Microsoft "Albany" Offers Office and Security as Subscription

News.com is reporting that Microsoft has confirmed a subscription service is in the works for the next consumer version of their Office Suite. "Code-named Albany, the product has a single installer that puts Office Home and Student, OneCare, as well as a host of Windows Live services, onto a user's PC. As long as users keep paying for the subscription, they are entitled to the latest versions of the products. Once they stop paying, they lose the right to use any version."

Comments

Re:Something of a catch...

[thewils]

Don't worry, it'll be cracked in the first day or so.

It Would be Microsoft Doing This

[imamac]

This is Microsoft's way of demonstrating once and for all that you don't "own" the software you purchase. I hope this doesn't catch on and become the primary distribution model. If we don't own the software we purchase then the manufacturer does not have to guarantee any proper functionality.

Re:It Would be Microsoft Doing This

[spisska]

But in the large business market this may well succeed. Businesses are accustomed to budgeting and depreciation and all sorts of accounting practices that people don't have to do at home.

Businesses assume that it costs X dollars a month for a computer, and as long as the subscription costs fits in nicely with whatever cycle they buy upgrades on, they won't mind the rent/buy dichotomy.

Maybe. It's certainly true that business operate on a much different and much more complex accounting and budgeting framework than households, and maybe monthly/yearly payments for software better fit into the whole budgeting/life-cycle/depreciation system. But I rather suspect not.

Businesses are much more concerned with reliability than with novelty. Businesses are also very concerned about having control over where, when, and on what their money is spent. A CIO may buy something like MS Office figuring on a three-year lifecycle, but then realize that there's nothing to be gained by upgrading. Thus running the software longer than the three-year term originally planned represents a savings, and money in the budget for other things.

If this were not the case, most businesses would be running MS Vista and MS Office 2007. In fact very few are, and a significant number of businesses still have a significant number of MS Windows 2000 machines running.

The fact is that a word processor/spreadsheet package is much more like a typewriter than like a telephone line. It's a product that you buy and create documents with, not a service that needs the constant attention and maintenance like a phone network with a huge company behind it. And no business would welcome the possibility of being held hostage by one of their vendors. It's becoming increasingly clear that while applications may be proprietary, there is no reason for data formats to be. It's worth paying for a product for the features it delivers, but not worth the liability if what you create is worthless outside of the application.

I tend to think instead that this move by MS is fairly insignificant play in what is becoming a very significant battle that will determine the future of the company. They're being forced to shift the whole direction of the firm into an area where they have never had any success, and in which there are already very formidable players.

This isn't about software subscriptions, it's about hosted services. MS has seen the future and doesn't like what it sees -- systems, applications, databases, communications, etc all living on the network and available anywhere there is a connection (and in many cases where there is not), regardless of platform.

I work in a middling consultancy that is almost exclusively an MS shop, and I've already seen folks at my firm excited about the Salesforce/Google Apps pairing. We recently migrated our CRM system to Salesforce and the consultants we have on the road are very interested in the ability to review and edit contracts and proposals on the fly, from their Blackberries. They also really like the idea of how chat/mail/calendars can be integrated into particular account records without the clumsiness endemic to Outlook.

We've only just begun looking into an official use of the Google Apps, but there is much interest. I certainly think we'll be moving in this direction well before we start planning a Vista rollout, or even an Office 2007 rollout. And I don't believe that we are in a unique position.

MS is terrified of this because their entire existence depends upon the platform -- primarily Windows but also MS Office and the supporting systems that businesses require, like Exchange and MS SQL. Salesforce plus Google Apps chips away at the need for an MS platform, and certainly is a direct attack on the whole one-user/one-system model that MS has always used. I can get to my Saleforce account, company mail, company calendar, company documents, etc. from anywhere, on anyone's system.

Basically, if

Not Unreasonable

[cheesethegreat]

Actually, let's just think about this for a second.

You currently pay $300 for the standard Microsoft Office 2007.

If all they're doing is spreading out the payment over 3-4 years, with a small premium thrown in, that's not such a bad deal. I'd happily pay a $25-50 premium on software like Office in order to receive constant updates. So if what they want is $115 annually instead of 300 at once, that's fine by me. These products don't usually have more than a 3-4 year life-cycle anyway, and this way instead of being stuck with a single version, you get something which improves over time.

Obviously, the question of how they implement it, what they charge, and how good the "free upgrades" really are will determine uptake of this product. But if you take off your microsoft-bashing hat for a second, this isn't as stupid as it looks.

Re:Not Unreasonable

[pembo13]

You currently pay $300 for the standard Microsoft Office 2007.

No I don't. Maybe if it has something that I need I would, but it doesn't so I don't.

Re:Not Unreasonable

[corsec67]

What about when your files become incompatible with the latest version?

If you have your file spread across 3 versions of office with minor to serious incompatabilities, how do you use your old files?

Re:Not Unreasonable

[Ivecowarrior]

If all they're doing is spreading out the payment over 3-4 years, with a small premium thrown in, that's not such a bad deal. Except that with the traditional model, you can continue to use your old and outdated software for ever at no further cost.
With this model, if you stop paying, you lose all the benefit of 4 years' payments.

Re:Not Unreasonable

[gunnk]

Agreed. OpenOffice does everything I need and no one even knows I'm not doing my work with MS Office. My docs look great and my spreadsheets do everything I need. I don't do many presentations ala PowerPoint, but I could do it with OpenOffice if I needed to.

I actually understand why people stick with Windows more than I do Office. To most people Windows appears to come "free" with their computer. Office is always extra. OpenOffice is free, powerful and just as easy to use. Why pay for something when you can get the same feel and functionality for free?

Tired of Subscriptions

[Thyamine]

I can't think I'm the only one getting tired of the subscription model for everything. I remember thinking at one point that I'm going to need to start figuring out what I can afford to have and not, simply because everything seems to be moving in that direction.

Cable, phone, utilities all seems standard to us at this point, but now we have music subscriptions (stop paying, lose your music), radio subscriptions (love that satellite radio), game subscriptions (WoW addicts unite), and now more and more software subscriptions (I'm sorry, licensing).

I can perhaps forgive it for something like antivirus software where you are constantly downloading updates (glad my Mac doesn't need that yet), but Office? When do they slip Windows into that model? Would you like to boot today? Your subscription has expired, please enter a valid credit card.

Re:Also illegal, at least in Canada

[pembo13]

Well you (people who paid for Office) gave the cash which helped to fund OOXML and the possible destruction of ISO

Re:Something of a catch...

[CowboyNealOption]

I must admit I appreciate Microsoft making it even easier for me to sell the higher-ups on the advantages of using OpenOffice.

so in other words

[ILuvRamen]

I don't even have to read the details to bet that you need an internet connection open every single time you open Office so it can contact the licensing server. If the time limit was kept locally, that'd be too hackable. So what about laptops? I guess you can't open your word documents if there's no wifi in your hotel. That'll go over great. Btw this whole process is about 10x more hackable than what they use now.

Re:Something of a catch...

[peragrin]

You save all your files in what ever form and end your subscription. Now you can't open your files and you don't have an office suite.

renting software always fails. It has no purpose and MSFT is going to charge some obscene amount so that a year of renting you can buy a full version.

Personally for me it doesn't matter. My documents are in ODF, and I can use any numerous applications to open the data, from Open Office, to abi word, to google docs. I can get 100% portable versions of those to stick on a thumb drive, and OS agnostic.

It doesn't matter where I am I can get MY data. Can you do the same with MSFT rentals?

God, what have we done to deserve this?

[alexborges]

You have to like getting fucked by a monopoly to BUY any kind of microsoft product.

You have to be incredebly stupid, and still a total masochist, to even think about RENTING it.

Jeesus, please save us from all this ignorance.

Re:Also illegal, at least in Canada

[Chris Mattern]

How does this work for other subscription services like World of Warcraft? Technically, your character, etc, is your data, though by the EULA Blizzard claims that all data is theirs, so perhaps that's how they get around it,

Correct, that is how they get around it.

and Microsoft could just do the same.

Um, no. Technically, Microsoft could try this gambit; I'm not sure whether, legally, it would work or not. But practically, it'd be a death sentence on Office. Rights to Eleroth the Night Elf is one thing. Rights to your personal correspondence, to the data that your business needs to run, to your personal data, that's another. If Microsoft announced that they owned all the data created by subscription Office, nobody would buy it. Ever.

Re:by cutting prices!

[johannesg]

You got it all wrong. You do it by charging a HIGHER price for a comparable Linux / OpenOffice based package.

Pricing it higher will create the impression that this is a more worthwhile package (and vice versa: a lower-priced package will be less worthwhile). And it creates income that can be used to further build up the open source industry.