we use because they end up being quite cost effective and easy to maintain as a regular bill rather than a big hit every 2 years or so.
Is this a bad thing? The answer is a resounding NO as long as you still have the option of a non-subscription version that fills your needs.
John Wiltshire
Fear: When you see B8 00 4C CD 21 and know what it means
Imagine M$ doing away with OEM `Doze and selling "subscription" versions to PC vendors... Millions would buy PC's with self-destructing versions of the OPERATING SYSTEM, unless they paid the fees... .NET on the world.
I can see M$ doing this... It's the only way they can FORCE
In 2000 America, is a non-lawyer truly free?
Foolish humans. You have seen the powers of Microsoft's evil armies, and yet you did not run. Now you will be crushed by its almighty capitol Power. QUAKE (III) IN FEAR, FOOLS!
Seriously, though, when was the last time you actually had to *upgrade* a M$ product? There's going to be a lot of folks hanging on to M$O2K and the like, don'cha know.
"Blow up your TV/Throw away your paper/
Move to the country/Build you a home"
io hymen hymnaee io
io hymen hymnaee
I'll just wait for the crack. Who has money to pay for shit anyway?
Never Underestimate the Power of Stupid People in Large Groups.
I have an old 486, almost ten years old, which still gets some occassional use, email checking, etc. when my PIII is in pieces. Let's assume this had started in 1991 and Win 3.11/95 were both subscription based OSes. It would have probably cost less to buy the OS in the first place, yes, but the I would still be paying money every to use Win95 for a couple days/year. Anyone want to claim this would be a good alternative?
I agree with your sentiments there. Hell even Ol' Billy boy himself said when he was here in .AU for the olympics that in about 10 years (well something that was longer than i wanted) we will have enough bandwidth (to the home) avail to everyone to enable us to use the "cool shit" in WinME. I mean that has got to mean that we DONT have a chance of being able to run Office10.NET, and we would have to buy Office10.CD (if we were to use Office at all). So i really can not for see MS ricking loosing ANY customer base, untill there is enough bandwidth to their core/major market segments. I am pleased to see that MS does view all computer users as more than just USA. (Approx only .001% of AC's are able to do this correctly, and maybe 55% of Logged in users :-)
How every version of MICROS~1 Windows(TM) comes to exist.
Do the following really mean anything? SCSA MCP CCSA CCNA
--I'm not actually after an answer!
All righty then, Mr. Smarty Pants, why is it good? What extra service does the "rent" (vs. own) get you? What is it that would make me "buy" this rather than a version that doesn't auto-destruct? MS claims this is "an exciting new opportunity" -- for who? Their bankers?
It's good for companies like the one I work at. As soon as a new version of MS Office is released they jump right out and buy it. It they can "lease" a copy for less than an upgrade, it makes great sense. It's the same concept as companies that lease computers instead of buying them. It's cheaper to pay a continual fee and always have a newer model than having to deal with the outdated stuff. Same concept.
"Information wants to be expensive" - Stewart Brand, the same guy who said "Information wants to be free"
because as slashdotters we're all using linux/oss anyway, right?
so it couldn't possibly matter to anyone here.
these type of stories on slashdot remind me of some group of kvetching grandmothers who wring their hands worrying that somewhere, somehow, some gullible little boy is being convinced to trade his peanut-butter-and-jelly sandwich for leftover tuna casserole.
---
the problem with teens is they're looking for certainties
Hollywood, Television, has become the dream machine. We need to take that back; each of us is a Dream Machine
So how many people are actually submitting patches to the StarOffice source? Where can I download it? Is there a CVS tree open? I remember when we all bitched and moaned that Sun had bought StarOffice and didn't release the source. Now they have released the source (I guess) and I have this terrible feeling that no-one is doing anything on it. Last time I used StarOffice it sucked.. big time. So lets get this thing working. Lets make it the best office package on earth and then at least we have something to point at. Really, it shouldn't be hard to make something better than MS Office. Word is a scary beast which constantly trys to second guess what you type and they all have that brilliant MS stability. If we can point at something terribly good then we can win, but until then we're just speaking hot air.
How we know is more important than what we know.
Why do I bring this up? Well, I do the majority of my non-trivial text processing in GNU Emacs, but there are situations when a copy of Microsoft Word would come in handy. When revising my résumé, for instance, although usually I write it in XHTML, many potential employers expect you to send a Word document. If I could access Microsoft Word through an applet-capable UNIX web browser, sure, I'd be willing to pay $5 for an hour's access. It's a lot cheaper than buying the $300 (or however much it costs!) full version, and even better, I don't have to worry about giving up Solaris or GNU/Linux to use it.
I believe that eventually the WWW will be the only application platform that matters for most business users. It's Sun's "WORA" philosophy taken to a whole new level.
I think that progress in this direction is held back by two problems. The first is bandwidth. Even if the WWW-based work processor described above were extremely modular, there's no way you could have 5000 employees using the application over a few T3's. Clearly the "buy the media and licenses" model will be around for a while, but if the bandwidth trickle-down continues at its current pace, I think this not an unreasonable goal for the next decade.
The second problem is many UNIX programmers' reliance on old-school server-side programming methodologies. Like it or not, Java and its lightweight object-oriented brethren are here to stay. We're in the middle of a period of evolution -- much like the jump from assembler to C -- when program abstraction is moving to a new level. (I can no longer say things like "business logic" and laugh.) Unfortunately, I see a bigotry in many UNIX users towards anything but the "C/Perl CGI" model of server-side programming. Even C++ is sometimes looked down upon. These attitudes will have to change; there will always be a place for those technologies, but as web programming more fully embraces OOP (1) (and database-driven OOP apps), I see more and more server-side programming being done in Java (generally), C# (for microsoft-freaks), and C++ (when neither of the first two is fast, powerful, or flexible enough). My experiences in the last year have convinced me that this approach is not only does increase programmer productivity (less time designing, AND less time coding), but allows us to create systems of a complexity that would be unthinkable in ANSI C or Perl 5.(2)
Perl has the foundations to make a place in this new world, but it needs better support for high-level programming, and better database support. I've spend a good portion of the past two months converting my employers old Perl scripts to Java servlets, simply because Java has better database support (gotta love JDBC connection pooling) and servlets scale much better on high-load sites than Perl CGI(3), at least with my employer's setup.
I have faith that Larry Wall and crew can pull this off. Listen to the webcast of Larry's "Camel Lot #6" speech (4)from mid-October. C++ and Java programmers who've dabbled with Perl should enjoy the latter half of the speech.
However you feel about Microsoft, it's interesting how long ago they saw this coming, and how well they've prepared for it. Windows 2000 will continue to kick our ass in this arena for a few years, because the operating system has capabilities that we UNIX goons need application servers (iPlanet Application server, BEA WebLogic, et cetera) for.
Amusing... in ten years, it might not be uncommon for every worker to have a diskless X terminal feeding of a central (UNIX, GNU/Linux, NT) server, running "productivity" applications (read: Office) over the Internet with Internet Explorer 27 or Netscape 6 (grin ;-). It's amusing because that's the same model that we were supposed to have escaped when PC's got cheap and every employee had his own. (A new era of workplace surveillance? Likely. A new era of employment for UNIX sysadmins. Definitely.)
Anyway, that's enough ranting from me.
Footnotes. ;-) "Haha! Just try and run four JVMs on that 600MHz Athlon, kiddies!"
;-)
1. Perl isn't a good OOP language. The basics are there, but it doesn't even support encapuslation properly. This will change, however.
2. It also allows us to create systems that can bring today's mighty servers to their knees. If I were a conspiracy theorist, and I am, I would postulate that one of Sun's motivations for spreading Java's use is that it creates a need for their monster hardware setups again.
3. The normal response to this is, "What about Slashdot? They use Perl and they're a high-load site!" The only reasons that Slash is able to run a site like this are mod_perl and the Arrowpoints. Mod_perl is awesome, but my employer runs iPlanet on RS/6000s, so it's not an option. True, Java is fucked above 100k HTTP connections, but that's what clustering is for, right?
4. http://www.technet cas t.com/tnc_play_stream.html?stream_id=375
All generalizations are false.
--
I like to watch.
Hell, just make one and keep copying that. :P
DNA just wants to be free...
On a product with a base price of $700, do you really think they would sell you the same thing for a $100 yearly fee? How about something more like $300/year? If Corel doesn't make the difference in revenue back in less than 3 years, they aren't going to go that route!! I'd still say getting a professional package for $300 instead of $700 is a good deal, and even at a yearly fee, it's still small change considering how much return you're getting on your investment, but don't think that you are saving fistfulls of money in the process. You will end up paying more money for the service, though you may also end up with better software in the long run.
--
Your Servant, B. Baggins
I can't speak for that guy but I think the average is 3...
I must burn in hell, suffer and pay for my sins
But Gods the one who's losing, Satan always wins!
The announcement clearly states that the subscription fee will be lower. I don't see any difference between this and a lease. Presumably a customer that would upgrade every year anyway stands to benefit. There may be other concerns, but we'll have to see what they do.
"It is not necessary to change. Survival is not mandatory." (W. Edwards Deming)
This is not the same thing. With a typical subscription model, you do get 'free' upgrades (not really free since they're all part of the subscription price). Under this model, if you choose to continue using the 'old' version of the software, you can - you've paid the licencing fees, the software does not self-destruct if you let the subscription run out.
The difference with Office 10 is that @ the end of the subscription period, the software becomes, IMO, crippled. From the press release:
As is so often true with MS (or anyone's, for that matter) press releases, it's not what is said, but what is not said that is of issue. Note that in the above quote nothing is said about updating/saving current documents. Which, by extension, reasonably means that Office 10 (Office 2002, or whatever they call it) will be crippleware unless you pay the ransom^H^H^H^H^H^H subscription fees to continue working with your documents.
It's probably too early to say with any certainty whether this model will actually work. I suspect not, given the dismal failure other pay-for-play models have suffered (Divx comes to mind). Paranoid or not, RMS's Right to Read story serves as a cautionary tale. If you are unable to continue working with your documents because you haven't paid the fees, what other restrictions will they be willing to place on your use of your documents???
Me? I'll continue to use AbiWord/StarOffice, thanks.
Where the value of X-Mailer: is the true measure of a man...
Asmordean (I forgot my password and the mail bot is being slow to send it. Perhaps I should write it down next time....)
Microsoft is doing this not to cut costs (side benefit) or make it look like they are trying to provide a lower cost service to the consumer. They want to strenghten their monopoly power.
The idea is this. Once patched and working, office applications and even OSes to some extent are a durable good. As long as they provide all the features that a user needs, there is no incentive for that user to upgrade to the latest and greatest version. I know many many people who still run Windows 95 because they don't see any reason to upgrade to 98/ME.
As a result of this, Microsoft has to fight with people's notion that what they have it good enough and they can just wait for the new product to get cheaper (Which does not happen with MS, but people do sell their old versions on ebay or though local classifieds. MS has tried to stop this as well) then buy it.
The solution? Change your durable good into a non-durable good. By implementing expiring liceses you force consumers to pay you again even if what they have works just fine and there is no need to upgrade. This also will tend to prevent users from migrating to competitor products such as StarOffice or WordPerfect because they will feel that they have already paid for the license, so might as well use it up. By the time renewal comes around, they are familier and at home with the software so they don't want to switch or would rather pay a renewal fee that is likely cheaper than the competator product (StarOffice is an exception).
They will shout that this is a solution to software piracy as well. It may very well stop some pirates but as Quake III showed, people will have thier numbers stolen then have to go though a painful process to prove they are the rightful owner.
I am of the opinion that this is a fantastic idea if it works for Microsoft. They will likely see profits increase in the order of several magnitudes. For the user this sucks. You pay more and more for something that used to be a one time cost.
For me, as much as StarOffice bugs me with some things, I will stick to it. At least it does not have a paperclip!
So that's what those Blue Screens are...
Unless the whole company consists of a bunch of computer-illiterate monkeys, there's no way StarOffice is going to replace MSOffice anytime soon.
We have a bunch of VB code buried in production spreadsheets - a lot of work went into them. Also, StarOffice still cannot (version 5.2) handle merged cells in Excel spreadsheets. MSWord? - forget it!
Founded in 1975, Microsoft (Nasdaq "MSFT") is the worldwide leader in software, services and Internet technologies for personal and business computing. The company offers a wide range of products and services designed to empower people through great software -- any time, any place and on any device. wheres this great software there talking about? and any device? does this mean windows runs on my imac?
All generalizations are false.
--
I like to watch.
Well, one reason it's good is that it's become widely accepted that the "product" model for software is a bad idea. Software is not a fixed thing; instead it tends to get upgraded over time, which results in this fictitious notion of new versions being their own "products" so producers can offset the cost of improving it.
The whole idea of software as a service is sort of ludicrous.
Actually, it makes more sense to adopt a subscription (or "service") model, like customer support, since most of the cost of producing software is an ongoing kind of thing. As consumers it makes sense to have the latest version that works the best. Why not pay $x dollars a year or month and recieve continuous upgrades for the "Word service"?
<rant> MS software doesn't cost too much; it costs exactly what the market will bear. MS is not obliged to give their stuff away just because you want it -- and why on earth do you want it??? </rant>
I would explain this to you, but every time I try to de-reference you, I have to run to the shitter and dump core.
--
Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
>
> All righty then, Mr. Smarty Pants, why is it good?
And the answer to both questions is:
How can anyone say until Microsoft releases its pricing structure?
Sorry to answer a question with another question, but it could actually turn out to be a cheaper method of buying MS Office you know. In fact it almost certainly will be... until everyone is tied in and there is no alternative at least.
Or is that just me being cynical?
UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
if you have an old car you are free to open the hood and disassemble/fix/repair what is broken. you can also add features to your car that were not available at purchase.
OTOH, doing this to MS-Office is illegal.
car::computer analogies are interesting because they always point out the consumer-gouging that takes place in the IT world.
and once, after a few years, a high enough % of people move to the sub. version, MS can stop supporting backwards-compatibility (which is something they've never been in favor of anyway), and then your Office2000 documents will be worthless to Office 13.
---
the problem with teens is they're looking for certainties
Hollywood, Television, has become the dream machine. We need to take that back; each of us is a Dream Machine
No, we prefer bash over that horible money sucking (if you actually pay, which most of us dont) Mac looling GUI!
Kill me first.
snowulf.com
You have to remember, this is the 21st century we are talking about. We have the technology to make your life not so nightmarish.
I suspect that the license would be managed by a network server. Install the key once, and it gets propagated out to all your installs.
I used to use Arc/Info back many years ago on Unix workstations and they used a licensing product called flexlm which managed this.
It was only a pain when the network went down and I couldn't reach the license manager server.
This is a blessing in disguise for the non-Micros~1 world. People will stop using pirated versions of Office, which to be frank, is what is on 90% of average users home PC's. They'll need to go down to their local computer store to buy an Office package, and it will allow other software manufacturers (Core, Sun, Gobe) to finally receive some income, which was deprived due to users running pirated versions of a competitors product. Now we're one step closer of removing Windows from the equation as well, since users can run their favourite Office package on a different OS alltogether. This new story will actually help Gobe with Productive, Sun with Star Office and Corel with its Office package. Micros~1 marketing have just decided to fire a bullet in their skulls. Yes, they will briefly experience an increase in sales, but what happens when the user base switches to competing products (which they can also pirate). PS - I don't run have Micros~1 Office, even though I've got access to a pirated version. All my office needs are done with Gobe Productive 2.1, which I legitametely bought.
Revolution = Evolution
>"I'm happy with my Office 2000 and don't feel inclined ever again up pay to upgrade".
That is until everyone you work with starts giving you Office 2002 documents which your software won't load. That was the _only_ reason I stopped using Office 95.
Face it, in a business setting, if you use Microsoft you'll have to upgrade as soon as anyone you work with upgrades.
Personally, I've never had a use for anything more sophisticated than WordPad (actually I do everything in Multi-edit), and any time I've tried any non-trivial use of Word, I end up giving up in frustration. The only Office app I've ever had any use for is Access, and it is a total piece of crap, and occasionally Excel, which actually seems like a usable product.
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
Before: Users were forced to pay regular fees in the name of "upgrades." Users had to upgrade so that their documents were truly compatible for other people using the latest version of the software.
Now: Users are forced to pay regular fees in the name of "subscriptions."
Either way: Users shell out money every 12 to 16 months to continue using the same product.
My prediction: Microsoft's subscription plan will open opportunities for competing products that cost far less and can be owned. Companies buy into the idea of upgrades, but far fewer will stomach the idea of losing ownership (autonomy) over their software infrastructure.
How much 'innovation' is necessary? The first version of Word for Win95 still does everything I need it to do. The vast majority of users don't need to upgrade for new 'features' and don't need subscriptions.
This is a Good Thing. Why?
In general, the cost of the M$ Office Suite is absorbed into the price
of a new PC. Most of our butterfly-ballot colleagues just come to
think that the hardware cost of a Dell is X, where in actuality it's
(X - M$). Given the option, Dell is going to want to pre-intall the
cheaper needs-to-be-licensed Office 10 version so they can advertise
cheaper computers and hence have greater volume.
But I don't think end users want to have the man on their back all the
time. They're going to realize that Microsoft is charging money for
this shite, and they're going to look for options (and KDE will be one
of them).
Thus, the subscription model is good becuase it shifts accountability
to the user rather than the PC vendors, which is how it should be.
This is a complete and utter lie. I have the educational version of Office 2000, and there was no such internet registration scheme. Please moderate the parent post down.
forced to move to subscription models, since otherwise offering
technical support is like writing a blank cheque. The surprise is
that MS is the first to make this a centrepiece of their strategy...
It makes sense to change to a subscription model if you are already
a MS shop.
And most of you think that this is a bad thing.
What would you do if you walked into a room and everyone started handing you cash? Their hands are in the air and the bank vault has been opened. It's not so much robbery as just playing along.
Stick them (read: us) for everything they (read: we) have! It's the American way!
ridiculopathy.com
"This copy of MS Office failed to autodestruct. Check your Dial-Up Networking propertises and try again later."
They denounce them, because they don't use software professionally, Estanislao.
I use Corel Ventura to produce long documents: I do technical writing by trade, and I've become reasonably adept at document design.
Ventura is currently my bread-and-butter application: anyone can create documents using Word, but I produce documents that are eye-smashing: their appearance wins me contracts over the competition. The *only* software that fully meets my needs is Ventura (Framemaker runs second, as it lacks some powerful typography controls; Word doesn't even register on the charts).
Would I pay a yearly fee for Ventura? You bet your bippy! It makes me tens of thousands of dollars: I'm willing to spend a hundred bucks a year to ensure that development on the product continues.
That way, I'm guaranteed to have a more powerful, more bug-free, more productive tool on a regular basis -- all of which serves to make me more money, faster.
The way I see, I can pay Corel $700 every couple of years for the next significant version upgrade, or I can pay $100 every year for continuous, incremental improvement.
Thanks, I'll choose the $100 route.
And Corel? They're foolish not to take me up on this offer, because it guarantees them a steady income. With 100k users subscribed to this model, they'd have $10M per year to dedicate to developing the product! It'd take them out of the red ink, and put them solidly onto profitable ground.
Damn straight that subscription models are preferable. Anyone who isn't turned on by the idea of continual incremental improvement of a product isn't using the product professionally!
--
--
Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
Like so many things M$, the PR sounds good. In exchange for a fee, I get an easily updated, constantly state of the art office software product. As it is a 'lease' or 'rental' as opposed to a purchase, it is now a cost of doing business as opposed to a capital improvement (or that is my understanding of the appropriate tax law). In addition, if forthcoming improvements don't exist, I end the revenue stream from my company to them.
Problems:
It will probably be a dumbed down version, no matter what. Expect even worse 'support' for other file formats. Probably some lame requirement that my subscription can't transfer to a new machine without some additional fee. I expect it to be as easy to cancel your subscription as an AOL subscription (now we know what those two are REALLY cooking up;).
What would be most useful for my company:
Have M$ Word substantially cheaper than Office. A whole lot cheaper. We don't use PowerPoint or Excel. It would be nice to not have to pay 50% for 20% of the functionality.
Let us buy based not on time, but on the number of documents created. We don't even do much stuff in Word. Why pay that much for something used so infrequently?
(Yes, yes, Star Office, Abi Word, etc. We don't have the time/money to do the training on them. And I don't have the will or desire to support them, (I'd do it alone, whereas others in the office would be willing to install/support more commercial based solutions.))
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
Well, you probably know the argument against open source-software. Business people like to know whom they are buing from. And trust me, Microsoft is going for businesses, not for the regular people. But the way they are fighting is quite tough, I must admit. Their marketing strategy relies on the accounting people saying: "look, we got a better deal with the new software!" and on the decision-makers being unable to predict the spending future for one year or unwilling to make any radical decision that can cost them their job.. So, there it goes. MS is exploiting smartly its market share with this new licencing system.
Paramount is cost (phrases like TOC) and maintenance. Quite frankly MS have so far been one of the best Office products both politicly AND functionally (nb the word BOTH).
There has been a dramatic lack of uptake of Office 2000 here because there is no percieved need for it - I'm guessing that MS are considering subscriptions because large companies are NOT upgrading applications automatically any more.
StarOffice probably won't be accepted by General Management simply because it is free - but Lotus sure does have an opening now.
Your right, it isn't something that is new. At my school I have to redo our 20 Matlab licenses (among other software) every year or so on the Irix and NT machines. The problem is, as others in this forum have mentioned, is that Office is everywhere on campus. Reregistering 850 Windows 9x/NT PC's every 365 days would be a nightmare. A license key server would be part of the solution, but I have a feeling MS isn't going this route.
you can't create *new* documents, not that you can't continue working on and reading existing ones
Im sure Mr.Bill has thought of us doing: cp c:\mydocu~1\generic.doc ~/generic.doc editing the file so it is absolutely different - then printing - emailing - or the really inventive cp ~/generic.doc ~/my_archived_important_file.doc
Im betting you wont be able to do ANY work with your 'subscription' version of Office 10 after your time is up.
Why on earth would Microsoft begin a licensing scheme that earns less profit?
I/O Error G-17: Aborting Installation
some time ago - or rather, they never converted to MS Office. Most lawyers use WordPerfect, and WordPerfect is _required_ by courts in many jurisdictions. For an example, see this (PDF file, page 2). The reasons for this are historical; WordPerfect had much better formatting controls than the early releases of MS Word. (When the IBM PC first came out, I recommended WordPerfect to a friend who worked as a legal secretary, and I'm sure she's _still_ using it today, all these many years later.)
Open source StarOffice should develop a WordPerfect file format default option and keyboard/formatting workalike regime, like QuattroPro had a Lotus123 workalike option (for awhile, until Lotus sued Borland about it, IIRC). Then StarOffice might become very attractive to law offices (cost savings, rock-stable OS, low-pain user transition). Lawyers and legal secretaries _really_ hate losing billable time to crashes. Convert law schools, then MBA schools... business will follow, somewhat later.
But the real reason the MS Office/.Net subscription model is likely to fizzle is that it's now an _explicit_ treadmill. Heretofore business could kid itself to upgrade for "new features" and naively think it would have the option to forego future upgrades. For example, Ernst & Young (70,000 users) initially elected not to upgrade to Windows98, prohibited it completely for a year. But Microsoft has just (rather arrogantly) removed all potential for this sort of self-deception. So much for their incremental seduction marketing model in the business community.
Well, I can think of many different companies with these kinds of "gotchas" not to mention their maintenance support
<B>*</b> Cadence Software. If you don't pay the yearly fee, their software license is set to shut down. I'm not sure how much their software costs, but I think it's in the order of tens of thousands per head. Not cheap
<b>*</b> Rational Software. Actually, they get you on the maintenance fees. Rather expensive to maintain, but with out it you can't get the latest version of the software, or transfer licenses
<b>*</b> SGI. Yes, SGI is very very very bad in this department. You get the SW fees, then the OS fees, and then Maintenance fees. Oh and if you forget a year of maintenance, or forget a machine, they get you twice as hard.
Alot of the bigger SW companies really know how to bend corporations over with regards to SW maintenance. Only a couple I know of actually are balsy enough to build in the self-destruct mechanism. This is just a few of the many reasons we are going away from the proprietary solutions and into more open solutions. With the SW maintenance/support agreements, you'd expect to get support as well, but oftentimes it turns into phone transfer tag.
So I guess I have to say MS isn't really the only bad-guy here, they're not the first. But hopefully they will be the last major company to offer these kinds of services.
No longer is it "one-time cost" versus "open-source-and-usually-no-cost". I think the subscription model will actually promote faster revisions of Office as a way to show value to the subscribers--if it's updated and patched often, you'll be more likely to want to keep using software that seems good. Nice job for Microsoft--we'll just see what the costs are and if people will bail for the alternatives...
--
-- Geof F. Morris
So long as there still is an option to purchase at a flat fee for the retail customer, subscription licensing is a nice option to have. That's basically how most larger organizations (like mine) pay for Microsoft software today - and most of our other software, too.
I negotiate a price for the annual agreement, and the company, in turn, sends me discs (or gives me access to a download point) as long as the license is current. If we choose to extend the contract, we remain entitled to the product. If we don't renew it, we are legally obligated to get rid of it.
This is different from OEM licenses (which we don't get with our systems, since we have a Microsoft Enterprise agreement - so we don't have to pay twice) in that OEM software is licensed to the specific PC it enters the building with, and retail software which is generally allowed for a single PC, but you have the right to uninstall it and then reinstall it on a different system. Enterprise licensing is a flat fee per seat per year that covers Windows (any version), Office (any version Professional or below - not Premium), and BackOffice CALs to access the servers. If you subscribe to Enterprise and don't renew, you legally have to buy the software through other means (though the discs they send you aren't time-bombed) in order to keep using it.
It sounds restrictive, but it saves my company a lot of money, assuming I upgrade software every couple of years. It makes licensing a simple matter from a cost perspective, easy to track and predict, and the software we get already has product ID's burned into it so I don't have to use keys to install any of it.
In fact, my McAfee subscription works pretty much the same way (but for two-year terms), as do several of my other enterprise-wide products (and most of our mainframe applications). All this really does is extend the model down to smaller businesses and individuals who couldn't get on these type of plans before.
So I'd have to say I like it. So long as the traditional purchase option remains available, choice is a Good Thing.
- -Josh Turiel
-- Josh Turiel
"2. Do not eat iPod Shuffle."
Flashback to 1990 or so...
IT managers choosing micro$oft over Wordperfect? What world are you living in?
The integration of Wordperfect in the corporate world is incredible. There won't be any changes to shiftin to m$orifice at all (PERIOD).
Do you have any facts to back up your statement that IT managers will force corporations to re-think their entire IT strategy because of this or are you just blowing it out your ass?
Wake up people; Wordperfect ain't all that bad; Wordperfect software works and people are using it because it kicks the shit out of m$orifice and other suites.
john
Resistance is NOT futile!!!
Haiku:
I am not a drone.
Remove the collective if
Imagine all the people...
..and it forces others to upgrade on a more regular basis. The companies will have to continually upgrade to be able to read the documents by other companies who were forced to upgrade to be able to read... (well, you see where this goes -- kind of like a self-feeding catch-22)
Even the press release - bless it - gives the game away. They speak of "at a lower initial cost" which begs the thought that the lifetime cost will be greater.
That really depends on what the pricing model looks like. If my employer could rent MS Word on a per-use basis, it would probably save them quite a bit of money when it comes to me and the rest of the programmers, since we rarely use it. Whether that savings balances out with the (presumably higher) cost for usage by the clerical and documentation staff, I couldn't say.
We don't think MS is stupid. We know they are very clever indeed - especially at the business of business models. And the subscription business model is clearly more attractive than the "I'm happy with my Office 2000 and don't feel inclined ever again up pay to upgrade".
But if these folks don't feel the need to buy an upgrade to Office 2000, why would they feel the need to rent an upgrade?
"The Greens lynched a hacker in Chicago. Last month, but I think the body's still hanging from the old Water Tower."
They've outsmarted your local iso dealer, those little playfull scoundrels! The notorious ms-corps is going to hit it hard, very hard!!
Yes, this time they really have gone one step closer to a pir8 free ms based world. They did it, need I say more? The final step into *-commerce, they hit the columbus egg! I just $mell a patent here.
I wonder what will be next then? Maybe they're gonna include the crackpatch themselves in their next socalled release so you don't have to visit a pr0n-a-holic crack site anymore.
heh, i type too slow.
---
the problem with teens is they're looking for certainties
Hollywood, Television, has become the dream machine. We need to take that back; each of us is a Dream Machine
I thought the point of the manifesto bit of the GPL was that software
should be treated like a service and not a commodity. Surely MS is
moving *closer* to the way that the Open Source community sees
things...
Well, from a business perspective it doesn't really matter. Most companies are already paying maintenance fees on their software licenses anyway. I don't see much difference between paying a maintenance fee to get upgrades with products and paying a subscription. For example, on our firewall software we pay X number of dollars per year and get upgrades whenever they become available. It's perpetual and we never really buy any "new" software versions since they're part of our subscription service. Now, I really couldn't care less about MS Office since Staroffice works just fine for my needs. ;-)
if i ever decide i need office 10, this is great news. now i can get the subscription version for the lower price and then go find a crack. :)
You know as well as I do that it was just some dumb marketing gimmick so they could call it "Windows ME". ;-)
Most people want Instant Gratification and Microsoft is betting on this. How many people lease cars instead of buying them? My only concern I fear that people will be tricked into buying a subscription when they thought it was a full blown copy. If this is not handled the right right way Microsoft will get in trouble for this.
This subscription doesn't offer what Visual C++ tried. It doesn't promise any automatic upgrades. It's simply a way to replace a higher one-time cost with a lower recurring cost. Presumably, when a new version does become available, there will be an option to upgrade and continue paying a (higher?) subscription fee.
Ever been unable to re-install software you legally bought after a machine died because you couldn't find a 2 yr old CD key? This is just one step past that. It's not that people here are necessarily bigots (possibly, but not necessarily), just that they think it's stupid to leave access to your work open to extortion. If it floats yer boat Estanislao by ALL means go ahead and let us know how it works out. You could be the first to evangelize the ASP pay-per-letter transaction business model of computing to the Slashdot crowd.
The revolution will NOT be televised.
The folks around my office seem content using Office97. Office 2000 doesn't get them any improvements they need over 97, so what is MS going to add to incentivize us to go through the hassle of upgrading and the hassle of dealing with subscription services?
Not much.
So what if it's designed for the "Internet integrated office"? Most non-Fortune 500 offices are just learning how to use a networked print server or a networked fax server. What's the advantage of having Internet embedded abilities in their documents if they're still using a photocopier as a photocopier?
This isn't worth getting up in arms over.
-Chris
...More Powerful than Otto Preminger...
1)Yes, the "subscription" will be cheaper at first, but can you honestly believe M$ is gonna try to migrate to this if it doesn't put more money in their coffers in the long run? (BTW - when office 11 comes out, M$ will say "we said free updates, we didn't say a whole new version")....no, i don't see why anyone would have a problem with this ;-)
2)Open source advocates are always talking about the virtue of choice, but when MS offers choice, they cry foul
nope. we open-source advocates are always talking about the virtue of OPEN-SOURCE!!!!!! M$ isn't offering anything for free, they're offering a different fsckin' way to pay for closed-source software. You think we're gonna sit here with our thumbs up our butts goin' "Hip hip hooray for for a new way to pay for buggy, proprietary software!"
FluX
After 16 years, MTV has finally completed its deevolution into the shiny things network
"It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -David Hume
Well. Are they going to have other options than JUST subsciption? If so then its ok. It doesnt matter what happens, I aint going to pay. I am just gonna take out my little program called Serials 2000 and "purchase" (wink, wink) the item. Worst of all, what happens if users don't upgrade? Why go and get OfficeX when you can keep your already "purchased" copy of Office and not have to worry about subscriptions? I sure hope that Sun puts of some new versions of StarOffice (so everyone will move over to that, specially since it is multi-platform compatible).
snowulf.com
I really think that consumers will be apprehensive about this. Even though you dont own your software, you have a licence to run it. There still is the perception that you own it. I think it will be very difficult trying to overcome this. Especially if other services are like that as well When people start seeing they are paying $20 a month to run a computer they will get very annoyed, another bill (no pun!)that comes every month they will be happy to use an old version, if they dont have an old version, they'll swtich office programs. i mean how many extra features do you need to writeup a school assignment, or you resume for a job interview?
-- Cheer, Cheer, The Red and the White.
Yeah, IT managers who have now been given a new option for software purchases (emphasis on OPTION) will bail out from quality, tested applications to the uncertain open-source world. And then all those IT managers will be fired.
HEY! Where's the "insightful" part of this post? Seichert is a person who thinks M$ has invented a software distribution model that "could work well for smaller software companies", and it "should make the industry much more competitive." This is _not_ insightful.
hey seichert, we realise "that many people are willing to pay for software and pay for its continued development." This is _not_ insightful.
And what of "many offices that type up documents and do spreadsheets they have a vested interest in the continued development of Office." _NOT_ insightful, to the point of deluded. The ONLY office that has a vested interest in the continued development of Office is the M$ Finance Office.
seichert, you've made poorly modded chickenscratch. but i would expect that from the Slashdot/UPenn crowd....
And so? What's the big difference from having a WordView on it? What if I need to convert it into something else if I wanna keep working my docs? What if I need that new Curriculum Vitae ready to get the new job and I don't have money to renew a license? What if stale software gets nuts because my VB script tries to do something on the doc? What if I can't open my database because the query doesn't work anymore? What if I can't open my electronic table because it automatically tries to modify embedded docs?
I found it pretty damn funny.
How we know is more important than what we know.
I do. I use it because as lousy as the UI is, it is still one of the best office suites for Linux which interoperates with MS Office. May parents use it for the same reason (yes, they use Linux, and they are not expert computer users but it works for them quite well).
I have a friend who uses Star Office for Windows as a web browser because it is light and resistant to the more annoying scripts that sometimes run on web pages (usually with the on_close property set).
It is my hope that the UI of OpenOffice will be redone soon by people who realize how difficult it is to use. I am still learning C and don't know enough to make those changes, but I will presumably be able to do so eventually.
Now, Star Office is the closest competition Microsoft has at the moment, and it could be a deciding factor in how or when a non-subscription based Office is dropped. I take this sort of thing seriously because Star Office has a great idea at its core-- it just needs some help which hopefully the OSS community will provide. If not, then they have nothing to complain about.
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
cool thanks.. trying to download it from Sun is an impossibility.
How we know is more important than what we know.
But now Microsoft is rigging things so that, even after I've paid hundreds of dollars for their software, I still have to deal with a "trial period"? What's next, I have to start paying for bug fixes?
Oh, wait... they started that with Windows98....
(This is from experience. I work in the IT Dept at a college where we use the MS Campus Agreement.... pay a chunk of money (I'm not in money, but I think our campus of 750 students and 175 staff and faculty costs about $10K), get licenses for all students, staff, and faculty to use all Visual Studio, Office, Frontpage, and OS versions, with upgrades included... and the students get to take the license with them when they leave. Actually, this comment applyies to Office2000 CD's that were distributed by some plan via Worldwide Fulfillment. These CD's are identifiable by having the front paper insert in black and white, and the words "NOT FOR RESALE" printed across the front of that insert. These CD's had a yellow product key sticker on the back. There were two versions of this CD: One that will accept the product key on the back (shipped until about April or May 2000), and one that says in an extra paragraph to check with the license coordinator for an appropriate product key. If you tried to use the key listed on the first type or second type with the second type CD's, you'd get the 50 session countdown. And if you register the 50 session countdown, that key is locked down to that particular install of Windows on that particular computer, so if you need to re-install the OS or upgrade it, tough. We found this the hard way because we were distributing CD's, and once we finished with our old batch, started on the new batch we got. We got all sorts of complaints before we noticed the three line, 8 point font notice on the back of the new CD's. -ERP
-----------------------
Although you don't mention what company you work for (for good reason, I'm not faulting you for that), I suspect that at those kinds of prices, you're not talking about a desktop application. At the very least, not a horizontal-market application like Office. I've seen this sort of pricing for server-apps, though.
Frankly, where I work, if we were to encounter a licence that 'rots' like this, we'd probably go with a competitor anyway. After all, if I not only have to pay to update my 'licence' to run the software, but also for patches (bugfixes) separately... that even gives the PHBs pause. This does not include support. We're quite happy to pay for that - for as long as we need it. After using a given package for a year or so, we probably won't even do that; relying instead on web-based and internal documentation where needed. Major upgrades are also another issue - happy to pay for those, again, as needed. All this means that we are running older versions of... well, pretty much everything.
But, with the latest patches and bugfixes in place, if it meets our needs, why upgrade? The whole mentality that we have to be running the 'latest and greatest' of everything is very overrated, especially if the 'latest and greatest' does not offer significant advances in the state of the art. A new rendering of Clippy need not apply.
Thing is, most licence agreements allow for revocation at any time anyway, which also means that using GPLed, and other less transient licencing is very much in our (meaning everyone's) best interests, never mind the pricing. I don't think it's unfair to ask for some kind of recurring payment to continue phone/live support of a given product, but to simply continue to use it (upgrades aside)????
Which, to maintain some semblence of being on-topic, is exactly what Microsoft is proposing. I don't think it's overly paranoid to expect, given previous behavior, that the file format of Office 10 will change again (I'd bet money on it), making them unreadable by O2K/97 without a plugin (which carries other artificial limitations with it - such as faulty rendering). Which also means that for a time, anyway, other word processors will not be able to handle them as well. All of which means that, again, if you fail to pay the ransom, your documents are rendered unusable.
And so, again, we arrive at the fact that I will continue to use/recommend AbiWord/StarOffice.
Where the value of X-Mailer: is the true measure of a man...
The more pertinent question: How long until people figure out how to break the breaking? No wonder DMCA was so important: if you can reverse engineer, you can break obviously lame payment schemes like this. Will tcpdump and strings become banned tools since they allow users to reverse-engineer lame "products" like this? What next? Will you also not be allowed to set your own clock? --Frustrated User
I just hope, for the sake of people who don't know any better than to use non-free software, that it doesn't turn out like this.
Why would I pay again and again for a downgraded version (10) when I already own a much, much higher version (2000)? Isn't this kind of like "upgrading" RedHat 7.0 with Linux kernel 2.0?
Sheesh. Do they really think we're THAT stupid?
Personally, I am happy to see MS moving to a service model. It
makes the distinction between commercial software and open source more
natural.
Just because you are incompetent does not mean they are out to get you...
(It doesn't mean they aren't, but one does not follow from the other.)
Check my Go-related blog for beginners: DGD
Ok ok - go easy - I often find myself typing copy in bash shells and dir /page/date and other various DCL (VMS) commands in DOS shells and versa-vice. You know what i meant. ;)
...is the messagebox that reads : "Please save your work. This copy of MS Office will autodestruct in 10,9,8..."
The old versions don't 'work well enough' if they keep changing their document formats and the older version can't read the newer version's documents.
As long as the file format stays the same, sure, but how much trust do you put in MS that this will be the case? (they WANT you to need the newer version)
--
Soma: because a gramme is better than a damn.
Or '97 like myself. I didn't think that I really needed the new icons.
...if only MS introduced an easter egg where you could kill clippy in a FPS
Except that nobody *actually* gains karma. I have never, ever gained karma, and I haven't heard of a single case in which somebody gained karma by being metamodded. I think that it just decreases karma if you mark the moderation unfair. Actually, does anybody know if it does actually increase karma?
can you? cause i have no clue as to how it works...
...when it comes out? That could be very useful to some.
I work for a company of moderate size and we pay for software yearly anyway. It's called leasing... Many large companies don't pay for everything at once they tend to drag it across multiple years, this goes for new factory equipment, computers, software and God knows what else. So to the IT guys in the corporate domain, not that much of a change... Now the home user... Depending the pricing, could be good, could be bad.
Sotaku
People I'm tremendously admired upon your level of "acceptance". Do you know what this reminds me. Early feudal times, when peasants voluntarly offered their lands to knights as they wanted to be protected from barbars, burglars and other knights. You talk about renting as an easier and cheaper way. Ok cool. It may sound cheaper. But please take into account the Microsoft Tax that we already pay. Take into account that even US DJ noted in court that hardware/software is becoming increasingly cheaper while Microsoft keeps prices in the high tag. Take into account that increasingly lots of software are becoming of free use, and this includes not so bad office software, while Microsoft keeps charging a lot for its own. Compare Oracle to Office as one can compare an elephant to a dinosaur. Yes, Oracle transmits their licenses, NETWORK ONES, for a period of time. Personally i consider this unfair. But I also note that this stuff does not disable the soft. Right in my desk is the example of this. A one-user Oracle CD. In Office's case, term ended, bye-bye. On what concerns faster updates. What will be the difference from now? Microsoft has money and money and money. Gates is the richest man in the world. So do you really think that renting soft will force M$ to loose some more on R&D and bugfixing? In a year you will need them more than before, when your further work will depend on what you will pay them. So why to care too much to feed the crowd? That's what feudals did. They took everything they could, so that people would keep needing them... Why to care about people's welfare? "The crowd is always unsatisfied when it is well feed".
Under this light. How can you consider and accept the terms M$ sets to you? Do you wanna really feel what this means? Pick your car and consider that Ford or whoever put a key on ignition. "You have one month to ride it". I would like to see how many americans would be happy with this...
And don't come out with the crazy conspiracy theory that "Office 11 will be subscription only". First of all, it attributes to MS a level of stupidity they simply lack. And there is simply not basis for that statement.
Open source advocates are always talking about the virtue of choice, but when MS offers choice, they cry foul. How convenient.
Are you adequate?
..you license it and I thought most people on this site would be aware of that. You were and will never be able to do "whatever" you want with the software, you just license it indefinatly. I like the subscription service as opposed to buying the next version of office whenever it comes out which is what most companies do allready. As for what the open source community "stands for", it does not mean it is the way things work, only some idealistic stance.
what a woman!
in Atlas Shrugged it only took one thousand eighteen pages for her to communicate the single sentence above.
it's too bad the utopia she pontificates about is a fictive creation that requires fanatic, fascist devotion to re-forming oneself into the image of the Perfect Man -- which turns out to be, of course, Ayn Rand herself.
we reject her and her unpracticable moralizing.
---
the problem with teens is they're looking for certainties
Hollywood, Television, has become the dream machine. We need to take that back; each of us is a Dream Machine
Amazing, prejudice against MS on /. This always happens when an MS story gets posted, anti-MS folks go ape and MS folks complain about it. If you don't like it, why do you come here?
Ah yes, so you get that "free update" (not really free, but you've gotta pay your subscription fee whether you take the new version or not) but then you've got a few hundred PC's to upgrade, at a fabulously expensive cost (that army of MCSE's doesn't work for peanuts, y'know).
/opt or /usr/local volumes, and I've upgraded apps like WordPerfect, Netscape, StarOffice, etc. without having to visit any desktops.
This model works nicely in the mainframe world, where you can upgrade once and suddenly the whole shop has the new version. I've seen it done with stuff like SAS and MXG, and both the users and sysadmins are generally happy with it.
I daresay it could even work if you had Linux on the desktop -- I admin a couple of networks that have shared
Introduce the C:\WINNT\SYSTEM32 directory, though, and you've got a big, unmaintainable mess. You're stuck having to manually upgrade every desktop. If you're really big you can do some of that tedious mucking about with pushed, scripted installs using tools like Novell ZENworks. But it's still much, much easier when the whole shop is working off one copy that can be upgraded.
--
Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
if you keep creating more slack for john q. public he will never be provoked into defending his rights.
historically, every philosophy based on Universal Natural Rights has greatly underestimated habit and laziness as the prime motivators of human behavior.
---
the problem with teens is they're looking for certainties
Hollywood, Television, has become the dream machine. We need to take that back; each of us is a Dream Machine
The shareware world has shown us that we can always circumvent the registration by the use of cracks, or key generators. Does the fact that Microsoft is willing to give us a subscription version that works just like the full version means that it's vulnerable to such ways to get around it?
FluX
After 16 years, MTV has finally completed its deevolution into the shiny things network
"It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -David Hume
It's a pitty that we don't get clues about what a flamebait point was given sometimes...
But I guess this was due to the "niggers" expression. As far as I know Blacks are too sensitive to this word... And it is not the first time I see a fast reaction to such words on print...
Ok I have no problems about the colour of a skin. I have seen more strange things in my life to care about such a thing. But...
Pick up your neighborhood. Harlem, Dar-es-Salam, Moscow, wherever. M$ starts renting you the soft. Good thing. Cheap and easy. But you can't no longer carry copies from computer to computer. You can't carry homework a software copy. You can't offer a copy to your cash stripped fellow/relative. If your try to use some cracking tool or cheat you may get into serious trouble. More than before has M$ will carry some good databases about your purchases/use. Besides you may have to get a credit card to renew the rental... You may try to cheat this but this also is a call for trouble...
Now I direct to some of the black people... Society did some Bad Things with you. Under this system, what chances do you have? What chances other less protected communities will have? Who's going to give you a right for credit cards? If you get into trouble, will the judge look at you in the same way as some other races? Do you feel that stripping the right to help your poorer friend/relative costs this "easier form of payment"? Are you rich enough to rent a home copy of the soft?
Does the word "nigger" sounds too bad? I thing it looks worser when someone surreptically treats you like that...
From the white niggers of the North... No joke... That's how we call ourselves sometimes...
Well, a few things:
1. I don't have to manage it on a windows workstation.
2. I don't have to support anything but the browser.
3. MS is going to get money one way or another.. and for an organization who cares.. I use abiword at home.
4. It's a centralized service that will support multiple platforms. (Now more people can adapt Linux at the workplace.. )
Sorry, but I don't think that Office is that bad of a product. Lets the Marketroids get their stuff done quickly and easily. Again, nobody is going to make me use it unless I need to give it-droid info to a market-droid.
Isn't server side apps where we want to be anyway? Thats what I spend my life writing currently.
*Sigh* It's funny, I don't think MS could do anything right in the eyes of the linux community. I believe
BTW, please don't flame me
--------------------
Maybe without the real need for getting customers to upgrade to the next version, they won't be so "innovative". Last time they were innovative we got Clippy.
How is this different to Sun's Network Computer idea? Or, more importantly, would they have opened up StarOffice if they didn't think that moving to this business model would be effective?
"by Microsoft creating the hardware, and the OS, they're doing what IBM wish they had done back in 1980-81 with the IBM-PC."
You seem to forget, IBM COULDN'T do it then because the (bum bum bum!!!!) DoJ wouldn't LET them, some silly thing about restraint of trade etc.
I don't really see what the big deal about the potential for "free upgrades" is. Hell, I still use works 4.5 and enjoy it (no annoying paper clip, and the spell checker is more suitable to my style of spelling).
.Net strategy does is guarntee that if they every ACCIDENTLY release a bug-free piece of software, that they will still make money off of their programs.
.Net, all I will have to do is do what I am already doing. Namly reinstalling every few months and making sure that my computers date is set to somthing around 1995. Install all time dependent programs on partitial A along with M$ OS's, and all none time dependent stuff on partition B, and Linux on Partition C. Every three or so months, reformat partition A. Makes defraging your disk ALOT easier I must say ::grins::
Of course after Lilo ate my MBR (doh) I am now using Netscape's email progie to write all of my documents in.
Still though, I don't see WHY people stay on this upgrade cycle. Honestly, what does office 2000 offer over office98 that you really need? Besides owning the latest version, of course.
What it all comes down to of course, is that if Microsoft ever released a working version of their software (read: no glaringly obvious security holes that even a 10yr old can find) then they would go out of bussiness, as they would have no more software to sell. All the
Of course, even if the world goes the way of
Need help treating your acne? Come here!
...in about, oh, one year I bet a whole bunch of pissed-off IT managers move to StarOffice on a real (Solaris/Linux/BSD/HP) platform.
Sun should be working on an Enterprise-scale migration utility... afterall, the cutover date has just been made official.
--
Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
THe thing is though, I'll give you 10:1 odds that these so called 'upgrades' are oging to slow to a trickle once this system is in place... basically, we're granting a monopoly within a monopoly... since monopolies are already unwilling to do any work to earn money, sicne they're the only game in town, now we guarantee MS money even if they don't do any improvements... it's just not cool m8
I must burn in hell, suffer and pay for my sins
But Gods the one who's losing, Satan always wins!
my school needs to re-negotiate with mathworks periodically for the matlab license.
Revolutionary hardware device offers home users and small-business a new choice for payment options
LAS VEGAS -- Nov. 13, 2000 -- Today at COMDEX/Fall 2000, Microsoft Corp. announced a new hardware option to accompany subscription services for Office 10®, Millenium® and Win2000® operating systems, Outlook®, Microsoft Mouse®; which will provide customers with an exciting new opportunity to subscribe to the world's leading software products for a per-usage fee. This new device will enable home and small-business customers to acquire the latest microsoft products without the troublesome one-time up-front fee while receiving product upgrades released during their subscription at no additional expense (installation and upgrade fees not included). Customers will be able to obtain usage of Microsoft® products via a hardware device that accepts coins and bills and attaches to their computer via the serial port. Microsoft Coinbox® promises users peace of mind that their software and hardware are properly licenced and accounted for at all times. Such unheralded freedom will revolutionize the way you and your company do business.
Here are some examples of Microsoft Coinbox in operation: Upon starting your PC, users will insert $2 to cover the licensing of the start-up sequence and the first hour of using their operating system. Users also have the luxury of pre-paying for operating system usage, up to 4 hours at a time. Being renown for our user friendly interfaces, Microsoft® includes a "parking meter" digital gauge to keep users informed of their time.
To properly keep track of Microsoft Mouse® usage, users will insert 50 cents. Coinbox® automatically deducts 1 cent for every left-button click, 2 cents for right-button. Users will rejoice!
The following rules will apply for Microsoft Office® products:
Reading an Office® document: 25 cents per access
Writing an Office® document: 35 cents per access
Reading and writing an Office® document: 50 cents per access(note the huge saving!)
Finally, Coinbox® will take postage for Outlook items:
Regular e-mail: 33 cents
Reciepted e-mail: 76 cents. Coinbox will save you annoying trips to the post office!
Access fee for contacts®: 5 cents per usage
Rent for Calendar®: 17 cents for a quarter hour, $4.80 for daily events (more savings!)
Once Coinbox is installed, users need not worry about its maintenance. Through the wonders of ActiveX® technology, Coinbox® will automatically contact Microsoft Collection Services over the World Wide Web everytime it's full. A friendly Microsoft Technician will come into your office or home after-hours to empty Coinbox®. It's that simple! Coinbox is simple, user freindly, and it's a Microsoft product so you know it's secure!
Also coming soon from Microsoft: ChangeMachine® for Coinbox®, and Coinbox® for Laptops (weighs only 15 pounds!)
Or, more importantly, would they have opened up StarOffice if they didn't think that moving to this business model would be effective?
Exactly. Star Office in its current form is free only to annoy Microsoft. Future versions will probably have added featured based on a subscription model.
And boohoo, Eazel is doing the same thing. As do many other open source companies - offer additional services for a regular fee.
Btw, althouh I hate Microsoft, I still don't think that subscription software is a bad idea. I *wish* a company would have had the option of choosing office software on a subscription model years ago.
To rehash the old argument: Currently, MS et al have to add needless feature creep to make an upgrade worth looking at.
A subscription system forces a different view and lets software developers care more for their user base - if they don't, users will be able leave to a competitor's product in an instant.
Right now, users don't switch because it's hundreds or thousands of dollars of investments to throw away and to make anew. A one- or two-digit monthly subscription makes switching the product easy if you are unsatisfied with support, bug fixing or missing features.
------------------
------------------
You may like my a cappella music
Basically all they did was put a time limit on the purchase of the regular version. It will take M$ a few more years to get to the .NET level, where the application is delivered over the Internet. Personally, I like this model more than the .NET model, I still get a CD, control over how/when/where it's installed, and no questionable off-line support.
Think outside the... Hey, where'd the friggin' box go?
The moderator who knocked you down should check with his supplier with regard to the quality of his rock.
That being said, I concur, and I also think this will contribute to the downfall of Office 20nn as a business standard. A significant part of Office's dominance is its status as a lingua franca--a file format that is pretty much guaranteed to be readable in any corporate environment.
MS, by heading towards a mandatory subscription model, is risking losing their position as the standard. Alternative office suite vendors and, yes, free software writers, will eventually succeed in reverse engineering the current set of O2K file formats--the current standard. Meanwhile, there is hesitation to upgrade to Office nnnn because of the subscription model, causing companies to stick with the current file formats.
This will give time for an alternative, free or otherwise, to take hold in the marketplace. And poof, no more MS Office hegemony. I'll admit to more than a little wishful thinking in this regard, but I believe it could really happen this way if MS continues to try to extract a tithe from business--that cannot last forever.
...of the many companies providing irritating cripple-ware to consumers. Microsoft's "innovation"? Paying the "registration" fee only gets you another year. Blegh.
www.code-fix.com
Microsoft are deluded if they think their customer base will wear this. My guess is that, the customer base, already disgruntled with feature-ridden upgrades, will simply not upgrade. What's to be gained? Word is already horribly over-featured to the point of unusability, so why buy into more.
As to the freeware competitors, they're just even less competitent versions of the MS stuff, so they don't look like the answer either.
I'm rather amused at the bashing that's going on by people who aren't even using the product - or if they are - taking the time to click on [help] then [about] to see what version they are running.
I think consumers will resist the software rental model strongly ... it has no advantadges and alot of disadvantadges ... and star office is always free
Free Techno/Jazz/DNB/MI Music by guys obsessed with monkeys!
yes.. when X-Box finally reaches market their subscription model will move over and only corporate users will be able to get pc versions.
That oughta stop them pirates.
How we know is more important than what we know.
--
Find free books.
This was intended to be an anti-piracy campagn, nothing more. They actually have a department which can give the confirmation numbers necessary to unlock the locked down application. However, anti-piracy tools are never perfect and they have been known to backfire occasionally.
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
If this doesn't push the market to linux and open source solutions nothing will. It should go down in history as one of the greatest strategic blunders ever committed. With little opposition, Microsoft itself finally gave users the best reason to move to open source.
Microsoft is allowing people to purchase the program and not have to renew, but if they want they can force consumers to goto subscription based (gee, a monopoly kinda does that) software. Norton and mcaffee are already trying this: they have web-based subscription anti-virus services. they announced that they were moving towards web-based services and that regular anti-virus would no longer be available in the future. The message seems to have 'disappeared' on both sites, so i assume that it do not work out as well as they had hoped, hopefully the same thing happens to microsoft. There is a lot more profit to be made in 'web-based' applications, but not many people are buying due to the overall cost.
strong words from an anonymous troll.
--
The shareholder is always right.
What a crappy decision. I'm going to start running DOS 3.0 again and write all my documents in raw HTML using the original DOS editor (Blue Screen of Life, baby!).
Imagine if they made notepad subscription based??
I think Microsoft is going to end up writing all their applications as C# plugins for IE. Then they could manage their subscriptions easier.
-3Suns
~~~~
The Revolution will be Slashdotted
Day N: DOJ(or EU or whoelse) opens a new investigation on predatory practices of M$.
Day N+1 DOJ and M$ agree on solving some potential problems.
A few monthes later: Several state institutions started to suffer problems on renewing their Office licenses.
Day After: "M$ states that there were some problems on license renewal because of some features on software. However M$ warns that it is not all their fault but also most problems were due to some incorrect uses of their software that lead to some confusion in their database systems. Specially M$ notes that this comes from the limitations imposed by the DOJ agreements. M$ agrees to solve these features in the next few weeks."
After Day After: DOJ thinks twice before getting involved with M$
Could such scenario happen?
Does this mean that I can simply set the date forward a couple of decades when installing, and then set it back to today, so that I have quite a while until it expires?
I remember the first time I experienced the Word95/Office97 Wars. The company I was working for (Eastman Kodak Co.) tried to enforce the use of the Win95 version of MS Word because the Office97 internal file formats were incompatable, and if one person started using Office97, the entire company would have to upgrade. Of course, that only lasted a couple months before we started trying to communicate with people on the outside (sending us one page emains as DOC attachments, DUH!), and the cmpany quickly caved in.
No, in a REAL office, there is usually little choice other than to cough up the latest MS Tax to get their newest software.
--
Your Servant, B. Baggins
For example: for some developer packages we use, we pay lots of money for the package and support but we also get free upgrades as part of the agreement.
In a nutshell, as much as it sounds like this sucks for personal use: this may be an ideal situation for businesses. Businesses get "free" upgrades and are always on the most recent version of software.
It also depends on how long you plan to use that version. More than a few people keep piece-of-shit systems running with 5 or 10 year old software. How is it in their favor to end up spending double or triple to keep this antiquated, but still perfectly usable, software running?
I will say again how pleasantly surprised I was when I went to get a patch for Quicken 98. Turns out Intuit just gives out their software for free once it gets to be a certain age.
--
Dyolf Knip
Marketing manager 2: That's really going to hit our revenue. We're not going to be able to illegally leverage our monopoly position in the marketplace to force people to buy our new product. What on earth are we going to do?
MM1: I don't know. There is, after all, no way we can compete on price because our salaries might have to take a cut then.
MM2: And the product's such a bloated mess that you need the latest kit just to run a word processor.
MM1: How about we open up new markets. That way we can fire all the pesky expensive engineers and just flog the same old stuff to new people.
MM2: Great idea. That'd double our salaries and we might get more stock options as well. The only snag is that everyone who can afford it already uses Office on the desktop, and if we sell it cheaper to bring it into budget for the second world we'd be cutting our margin and hence our salaries.
MM1: Well how about we charge them 50% less to begin with and then charge them 50% again every 12 months until we buy them.
MM2: My God. That's a work of genius. We can rent the software to everyone. That way our revenue stream is practically guaranteed 'til we buy our own country. Sack all the badly dressed tree-hugging engineers immediately and triple our stock options. MS will never have to produce another line of code ever again...well, maybe a few service packs.
Say....Do you reckon the idiots will fall for it?
MM1: Course they will. We'll just give it a funky new name that the MD's think sounds up to the minute... how about, hmmmmm, .con. No, that's too obvious .net maybe. Yep, that'll do. And now we somehow bring in the internet to the marketing angle, make a few colourful powerpoint slides with graphs rising to the right...
MM2: You mean a copy of Microsoft's profits over the last 10 years?
MM1: Excellent. Bill's going to love this. And the best part is that it's legal
"The new wave is not value-added; it's garbage-subtracted" - Esther Dyson, Dec 1994
... They just don't do much about it except badger users to free up licenses they don't "need". Even when they see what big green dollars this M$ stuff is costing them, they still fall in line and order more. So the decision is made to go Microsoft. Then later, when the true cost becomes known they start trying to cut back by doing things like denying licenses for home machines and now even test machines.
It's one thing for a company to peddle rentware if it's some high end CAD tool or something like that but a word processor, spreadsheet, etc.? I don't think so. Is the average home user going to spring for that? very doubtful
I predict old copies of Office 97 will be in demand. It may also twig people to try non microsoft alternatives.
Wansu, th' chinese sailor
First, how much are they going to charge per year?
Second, how long will it take someone to crack this?
.. so we can make a kernel patch to help lie to those processes about the date!
time_t gettime() {
if (substr(nameOfProc(),"Microsoft") != 0)
return faketime();
}
This will be a hard sell for both businesses and individual users. I know for a fact that everyone i know thinks of software in material terms. It is the difference between owning and leasing a car. People prefer ownership because it gives them a secure feeling, and ensures to themselves that the company they are leasing from doesn't cancell the contract, change the terms, or go out of business.
It is also important to remember that most consumers don't trust the internet, and having a service that would update over the internet will concern many people. If someone did a good hack, they could make every update install a virus on every machine that MS sent data to.
--
Find free books.
The viability pretty much depends on that, doesn't it?
I could see it doing well if the subscription price is relatively cheap compared to current Office upgrade prices. Especially if subscribers automatically get each version as it becomes available.
Say Microsoft is releasing new versions of Office every two years, and the upgrade price is $150 each time. That works out to paying $75 each year.
If the subscription is, say $50/year, and you get upgrades in that price, then customers are ahead $25/year.
I think this kind of stuff wouldn't be happening if there were real competitors.
Who wants to put up with this kind of thing? Why are we going to?
Hopefully, this will breathe more life into the remaining office suites.
Do you really need to reformat them by hand? Why not just save them on a disk (or email them, or ftp them or whatever) and open them on the computer of someone who has a working StarOffice and then save them there in a format you can read.
Care about freedom?
I'd rather be lucky than good.
"I suspect that the reason most people are angry, and most will be angry, is that this will require many, many companies who steal software to pay for it. If you want to use Open Source, free products, thats fine, but 9 out of 10 people who are bitching about this steal their software."
I doubt this will affect piracy of Office at all. Once your copy expires, you could simply go get a serial generator and extend the date. Or you could just pirate a cracked copy in the first place. If someone wants to pirate software they will, and this won't change a thing.
Realize that I skimmed through the press release since it's mostly just marketing drivel. I've written marketing drivel; this is bad marketing drivel.
Maybe I missed it when I was skipping through the drivel, but was there any mention of major upgrades at the end of a subscription cycle? Or in the middle, for that matter? I don't know about you, but the idea of upgrading Office SBE gives me the heebiejeebies. I'd rather use StarOffice.
But for the person who wants to run Windows, this sounds like a wonderful option. You're not ending up spending a boatload of cash on a license-for-life; you're spending money on a subscription. You don't have to feel like a heel for switching to OpenOffice in a year after you've spent hundred$ on a Microsoft EULA and media; you don't have to wonder how long the license is good for (life, apparently.) It has a specific time limit after which you're not obligated to use it and Microsoft is not obligated to support it. It sounds wonderful.
And before you use a "It's not Free; that's a f*cking good reason not to use it" realize that I use Linux as my primary OS. Your argument is tired and old. It's as simple as this: as a software consumer, I'm free to use either Free software or proprietary software. There are both positive and negative aspects to both approaches, and I'm not here to debate them, since they've been debated ad nauseum already.
In short, before you condemn this out of hand due to your blind hatred of Microsoft (I'm not too fond of them, myself--I wonder sometimes if they've ever had a creative thought in their lives) pause and *think*. It might change your mind.
Stating on Slashdot that I like cheese since 1997.
The key objection is that if you go to a subscription model for open-source software, you still have the source after your contract expires. Under a closed-source subscription model, you can be cut off from your data; Microsoft is under no obligation to provide you with their file specs, and in most cases, doesn't. At least when you /own/ the software, you can keep using it indefinitely.
/care/ what Microsoft does.
Personally, I haven't bought any commercial software aside from games in four years, so I don't particularly
-_Quinn
Reality Maintenance Group, Silver City Construction Co., Ltd.
About halfway down the release, set apart in its very own paragraph:
The only thing that happens when your subscription expires is the ability to create new documents.
Frankly, if the price is low enough, this makes a great deal of sense. If you consider MS Office nowadays costs $600 or more, and a new version is released every 3 years, an annual subscription of $150 saves you money in the long run -- assuming you always need/want the latest version of Office. Me, my trusty old copy of Office '95 works just fine on my ancient 486... but I sprung for Office 2k for my real machine.
"I came here to kick ass and chew bubblegum. I'm all out of bubblegum." MSE USC APX AIA CSI CASp
Comment removed based on user account deletion
...if it meant that I could buy 5 minutes of powerpoint to print out my professor's lecture notes for the occasions that I miss class. I don't think this is what they have in mind, though. If so, expect to see some creative idle monitors.
WARNING: there is a trojan on your
actually use MS Office anyway? I mean really, people? I'm sure a lot of people in here are into Linux / open source just cause its 1337 or whatever and *gasp* use windows like 90% of the time.
But for those of us who actually do the Linux/BSD/open source thing because we understand and believe in it, does Microsoft screwing over the rest of the world matter to us? I personally don't really care how they charge for their software, I still don't use it, and I probably never will go back to windows or other Microsoft products.
I'm not trying to start a holy war or anything here people, but it's time to stop bashing Microsft simply because they're evil, or all tohse cool 1337 h4x0rs on the internet do it.
We need to think for ourselves. If MS software does what you want it to do, and you're happy with it, you're gonna pay however they want you to pay, and you'll be happy. On the other hand, if believe in OSS for more than just the h4x0r factor, who cares about microsft?
I admit that I have not looked at the rest of the posts yet, but I am a bit under the bar. But, why would anyone pay for this when staroffice if available?
-Elendale (I still have a "fucking_useless_sdw_stuff" directory)
IANAT (I Am Not A Troll)
This is definatly a scary possibility... Up until now, if you buy software, it stays bought. You buy it and depend on it, and while it may have bugs, or whatever, it stays yours. So of course people are going to dislike the possibility of having their software say "Sorry, I don't feel like working for you anymore until you give my owner some more cash..." This puts you FAR more at the mercy of the company than before. After all, what's to stop them from saying, two years later, "we changed our minds, it now costs $150 per year, instead of $100. What will you do? Lose all your data? Change all your records to a different format? Or knuckle under and pay the extra cash, since it's cheaper than moving everything over to some other system? I work as a company programmer, and I can tell you for sure that our company would probably end up just paying it. Not because they like it. Not because they're stupid (they're not), but for the simple reason that they have a HUGE number of records, and converting them all would be prohibitive.
So the message, boys and girls, is simple: Don't count this out just yet. It's like crack. Microsoft will make it seem free and easy at the beginning, but believe me, once they get you hooked, they'll do everything they can to keep you hooked.
Also, has anyone considered what will happen if the company offering this "service" (using the term VERY loosely) goes out of buisness? Where will this leave all of the consumers? Unless they have some kind of "Indefinate Unlock Code" they can send to everyone, then the people depending on these programs will find themselves between a rock and a very hard place. Not many people like having their financial well-being directly tied to the financial well-being of another, entirely unrelated company, for some reason.
So yes, I consider this part of a VERY frightening trend. But I am not surprised by this in the least. It may look like a sudden, surprisng move by microsoft in a new direction, but let's look at a little history here:
This year has seen all sorts of things pass like the DMCA (which went fully into effect about a month or so ago... hmm...) and so on. RIAA and MPAA have been lobbying up a storm to convince congress to pass laws that in effect say "you may have bought the right to USE it from us, but it's on OUR terms, and we still can say what you can and can't DO with it." This is the logical extension of that: You don't purchase products, you purchase "use rights". Or rent them, in this case. And the worst part is that under current legeslation, they can do something as innane as using the expiration date as the key, or something like that, and under the DMCA, circumventing this is illegal, and has all sorts of nasty consequences. (And of course trafficing in this information is almost as bad...) So of COURSE, with such a wonderful legal enviornemnt (from their standpoint) this is going to be suggested. And executed. For no better reason than it can make them money, and is legaly fairly safe right now.
One more step towards a world where you can own nothing. And one more lurch towards more power for corperations, and less for consumers. Yay.
I sure as hell would never do it. Who really needs a cooler paper clip that uses 2x the RAM?
Then again...I wouldn't pay for it in the first place, so maybe it's just me.
... until we seeing the actual pricing schedule. If the total cost is approx. the same as the one time cost over the usage lifespan, then it doesn't strike me as too heinous. Of course, if it is %200 over, then we are seeing some heavy gouging, and then we can pay the castle a little visit. Couple thoughts.. How is this going to impact the OEM's? Are Dell and Gateway going to sell the generic BOX(tm) with the full version, or the crippleware? If it is the crippleware, how happy is Grandma going to be when she starts up to write a nice letter to the D.A.R., and finds that she needs to fork over X amount of dollars to Redmond? Also, what about templated workstations? Obviously, there is going to be verification based on serial number; will the templated boxes have to have Office manually installed, each with a separate serial # entered? That would be pretty sucky.
Technically, you are correct. However, those of us who don't use Office occasionally find that this choice makes our lives somewhat more difficult. For instance, I've recently encountered two recruiting firms which expect you to submit resumes in Word .doc format. One was quite reasonable about it and happily accepted my HTML resume once I pointed out that Word reads HTML without any problems. The other, however, insisted that all resumes must be in .doc format and refused to accept mine in any format other than .doc - even though I was specifically responding to a posting for a Unix position.
So, no, nobody will hold a gun to your head and force you to buy or use Office. But there are people out there who won't want to deal with you (or at least will refuse to take you seriously) if you don't.
What utter BS. No-one's gonna build a good, free wordprocessor on top of Mozilla. Hell, Netscape couldn't even build a good, free web browser on top of Mozilla.
nal 11
Comment removed based on user account deletion
The "subscription" use is not for IT, it is for home users that don't want to go out and spend $500 for an office suite. It is for the market that dosen't blink at spending $30/month for cable TV and would never spend $300 for a dish even if it was cheaper in the long run.
Microsoft isn't in it's current position because it is stupid. They understand the market that they dominate.
Maybe some Slashdotters hate the idea because it comes from MicroSoft but personally I hate it because it's crap.
.doc are renderred incorectly.
MicroSoft does not create backward compatible code in many cases. They say they do but quite often it's not fully backward compatible. Different versions of
So after the end of the year it may happen that you won't be able to rent the same version of Office and all your work will look just a little bit screwy.
Or maybe they won't rent Office for windows 98 any more so you have to upgrade to whistler.
Ok So both of those examples were specific things that MicroSoft would do. But I really don't hate MicroSoft. Other software companies would do the same thing to some extent.
It's always better and cheaper to own than to rent. Unless you don't use a computer very often, of course. But then why would you read Slashdot?
An important question is, "Why is Microsoft doing this?" Who are they targeting with this offer: individuals, or corporations?
Individuals will be unlikely to see a subscription program as beneficial. However, we must remember that the average computer user isn't familiar with the concept of software licensing. Most people who purchase Microsoft Office believe that they are doing just that: purchasing Microsoft Office. Of course, these people aren't going to like the idea of subscriptions, because they will see it as 'renting' that which they can just as easily buy.
Corporations, however, understand the concept of licensing. They are quite familiar with exactly who owns Microsoft software, just as they are familiar with the fact that "bigger and better" is, in the software industry, rarely very far off.
If Microsoft really wants to push a subscription idea, they'll start at the corporate level, and consider what they want the model to be. If they're going to institute a subscription program, they have to think beyond the initial payment. They have to consider what will keep the subscriber paying. When Individual X rents an apartment, that individual's rent entitles him/her not simply to use of the apartment space for the allotted time, but also to certain duties on the part of the landlord. If Microsoft is prepared to provide subscribers with additional support -- if that subscription fee entitles the subscriber to more than simply use of the program -- then corporations may very well decide to participate in such a program.
Microsoft should, for instance, keep track of subscriptions and renewal deadlines itself. Leaving this burden in the lap of the customer does introduce an added difficulty, especially for companies purchasing multiple subscriptions. Microsoft should also not set a schedule for updates; instead, it should focus on maintaining operability for its subscribers, and simply provide updates and support when they become available. A magazine needs to interact little with its subscribers, who use its product once per month; a subscription for something which is used on a daily basis, however, requires regular attention. Microsoft cannot sit back and hope to collect fees once per year, but with a bit of effort they could present a subscription program that would look very attractive to some customers.
Executed prudently, a subscription model such as this can work.
crib
Please don't read my journal
I forsee, OEM resellers not ponying up the cash for an unlimited copy. It'll be like the current virus protection scams. You'll buy your computer, with MS-Office and a huge suite of other applications, and it will all go kaput in 6 mos. because the hardware manuf only bought the cheapest license they could, and no doubt found one that transferred no rebates/discounts on renewal.
This of course fits cleanly with the new rent-a-wreck model Gateway is offering, where you rent a computer, return it and get an upgrade every two years.
Coincidence?
(And people actually laughed at me when I gave up word processing and started using HTML exclusively.)
Returned Peace Corps IT Volunteer
The worst problem I can see is that since consumers are locked in, the cost will appear cheap inially. But once everyone no longer has their old copies of MS Office, dont expect to see the price remain the same. They will slowly raise it claiming, "research and development costs", and begin extracting monopoly profit. Everyone is locked in, and will be helpless.
-- Cheer, Cheer, The Red and the White.
That kind of activity is typical for home users, however MS could probably care less what the home user does as long as we're not reselling the product. They care what goes on in the business world, which is where their money is made. Since most companies play by the rules, I doubt those who use the subscription Office will be cracking it.
end communication
So it went:
:)
1 -> 2 -> 3 -> 4 -> 95 -> 97 -> 98 -> 99 -> 2000 -> 10
???
Versioning by year does not make sense unless you release software on an annual schedule instead of when it's ready. Not only does it make you loose the flexibility of planning releases, but it also kind of breaks every 100 years if you use 2-digit years
Using the year as the version does not give you any indication of the program's maturity. And it kind of rules out patches, security fixes, or minor upgrades unless you want to lug around two numbers instead of just using a floating point number.
Software is not cars. Microsoft's marketing department must be really stupid.
I'm not an expert on software piracy, but wouldn't a subscription style service reduce piracy of MS Office ? It's probably one of the most pirated pieces of software out there..So Using one-time registration codes for continued subscription would help imo
I realize that this is probably going to be flamebait, but I think I'm just asking the questions that everyone else seems to be tripping over. Sadly, I did not see anything in the Press Release that answered these kinds of questions, and I don't really forsee MS answering them until they absolutly have to.
But, then again, how quickly is it going to be before some fast thinking kid cracks the code to the subscription process and offers free subscriptions to the world? Not everyone has Internet connections, so they couldn't (or should I say shouldn't) be depending on a .NET database to maintain who has a current subscription, so the most logical solution is to store the information localaly. And again, MS looses out on more revenue because of cracked keys/CD floating around in cyber-space.
I have to admit, it is a good concept for the home user, giving them the option to pay a nominal fee for a subscription instead of the full amount. But, IMHO, there are to many questions on both sides of this issue.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Continued development of Office? Ok Let's look on this side. Your rent Office and the money goes R&D. Good great. You are crediting their development and they feed back with more quality and flexibility.
But let's think there will be no continued development! You pay for the soft and cash hunger M$ waits for your next payment as it does not see any further incentives for development. As it knows that you will have to pay next time anyway. So you are feeding M$ much the way Linux users feed it, by buying computers with Windows embedded on it. On selling soft, users would have always the chance to say "take a walk" to M$. Office2000 was an example of this as many users kept working on Office97. In the new scenario this will not be possible. People will always to keep pace with M$. and M$ has no big incentives to develope in a long future. Maybe it will improve a few features, but i think they will make sense only to attract the Office97 users and some OSS lost souls. On the rest M$ has no real incentives to keep going.
So I would prefer to cut the word "continued" from your statement.
Btw, it would be interesting too see what will happen to users reinstalling Windows or using it on VMWare, Plex86 or without direct Internet stuff. and what will happen to your rights of having a "copy for backup purposes" or having two copies, one home and the other at work. And what will happen if suddenly an upgrade subscription goes wrong and delivers the use of Office to zero? What if you get late on paying your subscription and suddenly things jump two-three subscriptions away? What will happen if you get a virus on your notebook in the middle of nowhere? What will happen if M$ strips some features you need on next subscription (ex. converting docs)? And what may happen if someone steals your license?
Very good analogy, indeed. Standard Oil was broken up because they were close to becoming the only supplier of gasoline. By analogy, it is clear that Microsoft ought to be broken up because they have become the only supplier of Office. Just like we should ensure a supply of gasoline from many competing vendors, we should ensure a supply of office software from many competing vendors.
Office, if I'm not mistaken, is business productivity software.
Arguably, you are mistaken about the "productivity" part: most people would probably be more productive without the upgrades (and consequent retraining and format conversions) Microsoft forces upon the industry every year.
Dude! You're missing the whole point, AFAIK.
:) and _then_ registering the software with M$. No registration, no use.
This is not about you using a browser to run Word. It's about getting the M$ Office CD, installing it just like you would any other software (e.g. Linux
But the software is still installed on your own box. M$ does nothing but collect your money on a yearly basis (or whatever) instead of just once, when you buy it.
If office would actually run off the net, then yeah, it would make sense. However, why would you? I eamn, I have cable, so my connection is fairly fast. But it's not 24/7 reliable. So what happens when I have to finish my assignment due tomorrow at 8:30am, it's 12am, and my connection dies?
Of course, that's purely hypotetical, since I almost always use pico, unless I need formatting.
So your post is kinda' off-topic, IMHO.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Oh yes, IT departments do get tired of this.
Which is exactly why the company I'm working for is already getting ready to switch to Linux, first partly, if it works out they'll continue migrating to Linux (also for the Desktop!)
We have used NT servers for some years, they work fine (most of the time) but they cost a lot of money! Not to mention Win98+Office 2000 etc. etc.
Now we're already running Linux or FreeBSD on most servers, and documentation will be written in HTML instead of Word-documents. Add a word->HTML converter to be able to read Word documents sent by costumers via e-mail (in this case it usually does not really matter whether the layout exactly matches the original), and you're done.
The big reason why I'll be allowed to use Linux on my desktop? Licensing money!
Every expression is true, for a given value of 'true'
Look at it from the point of view of a business trying to keep their equipment up to date without breaking the bank... you can buy 100 copies of office and then replace them in 2 years or you can buy a yearly subscription and stay with the most current version. Depending on MS' pricing it could be more cost effective to go with the subscription.
- Toby
I also have the EDU version of Office 2000, and there was such a scheme. Don't be a such a twit.
Cheers,
Rick Kirkland
Kudos, seichert for being brave. It's absolutely a good plan. Considering the whole software industry is moving to an ASP model, it would be foolish for Microsoft not to do the same.
You lease your phone system, your copier, lease to own your mid-range systems (AS/400s), hell we even lease our water system.
Let me explain this in accounting terms. There's capital expenditures and operating costs. Getting approval for a capital expenditure is difficult, because it shows up on the yearly ledgers as one big lump of money you spent on something that doesn't directly lead to black ink on the bottom line. Operating costs get rolled all into one nice little unnoticed heap month after month. They are costs you have to pay to keep the business running.
Office, if I'm not mistaken, is business productivity software. Sure, it's used in education and home use, but it's primary market is business. Businesses like amortization (making payments over a period of time).
Microsoft holds no one anymore hostage than Standard Oil. You want to drive a normal car, you buy gasoline. You want to operate a normal business computer, you run Office. Heaven forbid anyone pays $10/month for productivity software! There goes the EverQuest budget!
In the end, the consumer gets a better product for less money up front, and the software maker makes more money from subscription fees and saves money by no longer needing to support obsolete versions of software.
If you truly think this is a bad model of doing business, please don't pay that cable/dss bill this month.
Unfortunately, it's rather bleak for consumers:
In the long run, I see this as hurting Microsoft's goodwill with it's customers. People are not accustomed to dealing wiht draconian licensing schemes, and may find themselves looking for another software with more relaxed licensing. Remember, the popularity of the PC can be attributed in part to having lax software licenses.
I say Microsoft is becoming more like Unix every day. Anyone remember FlexLM and the many poor attempts to replicate it?
Interesting thing...when I had a beta version of a previous office thing, I could use it until the new version came out...after that it would start to give me messages telling me to upgrade or register the version....I got annoyed at the messages and decided to uninstall. Unfortunately, after the time period ended, it no longer allowed that function. This not only prevented me from ever uninstalling, I could no longer use the program itself. I tried to use a clean sweep program, and the messages kept popping up and causing what I was doing to crash. I eventually went into DOS and deleted the programs manually. I hate subscription based IE programs
The anti-salmon
read the license below, "you have no right to distribute the software".. trading one pair of handcuffs for another?
Binary Code License Agreement
READ THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT AND ANY PROVIDED
SUPPLEMENTAL LICENSE TERMS (COLLECTIVELY "AGREEMENT")
CAREFULLY BEFORE OPENING THE SOFTWARE MEDIA PACKAGE. BY
OPENING THE SOFTWARE MEDIA PACKAGE, YOU AGREE TO THE TERMS
OF THIS AGREEMENT. IF YOU ARE ACCESSING THE SOFTWARE
ELECTRONICALLY INDICATE YOUR ACCEPTANCE OF THESE TERMS BY
SELECTING THE "ACCEPT" BUTTON AT THE END OF THIS AGREEMENT.
IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO ALL OF THESE TERMS, PROMPTLY RETURN
THE UNUSED SOFTWARE TO YOUR PLACE OF PURCHASE FOR A REFUND
OR, IF THE SOFTWARE IS ACCESSED ELECTRONICALLY, SELECT THE
"CANCEL" BUTTON AT THE END OF THIS AGREEMENT.
1. License to Use. Sun grants to you a non-exclusive and
non-transferable license for the internal use only of the
accompanying software and documentation and any error
corrections provided by Sun (collectively "Software"). You
have no right to distribute the Software.
2. Restrictions. Software is confidential and copyrighted.
Title to Software and all associated intellectual property
rights is retained by Sun and/or its licensors. You may
make copies of Software only for your internal use provided
that you reproduce all notices in and on Software, including
this Agreement. Unless enforcement is prohibited by
applicable law, you may not modify, decompile, disassemble,
or otherwise reverse engineer Software. You acknowledge
that the Software is not designed or intended for use in
on-line control of aircraft, air traffic, aircraft
navigation or aircraft communications; or in the design,
construction, operation or maintenance of any nuclear
facility. Sun disclaims any express or implied warranty of
fitness for such uses. No right, title or interest in or to
any trademark, service mark, logo, or trade name of Sun or
its licensors is granted under this Agreement.
3. Limited Warranty. Sun warrants to you that for a period
of ninety (90) days from the date of purchase, as evidenced
by a copy of the receipt, the media on which Software is
furnished (if any) will be free of defects in materials and
workmanship under normal use. Except for the foregoing,
Software is provided "AS IS". Your exclusive remedy and
Sun's entire liability under this limited warranty will be
at Sun's option to replace the Software media or refund the
fee paid for the Software.
4. Disclaimer of Warranty. UNLESS SPECIFIED IN THIS
AGREEMENT, ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED CONDITIONS,
REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES, INCLUDING ANY IMPLIED
WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR
PURPOSE, OR NON-INFRINGEMENT, ARE DISCLAIMED, EXCEPT TO THE
EXTENT THAT THESE DISCLAIMERS ARE HELD TO BE LEGALLY
INVALID.
5. Limitation of Liability. TO THE EXTENT NOT PROHIBITED
BY APPLICABLE LAW, IN NO EVENT WILL SUN OR ITS LICENSORS BE
LIABLE FOR ANY LOST REVENUE, PROFIT OR DATA, OR FOR SPECIAL,
INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, INCIDENTAL OR PUNITIVE DAMAGES,
HOWEVER CAUSED AND REGARDLESS OF THE THEORY OF LIABILITY,
ARISING OUT OF OR RELATED TO THE USE OF OR INABILITY TO USE
SOFTWARE, EVEN IF SUN HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF
SUCH DAMAGES. In no event will Sun's liability to you,
whether in contract, tort (including negligence), or
otherwise, exceed the amount paid by you for Software under
this Agreement. The foregoing limitations will apply even
if the above stated warranty fails of its essential purpose.
6. Termination. This Agreement is effective until
terminated. You may terminate this Agreement at any time by
destroying all copies of Software. This Agreement will
terminate immediately without notice from Sun if you fail to
comply with any provision of this Agreement. Upon
termination, you must destroy all copies of Software.
7. Export Regulations. All Software and technical data
delivered under this Agreement are subject to U.S. export
control laws and may be subject to export or import
regulations in other countries. You agree to comply
strictly with all such laws and regulations and acknowledge
that you have the responsibility to obtain such licenses to
export, re-export, or import as may be required after
delivery to you.
8. U.S. Government Restricted Rights. If this Software is
being acquired by or on behalf of the U.S. Government or by
a U.S. Government prime contractor or subcontractor (at any
tier), then the Government's rights in the Software shall be
only as set forth in this Agreement; this is in accordance
with 48 C.F.R. 227.7201 through 227.7202-4 (for Department
of Defense (DoD) acquisitions) and with 48 C.F.R. 2.101 and
12.212 (for non-DoD acquisitions).
9. Governing Law. Any action related to this Agreement
will be governed by California law and controlling U.S.
federal law. No choice of law rules of any jurisdiction
will apply.
10. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is
held to be unenforceable, this Agreement will remain in
effect with the provision omitted, unless omission of the
provision would frustrate the intent of the parties, in
which case this Agreement will immediately terminate.
11. Integration. This Agreement is the entire agreement
between you and Sun relating to its subject matter. It
supersedes all prior or contemporaneous oral or written
communications, proposals, representations and warranties
and prevails over any conflicting or additional terms of any
quote, order, acknowledgment, or other communication between
the parties relating to its subject matter during the term
of this Agreement. No modification of this Agreement will
be binding, unless in writing and signed by an authorized
representative of each party.
For inquiries please contact: Sun Microsystems, Inc., 901
San Antonio Road, Palo Alto, California 94303
How we know is more important than what we know.
"I think you are writing to renew your subscription. Do you want to
(*) Pay alot of money to use this program again when it crashes.
(*) Pay obscenely much money to just be able to read your own documents.
(*) Pay a damn huge amount of money to get the delux-version for the next subscription period. This version includes not only an animated paperclip to guide you, but you may also choose between an animated dollar sign, the smiling face of bill gates, and the ass of a donkey.
Tomorrow will be cancelled due to lack of interest
With this newer model, though, you are charged for what you use (kind of, I think it will be more like this in the future, perhaps a couple cents to create a Word document (with the tools for doing so being free)?) Also, when you want to upgrade to the next version, it will all be over the Internet, with the binaries for Word sitting at Office.net... you don't have to do anything... when a new version comes out, the IT manager can say, "Yes, we'll pay $x for the ten new features, or we'll pay $y for these three new features, or whatnot."
Also, the turn around time for MS on releasing new software and fixing bugs will be much better. Screw the time constraints of getting a new CD out and all that... if the Word team makes a small change that's neat, upload it to Office.net immediately and it starts getting used immediately...
Is paying for software on a per-use basis a good thing? For some, yes.
I could not justify my existence if I were a turkey farmer. Would I terminate myself? Undoubtably, yes.
People will only start noticing how the "software business" is absurd when they face the absurdities of the software industry, and how extreme the situation is. When people can simply have a pirate version of Microsoft Office on their homes, they will not see the real problem, but when they start to see how dependent on software companies they really became, things can start to change.
It's funny when I tell teachers or classmates that I won't send them document format X 'cause I don't have product X, and then they tell me "I can get you a copy", which is not the solution to our problem.
That's the problem with warez people. They think that it's ok to copy software because it is too expensive, but they don't see that with the extreme case, that is, no piracy at all, people would see how fucked up they are by software license agreements.
Of course not. It'll be done in VBA. You know, that thing that MCSE's put on their resume to show that they know how to program...
It may look like I'm doing nothing, but I'm actively waiting for my problems to go away.
--Scott Adams
We already buy their OS's every 2 years, and Office. They probably need more money more often. IT people should already be sick of this. But, the suits hear NT and go apeshit, and there's not much else us lowly users can do....or is there?
"Would it kill you to put down the toilet seat?" -- Maya Angelou
That is very different from Microsoft's subscription model. MS Office is not open source. If you subscribe to it, you have to stop using it when your subscription runs out. You don't get to keep using even the old binary version.
As for keeping down the useless features, what makes you think it will do that? If companies send lots of money per seat to Microsoft, they expect something back in return. And if they don't get anything, they'll wonder why they pay Microsoft lots of money merely for the right to continue using software whose development costs have been paid for many times over.
Microsoft has always had a strong incentive to tie their users to their company with overly complex, proprietary file formats and with intricate user interfaces that get people hooked quickly and keep them with the software. None of that is going to change with the subscription model.
Mostly what the subscription model does is allow companies to engage in more creative accounting techniques to reduce sticker shock for Microsoft software. That's good for Microsoft and it's bad for anybody else. And that's exactly why Microsoft is doing it.
With a low initial purchase cost and a pay-per-use model, how is this any different than the whole idea behind DivX?
From where I was standing, it didn't seem to take all that long to get even a large company (Circuit City) to back out. How long could it take before the same could be done with Microsoft and their rental product?
OfficeX? sounds like... Office Sex?
I bet that would make people buy it.
Hammer of Truth
Well take a look at the HTML-code...
Alright Im not going to bitch at oneside or the other but I going to speak from the entrepreneur in me. Whether or not you think this is evil, this could be a good thing for a small business that doesnt plan on being around that long, dont wont to pay the additional cost of licensing a whole version, or need the cash right now. Software subscription licensing is not much different then leasing a computer. Don't pay your bills they repo your computer, dont pay for your software it doesnt work. The people who will be paying for subscription-based software will know exactly what their buying and why. Its called Buy vs. Lease look into it.
Hangtime
we will lose the battle on the desktop market now. There are less than 10 people working on abiword, less than 5 working on gnumeric, only Sun's people working on OpenOffice. If we don't save ourselves, no one will do it for us.
Pickup your keyboard and start coding an officesuit now!
Of course anything that Microsoft proposes will immediately make the Slashdot crowd assume the idea is crap. What prejudice! This idea, of hosted services that a user pays a subscription or one-time use fee to use is excellent. I would much rather pay for Word on this model, rather than having to buy, install, and patch Office. This could work well for smaller software companies. No longer do you have to physically produce software packages and ship them to stores. Instead your customers can use their browser to access your program and pay you for it. This should make the industry much more competitive.
What a lot of Slashdot readers who think that open source free software is the only way to go fail to realize is that many people are willing to pay for software and pay for its continued development. Is it morally wrong for corporations and others to fund the Apache Foundation? Hell no. These entities have a vested interest in the continued growth of the apache software. Likewise for many offices that type up documents and do spreadsheets they have a vested interest in the continued development of Office.
Stuart Eichert
Stuart Eichert
People who buy the latest and greatest versions of Office every two or so years (like myself) may find this to be a good deal.. Depending on the price.
If I have the choice to purchase a license to version 11 for $375 which will just be sitting on a shelf in 1.5 years, its probably worth it to just pay like $75 a year for the license.
I guess I'm not sure what I am losing in this deal (if the price is right), I already have to register my product, its already under a restrictive EULA, etc. The only difference is that there is a version that is time-killed for less money.
One, we don't want to go that way. Two, that's the only way we don't want to go...
If customers do not renew or install an upgrade product, they can still open, view and print their existing documents.
--
My God! Did ANYONE read the article!?
-Pete
Soccer Goal Plans
M$ will track documents by serial number and PREVENT YOU from opening documents written by someone who hasn't kept up with his Office 11 bill...
"Hey! How come I can't open the status report from two months ago?"
"Oh, apparently they went out of business and their license for Office was revoked. If we pay a $5 fee they'll let us transfer that document to our license."
--- Jump!! Fire!! Bullet time!! - Lego version of the Matrix
No moron, it doesn't make sense. You pay like a magazine, once a year, whether or not you read it, YOU PAY. Learn to read before you speak
Look here for the source and binaries of the GPL'd version of StarOffice.
-------------
Someday, you're going to die. Get over it.
I heard in Office 10 there gonna attatch a coin slot where you have to insert 25 cents every minute if you want to keep typing.
I just *knew* some slashbot would come up with precisely this comment. Which is why I wrote in my top=level post:
So, of course, now I must ask you: on the basis of which evidence do you claim Office 11 will be subscription only? And, oh, your drooling hatred of Microsoft does not count as "evidence".
You know this place has totally gone to hell when user #203477 can predict what #125130 will say.
Are you adequate?
Most everyone here is complaining that they'd never buy the subscription software (even when they don't know the price) if they wouldn't be able to make changes, but what about those people who don't compose documents? It's been many years since I locked my own information into a proprietary MS format, but people less thoughtful send me .doc files all the time (as if that were an interchange format!). I normally extract the text, or just ask for a more portable format. If Microsoft put out the subscription version for $20, I'd probably buy it just to avoid the hassles involved in dealing with the idiots of the world. That's $20 more from me than they would have gotten in the past, and less complaining from me about people sending me crappy .doc files. MS can definitely make this work to their advantage.
This reminds me of Kurt Vonnegut's book Player Piano. In the book manufactures of consumer goods replaced appliances (weather or not they needed to be replaced) at intervals they set in order to "keep the economy from collapsing".
When punk rock is outlawed, only outlaws will have punk rock.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
In the long future, why do you need to pay for soft? Your boss gives you a copy for work and home. He states what you should do with it. he also gives you the right to do something "on your own". You work, work, work. If you don't do things in time or do something wrong, your boss strips off your license. Your software hangs up and you need either to find a new job or hit the streets. Meanwhile the second option will be more probable as the huge M$ database shows, directly or indirectly that you're a Bad Boy (TM), who does do well the homework. So if you get another chance, you'll work really like Hell.
In such scenario, why is money needed for? I mean directly. Maybe your boss pays something to M$ but you don't really need to pay for it... Your boss wll give your chains for free.
You can not download StarOffice source. You can download the GPLed parts of the code (nearly everything, except for printer drivers), released under the name OpenOffice. In fact, those sources have allready been made RPMs out of by MandrakeSoft, some weeks ago!
--The knowledge that you are an idiot, is what distinguishes you from one.
So assuming people move to this "services" software model, they will only really need an interface to the net, rather than a whole PC. If that's the case, how will processtree.com make money?
But if we don't do this model, and everyone sticks to PCs, how will processtree.com make money?
-=m
The point is that people AND major companies WILL subscribe. Why the hell not? What can you do? Nobody in their right mind would switch all the machines to Linux for an office package.
Open Source wont make money for anyone, selling this subscription will due to the fact that companies will do about anything Microsoft offers, because there is nobody else to turn to.
From MS's perspective, Why not? Anybody in their right minds would do it, knowing it would bring in the cash, and on a constant basis. No need to worry about bootlegging either.
I think subscription software could become big, since it can stop bootlegging.
Just my views
Because upgrades are included in with the service, ms can now say that you're buying their latest and greatest for the next year. Beacuse they'll no doubt have some sort of autopayment system (give us your credit card #, and we'll detuct $x from your accout every year), by signing the agreement, ms can tell joe user that payment is worry-free, as long as you pay...
Man, just coming out of college, this would have been a life saver. Not having to purchase a full version of Office, but just 'leasing' a copy right around finals, that would have been smooth. From a student standpoint, I think it is a great idea. With the cost of tuition on the rise as a whole, and books as expensive as ever, any way to save a buck would be great. Plus, since students will probably only use Office in an educational environment, they would be all for it. Most universities are Microsoft shops anyhoo, this only makes sense.
Bryan R.
Bryan R.
The price of freedom is eternal vigilance, or $12.50 as seen on eBay.....
I'm pretty sure that Microsoft Select would include the non-subscription version of Office - meaning that large companies at least will be able to avoid the yearly nightmare....
I work for a moderately sized company - we only have 500 or so workstations, about 300 of which have Office 97/2000 installed - even with our small size, it would be a nightmare to obtain and issue new licenses each year. I would like to think that Microsoft can see that, and will continue to offer non-subscription versions of their software, to both corporate and consumer customers.
If they don't, maybe we'll see a revival of Lotus SmartSuite....
If I were a software reseller, I would be VERY worried. MS already has software in the browser, where it can update itself via the "critical update" feature. All MS has to do, is incorporate this into Office, and resellers be dammed.
You'll get your Office, updates, bug fixes, etc, DIRECTLY from Microsoft, via downloads from MS approved locations.
MS Wallet will read your credit card number, and you'll buy more time over the net.
Oh, did you say you want a CD? Pay the NORMAL price. MS saves on packaging, pressing, shipping, and all the associated hassles with the Reseller/Destributer channel.
MS spends less, makes more, we get the software a bit cheaper, and only the middleman is the true loser.
Oh, the solution is easy. Use an HTML compatible browser.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Busnesses usually have to depreciate their software over a 3 year period. If you are buying software that only lasts a year, you can write it down 100% that year. Clearly the gov gets screwed on the deal, and it could be a benefit to companies in the 38% bracket.
They stab it with their steely knives,
But they just can't kill the beast.
The data in my document/database etc belongs to me
V yeUBudHUuZWR1LmF1')"
why should I put this data into a system where I could lose control I want to put this data in to a open and free format encrypted maybe but when someone searches the archives in 100 or 1000 years they will still be able to read it
ownership of data should be on the top of the list
python -c "print __import__('base64').decodestring('bWFyay5icmFkYn
Well. It looks like from now on, I'm writing papers in HTML...
/. news "MS Office Expiry code cracked"
V yeUBudHUuZWR1LmF1')"
I bet it will happen:)
python -c "print __import__('base64').decodestring('bWFyay5icmFkYn
Circuit City's DIVX system was about the same thing... (for the most part), and it didn't succed. There is a very real possiblity that this won't either.
It might be better for larger businesses, but for the small business owners, this won't work at all. Think about it, the small business owners are the ones that, right now, are still using Office 4.0 on a Windows 95a machine. They don't upgrade... they don't have the money to, and they definitely won't want software that will disable itself after the first year.
When Circuit City tried to push this same revenue model on consumers, it didn't work.
Small Business Owners, just like consumers, want to OWN their software/content.
That is almost enough to convince me that UCITA and the DMCA and all that are good things. Just to see this bizarre case in court.
If you are modding me down because you disagree with me, use the "Flamebait" category, not the "Troll" one.
Accountants now consider software licenses to be a capital expense. Software "rentals" are likely to be considered an operating expense, and will be managed differently in a corporation. Like toner, paper, and christmas parties. I think that this is going to start some interesting money fights when it comes to budget time. And will have some interesting effects on IT departments managing deployment and payment.
--
The shareholder is always right.
... is that is is already built into your current version of Office... Suckers.
Hammer of Truth
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Ever wonder why DIVX failed as a sustainable video format? Not because it didn't make sense to the marketing geniuses who dreamed it up, and not because it probably would have saved the average user some money in the long-run, but rather because they underestimated two aspects of human nature:
1. We like having that intangible feeling of personal ownership -- you know, that human desire that just happens to drive Capitalism?
2. We hate being continuously reminded that our money is slowly being taken away from us. We want to use our belongings whenever we want, without having to even think about monetary considerations.
If you take away the right to ownership over goods that people are accustomed to owning outright (especially in the face of strong competitive alternatives), you will quickly drive away potential customers.
It's an interesting experiment, but I don't think Microsoft is going to be able to pull it off in the long-run (at least not for office software).
--Gordo
Hex editor.
-Billco, Fnarg.com
correct me if I'm wrong, but what gets me is that there is no mention of any buyout option when the year is over, so that joeblow can't pay ms the balance of what he would have paid had he bought the app as we do today, forcing mr. blow to either pay ms for another year or have nothing to read the files on his hdd when the lease term is up. Most, if not all, other lease programs have that kind of option (cars, boxen, etc.)
It'll be interesting to see if Microsoft keeps its prices relatively consistent for customers. It wouldn't surprise me if suddenly the renewal fee went up for companies that started doing well, were in direct competition to Microsoft, etc.
--
All men are great
before declaring war
A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC
Lots of other programs have had subscription licenses in the past: This isn't a new idea. It does seem like this is the first time subscription licenses have moved into mainstream products. I know SGIs optimized MIPS compiler requires a subscription license (it just ran out, and my students had to wait for us to renew it before they could do their projects!). Also either SoftImage or Alias Wavefront has a similar licensing option (My Senior year of college my friend was using these tools to make models for a computer animation course, and the license ran out. The instructor had to find funding to renew the license). I'm sorry I am not sure which of these programs he was using but...you get the point.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Actually, they also made Office 95, so we only have to wait for version 94 before they start running into problems...
"The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than that of whether a submarine can swim" -EWD
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I work in the retail. Every day, I hear people complain about the price for M$ software, and about having to upgrade their OS every time they turn around.
Let's face it, this "new model" that M$ is planning, may be what pushes Open Source (read Linux) more mainstream. When these people see that they will have to pay yearly for their software (imagine what M$ is planning with Windows!) they WILL seek alternatives.
Right now, the only alternative, given the cost and being able to find Mac software, is Linux and the other Open Source OSes. Couple this with the advancements being made in the area of applications for these OSes, the general public will start seeing these as viable alternatives to Windows and all that encompasses.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Subscription based Office software?
I think we all better just send Microsoft a letter with "unsubscribe" in the subject line.
I used Purify, which was on a year-long license. The license was a major pain, especially for something of that sort, because the IT people didn't keep it up to date (they didn't use it) and didn't pay attention to it. So the license would run out and we'd have to get IT to do all the paperwork to get a new license.
I actually really liked Purify, and I wish we could have continued be using it legitimately, but I actually ended up mostly using it on brief "trial" licenses; we couldn't afford it as a group of individuals, and it was just too much trouble to get it paid for on purchase order.
If MS stops offering the non-limited-time version, I expect there to be days when companies grind to a halt because none of their office software will work until they can get through the paperwork to get a new subscription.
Office is expensive, I think everyone agrees with that. Office also works well, even though it is Microsoft.
:)
I use Office for a number of things that I just can't get done with Abiword or StarOffice right now. My publisher uses templates that only work in MS Word, even when I'm doing something on Linux which is a whole other discussion.
When a project comes up that requires MS Office something like this subscription model may work well. It may also help others that could use it, but don't want to drop $500 at one time on it. I'm not so sure how well this will be adopted to businesses. When our Internet connection goes down I hear enough complaining about no web and email, I don't want to have to worry about no Office apps for the marketing and sales department too.
I read something on Slashdot about how MS is trying to partition the internet into the "Microsoft Internet" (.NET) and the regular internet. To me it looks like they are taking the inevitable step of transitioning their existing, naive user base to a new software distribution model. Every company in the country uses MS Office, so the ordinary office types will want to continue using the programs; to them a subscription is the same as upgrading every year...but wait! What if all of your MS software gets upgraded automatically when you pay each year? Nobody has to go through and do a network install on each computer, since the code for upgrading will already be in NT and it can fetch the installers and put everything on the system itself. Office people will see it as a timesaver, and if they pay less for the subscription than for the regular upgrader disks, it's an advantage to them.
The concept that they won't be able to use the programs that are already on their drives once the subscription is over doesn't bother regular users. I just use BBEdit or TextEdit to make RTFs and then print them from MS Word, so Word subscriptions don't matter to me. But how many people out there care enough to use open source/open format files? Nobody in business, that's who.
what is with this 'cloud' business.
It's not enough that if the subscription expires then you can't create anymore docs. What they have to do is either destroy or encrypt the docs you've already completed. And also they should encrypt all of the docs anyway so they can't be read or used on any other machine than the one that had the subscription to begin with. In fact this whole subscription idea is so 20th century. They have to track every keystroke made on that machine and and force you to pay before the document you're working on at the time can be printed or saved. Then what they have to do is ensure that the subscription is only for versions that the doc was created on and continually change the version so that you have to pay an additional kick to use the old doc on a current version which holds its own upgrade maintainence subscription charge. And copying or backing up a doc requires a duplicate charge. Then they have to charge you for embedded objects - or at least force you to license every application that could use the doc. And make sure that the versions aren't upgraded at the same time so you have to maintain every version of every application. Also charge for each font seperately. And if you let a subscription lapse then you have to charge a subscription reinitiallization fee and force a complete reinstallation of all applications. In fact the only thing that makes sense is to give them direct access to your money so they can simply debit what they need. Oh in case your continuous version maintenance causes you to have to buy another PC, then you can either re-licence everything again for an additional fee, or you can simply lease a PC from MS directly.
This is the same idea as the network pc that downloads its software from the net - interesting that M$ implements what they laugh about when an opponent utters it.
I'm still trying to figure out what people mean by 'social skills' here.
how many people actually paid for office? i am sure many did, but at least 10 times as many didn't. hence, this will be cracked just like every other microsoft product out there. currently, the only microsoft product i purchased was windows 95 back in the day because i wasn't given a choice when buying my pc. am i alone here?
Also, does this benfit anybody? I don't know anyone (that uses WORD) uses it for a month then stops. If there was such a person they might be paying less for it.
--
Now instead of giving the lame excuse "my dog ate it....", you can say, "my copy of office expired while I was writing it."
That's progress.
"Any connection between your reality and mine is purely coincidental." -Slashdot
http://a1556.g.akamai.net/7/1556/2064/OpenOffice60 9/anoncvs.openoffice.org/download/OpenOf fice609/oo_609_src.tar.gz
There you go.
What's *your* problem?
--
Peter
so if i understood what you wrote you think that replacing micro$ by $UN will change our life?
yes it will cost more money...
I understand people who are defending the right of using the software as they want to : every things, well almost every things, you can buy is supposed to be like this,
but i can't understand people that are defending UNIX vs NT or stuf like that : bilou's products cost, with intel as their friends, far less money than sun's products and are better for bureautic.
and ask yourself this to :
okay a computer with NT on is back can fear the reboot syndrome, but what do you think about a freh little secretary trying to configure the palm pilot of her boss with a schedulling program on a ES10000 ?
a lot of people don't even want to try to learn how is working its computer. That's it secretary are not hackers...
so give her a beautiful kde environnement but please don't even talk about solaris :)
ptitom
One of the major things MS has managed to do is to make flexible licensing programs for all kinds of businesses. We have the Select program at our company, which lets us use any MS software under the agreement for two years, while paying only for the licenses we actually use.
IT managers hats surprises, especially when their software company tells them "Oh, well, we did a license audit, and you owe us $xxxM extra for those 50,000 copies of Office." I hear the mangement gripe about this all the time. What MS basically did is automatically meter the software to avoid the surprises. (Not that it's good, see below!) Managers will eat this up, because then all they need to do is register Office in SMS 2000 (probably) and have it count licenses. Then, it keeps track of how many copies you use, and the IT management send one AmEx Corporate Platinum Card transmission over the Internet to upgrade the licenses for another year.
Now, of course this is bad. It means that Joe User (me) can't borrow copies of Office anymore. :) Seriously, it's just an easy way for MS to collect back more of its lost license fees. I use Office mainly as a convenience...no one wants to convert WordPerfect or StarOffice files, and I think that MS does have a lock on the Windows productivity apps market. I won't be using Office much longer if I have to pay $xxx per year for it. I'll just be one of the Luddites who's still using Word 2000 two versions later. :)
What really annoys me about this subscription thing is the fact that we are forced to continually adapt to new versions of software. Bad enough that I'd need permission to use the program, now I also have to install patch after patch to calm those transition woes. And I can't wait to see people who screw up and need my help. A lot of fun.
... they don't expire - yet.
What also annoys me about Office10 is what already bothers me about CDs. When you buy the stuff, it always looks overpriced and it never gives you any real rights. It's like buying air. I mean you have something that you can use, but it doesn't feel like it's really yours (the small print on CDs is quite telling, not counting the fact the the RIAA thinks making MP3s is immoral).
I also wonder about the future. Since these versions will have a specific "time to live", people wanting to renew their subscriptions will be desperate and might cave in to "questionning" by Microsoft. This would give the software giant a tool to peek into our private lives. And who knows, we might see a day where Microsoft could use this information in order to discriminate and refuse the service to people deemed "unfit to use the software" because they installed SunOffice or didn't vote for the right candidate.
Obi Wan Celeri
Wow hey, now I feel better about CDs
Ever wonder why DIVX failed as a sustainable video format? Not because it didn't make sense to the marketing geniuses who dreamed it up, and not because it probably would have saved the average user some money in the long-run, but rather because they underestimated two aspects of human nature:
1. We like having that intangible feeling of personal ownership -- you know, that human desire that just happens to drive Capitalism?
2. We hate being continuously reminded that our money is slowly being taken away from us. We want to use our belongings whenever we want, without having to even think about monetary considerations.
If you take away the right to ownership over goods that people are accustomed to owning outright (especially in the face of strong competitive alternatives), you will quickly drive away potential customers.
It's an interesting experiment, but I don't think Microsoft is going to be able to pull it off in the long-run (at least not for office software).
--Gordo
Also, if you try and compare it to a subscription-based magazine, you might also forget the fact that each magazine has new content for you to graze upon. So where does that put Office 10? Well, I'm sure we could easily afford the sale price for something even as bloated as $69.95 compared to leasing it for $20 annually with a $29.95 down payment. (BTW, these prices are only my prediction.)
Now the way this could actually be helpful is if the prices were really so low that it would be cheaper to buy the subscription version for a two-year lease and then buy the next version. I'm not advocating that we do so. Heck, that's why StarOffice was invented.
(Now for the punch in the gut)
Has anyone seen where this is leading up to if we have time-based subscriptions? With all that .NET stuff being flinged around, we will no longer have control of our our software. Our computers would only be kiosks to use programs for micropayments; it's just as mad as if you went use the computers at Kinko's just for Word. Think of it this way:
MS Office Subscription Offer
Buy a Two-Year Subscription to
MS Office 12 Online for $49.95
and receive a 100-word credit!*
*Credit only good with the purchase of the ability to type up to 500 words for the regular price of $24.95. Good for the first 30 days or until a new version, bug fix, or jury verdict is release, whichever occurs first.
I'm not trying to excessively beat down on Microsoft but just pointing our that we should remember to never expect Microsoft to play fair. A recent example is that Media Player 7 is not available for Win95, only Win98 and above. And you think they wouldn't be bias to their own programs, but hey, they're Microsoft...
At TVA where I work the standard desktop OS is still Win95, and the office suite is Office 95. They're currently "evaluating" Win98 and Office 97, but they're not yet available. The main reason is cost: the argument is that the software isn't broken, it does everything it's supposed to, so why upgrade? The logic breaks down mainly with Office, when TVA has to exchange documents with The Rest Of The World, where users are quite likely to be using a more current (and thus incompatible) version.
From various corners all kinds of rumours are emanating that The Government is evaluating Linux as a desktop OS, in conjunction with some of the free office suites. In the light of maniacal cost cutting, this almost seems credible. It would certainly fit the spirit of how things work at TVA, with the exception of development tools, where everybody is still worshipping at the shrine of Microsoft and Visual Basic. But that's another story...
Comment removed based on user account deletion
And people wonder why others download warez, theres a good reason right here.
When I worked at a school (up until 1998) we were still using 386 PCs, Windows 3.11 and MS Word 2 in some parts of the school because the headmaster was unwilling to dispose of machines which were still capable of doing something. Those Word 2 licences were, believe it or not, a major investment for the school, and they were determined to keep using that asset year after year.
Unless these subscriptions are cheap, having software expire after a year will be crippling for underfunded state schools who are used to struggling to wring the last little piece of value from an investment.
OTOH, having two versions of Word around on the network (95 and 2) with their conflicting keyboard shortcuts and interfaces, must have been problematic for pupils, and one could argue that it's a good thing to prevent organisations from having obsolete software in service. I'd have to say I think that choice should be the school's and not the vendor's, however.
--
So, if I install in on my wife's laptop and my desktop, so I subscribe twice? I don't subscribe twice to cable, or the newspaper.
:-)
But, since you are the sole person actually honouring your current MS user-serf licence, you have paid for two licences for Office for her right now - haven't you?