Slashdot Mirror
MS Tweaks Ill-Received Licensing Plan
ahooton writes "C|Net is
reporting that
Microsoft has updated it's
Software Assurance licensing program. The company has admitted that it's initial approach angered a large number of customers. No huge difference in pricing or terms -- changes are comprised of bundling some training and support. The one interesting concession is that corporate licensees of Microsoft Office can now use that suite on a home computer as well." What a concession. (Paddo points to this similar article on Australian IT via News.com.au.)
You can put a dress on a pig, but it is still a pig.
"There is nothing to do it. But to do it." -Floyd Pepper
Between this, and all of the charity software donations that they're making, they're basically changing thier public perception, while maintaining their draconian licensing terms.
I have to give them kudos, even if only for the sake of sheer diabolicalness!
Software pirates are the main reason these draconian licensing agreements have come into existence. There used to be a time when it was possible to buy a piece of software and be assured that you could move it from machine to machine so long as you only installed it on one machine at a time. Not so now because disreputable companies have taken to installing a single copy of software on all their machines.
What is worse is that there is a large group of people dedicated to making excuses for and promoting these software pirates.
I'm not saying that I like draconian licensing agreements, but it's easy to understand where the impetus to create them comes from when the goodwill of the software publisher is exploited time and again.
I have been pwned because my
There really isn't any beneficial changes here. People's gripes were largely with prices and restrictive measures that were associated with the new scheme, not what kind of "assurances" they were recieving ("assurances" that they thought they were already getting for free with older Microsoft products and that they usually get for free with other venodrs' software products: real support, limited training, and manufacturer accountability).
I still don't understand why Microsoft calls their scheme "Software Assurance". This implies that by being forced into expensive licensing schemes you are entitled to an extra degree of software security and performance.
Security and performance should be qualities that sell your product initially, something to be proud of as a manufacturer, not aspects of a product that you get only after paying annual fees.
Large companies end up paying tons in license fees for a plethora of different software products that fit individual needs. They could instead find a few open source products and pay the salaries of a few programmers to customize them to their needs, or outright integrate them. Lotus Notes for mail, Novell for meta, People Soft for CRM, Windows clients, etc. Instead, you could take one strong open source CRM, expand upon it, integrate web based mail (or even make a quick client), and integrate their features to work flawlessly, all running in an open source browser that is running on Linux terminals (which removes the need for de-centralized administration) - instead of forcing the admins to find ways around making all of these closed products work together in hack jobs, with expensive tools like Zen Works deployed just to install and configure software on expensive Windows workstations - or worse. Oh well - I'm being a square headed open source zealot again. I'll go lay down.
What's really ironic is that I'm using WIndows 98 right now, because I screwed my Linux kernel and don't feel like fixing it. My girl just bought me "Enter the Matrix" for the Game Cube man....been busy.....damn agents.
Allowing Office users to use the product at home with a corporate license will just help to keep people using office. People who want to work from home are either going to pirate office or install open office (a lot more people are learning that it works well enough for most uses.) This is a good way for them to keep their domanance in the productivity category.
Go away, or I will replace you with a very small shell script.
A Microsoft spokesman says they have informed their OEM partners that it has become illegal to ship computers designed for home use without Microsoft Office. The company says it is responding to a report that says 95% of computers shipped without Microsoft Office on them end up having a pirated copy installed on them within 90 days.
...their whole "Stop people from moving to OSS" strategy we have seen lately ?
If they weren't scrared of loosing their market I doubt they would change anything.
--- No 16-bit support in Vista? Half of our modules still use it! ---
IMO: Here we go, our daily dose of M$ on /. Remember folks, any publicity can be good publicity for the company being discussed. Whether you love M$ or hate them, consider how many times you look at the word "Microsoft" every day on the internet. It is in your mind, millions of minds. An article about M$ on one website that's negative, another that's positive. It doesn't matter anymore, the lines have been blurred in most people's minds.
Hey, listen. What's that?
Another coin drops in the M$ cup.
Render unto Gates.
Security and performance should be qualities that sell your product initially, something to be proud of as a manufacturer, not aspects of a product that you get only after paying annual fees.
Security is hardly a static entity. What's the more convincing sell, the idea that the product is already secure, period, or the idea that the product was as secure as possible when released and can be continually upgraded to maintain that level of security?
The coolest voice ever.
Microsoft has always only had good products (relatively speaking) when they've been in a competetive market. It took the 'threat' of Netscape for them to get their act together on the Browser scene. A lot of the quality of Windows 2000 can be attributed to them feeling the heat from competing x86 operating systems being forced to come out with something at least as good. Lord knows why things cooled off enough that the best they could do after W2K was XP, though....
People who want to work from home are either going to pirate office or install open office (a lot more people are learning that it works well enough for most uses.)
Actually, I'd wager they're just going to pirate Office, period. The ongoing corporate perception is that documents produced with non-Microsoft Office suites still stand a moderate-to-slight chance of not fully working with the officially sanctioned applications. When critical company information and timetables are involved, who but the most enthuastic advocates of alternative office suites, or the most technically adept workers who know exactly what's compatible, both of whom are very much in the minority with respect to the whole corporation, would ever consider using a non-standard office suite?
The coolest voice ever.
This thread is about licensing, not about pricing models or Microsoft stock.
Everything being equal, Microsoft could make the same amount of money and charge the same prices as they do now with a simple "book" license or an "all your base" license.
But all things are not equal because some people are not willing to pay the price of the software, or are only willing under threat of legal action. That's where the draconian licensing agreements come from.
How many people, who work from home on a regular basis, DON'T use a laptop with docking station set-up these days, and carry the ONE device back and forth ?
As a hardware support monkey that is the general setup where I work.
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
MS gives stuff away to schools = EVIL!!!
MS eases licensing plan and gives stuff away = EVIL!!!
CEO diversifies his stock portfolio = EVIL and End of MS!!!
MS loses a sale in Germany = End of MS!!!
MS releases earnings = They are too successful. EVIL!!!
Gates donates to India = EVIL!!
Jesus Christ!
I'd really like to know just what would be considered a positive for/from Microsoft around here. Really. What would it take for them to get an iota of respect beyond Gates saying that he runs Linux at home?
OK. I've been karma whoring again. But this post should take care of that. I can go to bed with a clean soul and neutral karma.
"If you want to improve, be content to be thought foolish and stupid." - Epictetus
This is like asking why Unix programmers always down-play the success of Linux on a Sun developer's forum, or asking why Puerto Ricans always want the US out of Vieques (spelling?).
Umm, No one said you "HAD" to release it. Just that IF you want to sell/give this out, you would have to release it under the GPL. You can keep it locked away in your basement if that warms your cookie.
Secure multi-mediation is the future of all webbing...
I'm in a particular industry, with competitors. Let's say I spend $150k developing something over a 6-12 month period (multiple developer pay and proj mgt, etc). I then 'release it' under GPL, my competitor picks it up, spends about $6k 'learning ' the code and integrating it with their business processes (again - it's my competitor) and they start to undercut my pricing. They've got the benefit of my software, my knowledge that's gone into my software, and have shelled out a small fraction of what I've had to to gain that knowledge and benefit.
Tell me again why this is a good business move?
This happens without the GPL (or OpenSource in general for that matter). The first to market always spends the most by at least one order of magnitude. It is not rare to spend several million dollars and two years on a new product and then have a new competitor pop up and reproduce the work for a few hundred thousand in three to six months.
The nice part about the GPL is that if the competitor takes any of your code, they have to release their additions under the same license.
moto411.com
> people who get their news from anywhere but Slashdot know what's up with .NET but
.NET is really supposed to be. The meaning of it has changed so much since it was first announced that I'm surprised anyone would know. But, of course, that's mostly because I don't care.
Well, I get news from all over the place and have no idea what