Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft: The Next Investigations

Runt-Abu writes: "Some of the UK's top companies (and some of the not-so-top as well but hey...) are questioning Microsoft's policy on pricing. In an open letter to the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry several of the top companies voiced concern at the cost of an extra £880m over a typical four-year investment cycle. No one from Microsoft has commented at this time, given the current state of affairs it's highly likely many companies will not upgrade or seek alternative cheaper solutions." Basically, a large trade group is asking the British Office of Fair Trading (akin to the FTC in the U.S.) to investigate Microsoft's price increases. And Gogl writes: "It appears the attorneys general of 6 more states have voiced concern over Microsoft, particularly regarding the upcoming release of Windows XP. Microsoft and their allies claim that AOL-Time Warner was behind this, which AOL of course denies," pointing also to this piece on Microsoft's changing licensing costs.

2 of 299 comments (clear)

  1. The prices really do keep going up. by Amphigory · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I've been running Windows XP RC2, and must admit I kind of like it. Since my needs these days (as a working pastor-in-training) run more towards word processing than development and web servers, it does what I need pretty well. However, I looked today at the license costs for it and I'm choking a bit. A single-user home *upgrade* is $99. Home full version is $199, and professional full is $299. None of these are designed for server use, but for individual users.

    More interestingly, they appear to be actually planning to enforce licensing through an enforced registration (i.e. if you don't register in 14 days, it won't work.) I've often said that few people would put up with Windows if they had to pay for it. The truth of the matter is that many people do not bother with legal licenses for their home software, so don't get too excited when told the product sucks. I wonder if the high costs and no-pirating-allowed will cost Microsoft the market?

    --
    -- Slashdot sucks.
  2. The Problem by zpengo · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Part of the problem in all of this is that changing to a "subscription" service is a brilliant financial decision, and Microsoft isn't going to give up their tactics without a fight.

    People have been complaining about Microsoft for the past fifteen years or so. Unfortunately, Microsoft products have been of a reasonably good quality, and people like them, so pirating their software has gone on for just about that long as well.

    Piracy means that not only the original owner gets to use it, but also a few of his friends. Microsoft may think that's a bad thing, but all it has done is secure their place as *the* operating system, the office suite, the web server, etc., because so many people use it, even if they're not all paying customers. MS would not have its current market share if it were not for piracy.

    With these new tactics to extract money from citizens, the only thing they're going to accomplish is that Microsoft will no longer be in the hands of Joe Sixpack, who will then contemplate Linux, BSD, AtheOS, BeOS, or other operating systems that cost less than a few limbs.

    In addition, the percentage of the workforce with Microsoft experience will decline; It's easy enough to learn ASP or whatever when you can install it at home, but not so easy when you can't touch it.

    They're shooting themselves in the foot, and that's probably a good thing.

    --


    Got Rhinos?