Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Postpones Office XP Subscriptions
shroom writes: "Microsoft has dropped the Office XP subscription plan, at least for the near future. Wonder if this means they were getting too much heat from IT managers, or if they have something else up their sleeve."
According to the Build fact, it does not run on 95/98, just NT, which would in no way make it a competitor to MS Office.
1) New file formats to create incompatibility.
Office 2000 uses the same file format as Office 97. So where's your 'new file format' there?
Simon
Coming soon - pyrogyra
Sure, there are a lot of "cool" features in XP but they will never be used by any of the staff in the course of their work so "thanks, but no thanks".
This is independent of any subscription model or anything. The details are so vague about when subscriptions die that unless we are absolutely confident that we will not be stung by this we are not going to even think about it. I'll give you an example: suppose we have an employee in Nigeria and his laptop dies - what we are planning to do is to have the ability to restore his laptop from backup onto a new machine and Fedex it out to him. Will this work in XP? Well, it might, or it might not - suppose we have to send a more modern machine out: will the different hardware disable XP?. Are we going to risk this? No way. This is before we even think about the problems that we have with imaging machines.
No doubt Microsoft will try to force the upgrade path at some point, but I think (hope) that they will be in for a surprise when they do. Under the current situation we buy the basic "OS+Office" package for all employees (plus a few to make sure we don't stray), and a number of licences for such things as Visio and Project. So we know we're covered, and they know we're covered. Everyone's happy, although we're slightly poorer (think of it as audit insurance).
Fast forward a few years to the happy world of subscription based software. Despite paying for the licence and all the rest, there is now this extra hoop to jump. And you cannot tell me that we will be able to jump through this hoop with 100% success rate from anywhere in the world (and the only continent that our employees don't work in is Antarctica). So the onus has shifted - before the sitation was that we could use the software, but microsoft reserved the right to sue use if we broke the agreement. In the future the situation is that MS has to approve the use of the software before it is used. Just wait until the first day the the CEO of a big company finds that he cannot use his new PC because MS is being DDoSed again. Apart from really pissing him off, and him telling all his friends (i.e. other CEOs), he will (hopefully) start to wonder exactly why it is that his company has paid big money for something that, sometimes, doesn't work at all.
Just think back to the Repo man story - imagine XP was a car that, if you moved house, got towed away by the manufacturers, and you had to phone them up to get them to return it. Would this be acceptable? Of course not.
I can see that you were trying to be funny, but as an open source programmer I remind you that you do not own the software I am so gracious to permit you to run or copy. That is why we put licenses on them. We specifically are saying that we retain ownership to them and that you must agree to the license before you use it. This is pretty obvious with the GPL but it is also true with the BSD license (specifically you agree that you wont sue me if you want to use the software). Even if I put my code in the public domain, and you choose to run it, you do not own it. The only way you can "own" the software you run is by writing it yourself or purchasing the copyright.
How we know is more important than what we know.
No. In fact, the worse MS looks, the more people are likely to look at Open Source before it's ready. And you know what happens then? People either laugh or scream, and run right back to Microsoft vowing never to touch that free shit again.
Star Office and all the other alternatives MUST become better than the MS product, and not just a little bit - obviously better. The cost doesn't really factor into the decision at the corporate level. If and when people flirt with change the change must be compelling, or else that brief look does more damage than good.
"Software is owned by people. We shall not stifle creativity, talent, and the wants of users for the sake of profit
If this were the case the whole world of computing would be entirely free. No Cisco, you cannot charge for your IOS, etc., etc., etc.
This is not a free world, and although I'm not a Microsoft devotee of any sorts, they are smart enough to pull it off. People bought into the Windows lifestyle because it was simple for them, not everyone can jump in a term and code their needs or wants, so they turn to Open Source to find the neccessities to make their lives simple.
However, lets take a look at the BSD's, and Linux', and other alternative OS', they don't appeal to the average Joe/Josie because they may be too difficult as opposed to just point-and-click, drag-and-drop. Sure it may be easy for someone to learn after some tinkering, but if your a Fortune 500 company your not going to drop your productivity because you have to train secretaries to gcc -o program program.c
Why because its simply not worth it. Sure you can change your network servers, etc., etc., but on the Office level its not feasible. Star Office tries but lacks for the standard "secretary" and not only that but what happens when you need to exchange legacy documents with other companies, clients, etc. then what? Even if you did switch your whole company around doesn't mean others will.
So yes Open Source may be better by very distinctive/somewhat biased at times/benchmarked ways, its still highly disputable from both sides to get a fair take on why you should either continue to use Windows or switch to Open Source.
In the end think about this saying: "When you drink all your water and look at your cup, you say its empty, I say its full of air"
Want Root?
Maybe the reason for the move is, MS could be waiting for the fed (Greenspan) to announce yet another raise or cut in interest rates (which is due for for May the last was to boost the economy sort of a freebie) which could also determine whether companies would jump up and buy buy buy, or wait wait wait. Analysts predict a stronger growth in the third quarter since most people are vactioning and sell off stocks in the summer, etc, etc. (no bs I dig the stock market)
Or perhaps some security flaws (which are high in MS) prompted developers to assess those in order to make it more attractive as opposed to the launch of Windows2000 where speculation was the product had over 60k bugs. By releasing YACP (yet another crappy product) MS could lose huge revenues all over the place, which is crucial especially when alternative OS' have been making their marks. Also remember their so called "Anti Piracy" feature was cracked recently.
Which reminds me... I remember when I was working on Theories in DoS, I made this program called Bubonic which was messing up Windows2000 and NT machines. I repeatedly tried to benchmark what was going on when I made the program and submitted it to Bugtraq since it messed up Windows' rpc crap entirely. Well after the advosry MS released a patch for rpc stuff saying they discovered an undiscovered flaw that affected rpc yadda yadda.
Hardcore Crypto
Want Root?
... Regardless of whether it is subscription based or not. Here is why:
When you have to support dozens or hundreds of PCs, you have to find ways to make your job as easy as possible. That means have ghost images of preconfigured systems, the use of a single product key, or other images so you can rebuild systems quickly and easily. By generating a fingerprint for each build, you eliminate the ability to do automated rollouts using images, or a single product key for an entire office. The fact that you own adequete licenses is irrelevent.
Watch the support costs grow when XP is rolled out in a corporate environment.
Feed the need: Digitaladdiction.net
Sure, we know it's easy. But MS makes the new file format incompatible and they make it default. Your average office drone who is busy sending stupid elf-bowling .EXEs to you is not going to take the time to learn how save documents in a compatible format.
The only thing that will happen is this: Bob sends Ned Word-2005 files, but Ned can't open them. What should happen: Ned sends mail to Bob telling him not to be a dimwit and save his documents in the older format. What always happens: Ned calls IT and says "I NEED WORD 2005!". IT gets thousands of these calls, they buy Word 2005. Ooops, Word 2005 will only run on Windows 2005! Quick, buy Windows 2005 too!
This is the game that MS plays.
Truthfully, there have been no new features since Word 6.0 that are worth breaking compatability for. Save 'em all in 6.0 format.
I can explanate how to administrate your network. You must configurate and segmentate it, so it can computate.
There is an article in the Toronto Star Newspaper that points out how users disatified with MS Office may be driven to switch to an alternative and this is an opportunity for Corel. The new WordPerfect Office 10 (WPO X) has lots of new features and still runs on windows 95. ZDNet in a rare unbiased move actually just gave it a good review.
It is shipping now and seems to be selling well at Amazon where it it is currently #38 in sales with a 5 star buyer's rating.
Now everyone are not going to switch over night but Microsoft cancelling the subscriptions may be an indication that it is worried about messing this release up.
Today's vices may be tomorrow's virtues.
I was kinda hoping this year and next year would would be when the horns locked between free software (as in GPL/BSD licensed) and subscription-based (as in Microsoft's). I felt strongly this would be the epic battle...and the turning point. It kinda irks me to see it delayed.
Why is now a better time than later? For one the economy is slowing down and that means the peanut counters are watching what is spent. Also, all the new Microsoft software doesn't have major advancements (ie. major imitation of other innovative software). That, combined with subscription based software spells disastor, IMHO. Being an IT Manager I see no reason to upgrade my 100 machines running w2k and office2k just to pay XX money XX times a year. Without subscription based software a lot of managers will probably fall into the same upgrade routine down every two years thus far (wait for complaints someone emailed a Word doc they can't read with their slightly older yet basically just as functional copy of Word).
With Samba's new features like adding printers and remote management as well as ACL lists coming into maturity the outlook (no pun intended) looks bad for MS on all fronts. I want the 2 bulls locking horns this year. I know a bunch of you say they are already locking, but I disagree. It has been mostly a stare down until the upgrade cycle comes around this time.
Lets remember, IT Managers only have so much ability for change. No CIO/COO/CFO is going to go for non MS stuff unless it seriously hits them in the pocket book...and on a monthly basis. Status quo is good enough until then.
Anyway, lets all hope MS changes their mind back because the time is right with the slowing economy, the maturity of free software and lack of real "new stuff" in the next versions of MS software, for free software to win the war.
I find it curious that only now is Boeing upgrading to Office 2000, and we're just finishing upgrading all our desktops from Win95 to NT4. Not only isn't XP (Windows or Office) in the pipeline, it isn't even on the horizon.
If a company that's as cozy with MICROS~1 as Boeing is isn't sending them huge globs of cash for the latest and greatest Windows and Office, imagine what LockMart or Exxon or the other Fortune 50 companies are doing.
I don't think MSFT's corporate bread and butter customers ever bought into their 2-year cycle of discard and replace. Even IT managers whose driveways mysteriously gained new Porsches have a hard time convincing their CEOs that it's time to negotiate a new contract with MSFT when they just finished nailing down the old one.
And if they feel like they got a good deal (CEO's who've negotiated hard always think they got a good deal), why not ride it out as long as they can?
So the short answer as to why Microsoft is pulling back on their plans for XP is a problem I've been waiting to come home to roost there for some time: not just revenue, but cash flow. You can ride on the back of a tiger only so long before he turns around and notices you. All this scurrying around MSFT is doing with .NET and software rental is because they're beginning to realize that their ride is over.
I'm bored. Slightly drunk. At home, on a saturday night. Alone. No, I'm not bitter. No. This is not part of the story. Enjoy.
Dark room: Scrawny man with a Microsoft T-shirt sits by a roaring fire, holding a white cat. His name-tag - emblazoned in gold, reads "Bill". Several disemboweled penguins hang from the wall, dripping entrails and blood.
A old bald man enters.
"Mr. Gates, you wished to see me?"
"My CEO, ah, yes. Come in Mr. Ballmer" The scrawny man responds. Stroking the white cat, he continues.
" The United States Department of Justice has damaged our financial situation. I am no longer the richest man in the world. What should we do? We can not allow such treachery to go without punishment!"
"Sir, we could use this opportunity to unveil our secret weapon!"
"You're not talking about . .
" Yes, I am"
The room goes deathly quiet, even the squealing penguins in the cages fall silent.
"Very well then - Send in . .
Dramatic pause, lightning flashes, thunder, well, thunders.
" The ACCOUNTANT!"
More thunder, we catch a glimpse of a worker with an arc welder, picking up a large thin piece of metal off the floor.
A scrawnier person enters. He looks very ferrety, almost identical looking to Mr. Gates. He wears an armband of a flying window. In other circumstances, he would be called "mini me". This however, is not Austin Powers, nor even a multi-million dollar movie. It is a slashdot post.
" Greetings from the boiler room Chief Software Architect, Sir." He goosesteps in, legs seemingly without joints.
Penguins squeal in terror, off to the side, we see a small daemon, begin to cry. The white cat darts off to the corner.
Varick salutes - "Heil Microsoft!"
Gates nods approvingly, "So Mr. Varick, what have you come up with this time?"
"Sir," Varick plugs a laptop into a projector - "World Domination" is projected on the wall.
In a high pitched voice, he continues, " By not hiring millions of recently un-employed tech workers to answer phones and "authorize" versions of XP, Microsoft can, single-handedly, doom the United States Of America to a several long years of recession."
Balmer nods, " Ultimately their weak government will fall to hordes of angry citizens - and the politicians will die slow, painful, brutal deaths! Utter chaos will result! Cities without leaders!"
The slide shows a burning city, with politicians hanging from lamp posts.
Varick switches slides and squeals "And we shall be the beacon of hope and stability! We will swoop in and save the people from their own madness!"
Maniacal laughter rebounds in the room.
Gates stands up, lifts up both arms and bellows "One World, one Web, one Program!" The screaming of the penguins crescendo's, as Gates' cat tears into them, seemingly insane - feathers fly through the air and blood splatters all over Varick - "Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Betriebssystem" - he screams (One people, one realm, One operating system according to the fish), the daemon falls next - torn in half.
" We shall rule the world!" Ballmer yells " We shall be Gods!"
Several minutes later, the frenzy stops, leaving only the fire, pools of blood, the three men and a bloody cat.
"Fuck with Microsoft will they?" Gates asks in a hushed voice. "Fuck with Microsoft?"
I have a shotgun, a shovel and 30 acres behind the barn.
1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcf
\HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\MSLicensing
(The original Tech Report article is here, and has some more interesting tech data.)
Bottom line, they are going to try to get you any way they can.
Check out the Vinny the Vampire comic strip
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
The subscription model lowers the cost of entry, which would in theory increase the number of customers. Office, however, has virtually no competition, so it likely would make them less money, especially in the short term. Microsoft realized that 90% of companies will buy Office and also pay to upgrade it every couple versions, regardless of the cost (within reason).
This kind of stuff is why I hate Microsoft, but I can't deny they have some good business minds there.
That's my theory, but what do I know?
The Microsoft spokeswoman emphasized that the company remains "committed to the subscription model and definitely plan(s) to continue with plans to deliver subscription offerings worldwide. She described Microsoft's new strategy as a "more metered approach," with the company "rolling out subscription offerings on a country-by-country basis."
So basically, "We will try this out in more oppressed countries first that have people in them that are used to being screwed over."
-
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
My company is a Microsoft shop (other than my machines) and so, to my dismay, we use Office. I'm really curious to see if we will upgrade to Office XP, and if so, why we would upgrade. What could they possibly add to Office that would warrant paying the upgrade cost? I know our company RARELY uses any of the bells and whistles later versions have provided. I don't see anything in the feature list that would benefit anyone I know to upgrade. Between the cost of the software, deployment time, orientation, and inevitable bugfixes, where is the gain? Don't you benefit more from productivity software by sticking with what's familiar and is already working fine? What exactly is the purpose of this corporate trend to want to run the very latest bleeding-edge productivity app?
...I like the department this time. =P How's that joke go? "Boil the frog slowly or it'll jump out of the pot"? =)
As for Office XP subscriptions, I don't think we've seen the last of this. I just think MS realized they would have too hard a sell with that. I think they'd much rather sell Office XP and put it on all Windows desktops, and THEN go over to subscriptions if people want to keep accessing their documents. Gotcha.
-Kasreyn
Kasreyn: Cheerfully playing the part of Devil's Advocate to hairtrigger
I'd say that they probably had some contract problems with Clippy the office assistant. There's probably some term in there that requires him to be in any subscription based software.
Maybe this is an attempt to save face after looking like a moron with that Mundie speech.
Here we are saying "This software is yours, do whatever you want with it," as it was in the beginning.
Then Microsoft came along and implemented a version of BASIC and said, pay me for this, and you can use it.
Then it said, pay me, and you can use this version, and no other version, and nobody else can use this version -- he's gotta pay too.
And finally evolved into, "This software is not yours. It's ours. But if you pay us, we'll let you use it--but only in ways officially sanctioned by us. After all, it's our software. And we won't tell you how you're allowed to use it until you've already agreed to the terms."
At this point, we gain popularity, stemming from the days in the beginning when all was pure and good: "Software is owned by people. We shall not stifle creativity, talent, and the wants of users for the sake of profit. Brothers and sisters hear me, this software belongs to you. Do with it as you please."
But these calls were stifled by Microsoft, "All your software are belong to us," they called. But, people got tired of giving money to Microsoft whenever Microsft said so. Microsoft can only make money when people buy more software... if people don't upgrade, Microsoft loses. Microsoft's biggest competitor is itself.
"Lo", they said, "your software belongs to us. No longer shall you be constrained to ancient practices of 'purchasing,' you will now rent your software from us. You shall pay us money, and we shall let you use our software for a month."
The free-software prophets said, "You own your own software. Do not succumb to the demands of the false gods of Redmond." And they were right. And the people agreed.
Microsoft realized they were in trouble. "We shall persuade the people that it makes no sense to let people have `property' on their hard drive." The RIAA and MPAA agreed. Microsoft told the people, "Behold, do not believe the lies told to you by the Free Software Foundation. They go against the ideals of our society. They are un-American"
And DMCA had been passed for the government was duped.
But the people were wise; they should own their files. They scorned and laughed at Microsoft.
Microsoft was angered. "We shall try to trick them into thinking that they do own their sofware. For we have a 'Shared-source' policy." They were full of crap.
Microsoft was again scorned at. "Perhaps," they said, "it will look like they owned their software if we didn't explicitly say that we were only letting them rent it." And it was so.
And michael said, "Microsoft has dropped the Office XP subscription plan , at least for the near future. Wonder if this means they were getting too much heat from IT managers, or if they have something else up their sleeve."