Ballmer: Don't Expect Simpler Licensing Soon

nk497 writes "Steve Ballmer has admitted Microsoft's licensing is too complicated and contains too much fine print, but has no plans to change it at the risk of angering shareholders — and even customers who benefit from the confusion. "I'm sure we have fine print we don't need. We're not saints," he said, adding that customers have a way of figuring out how to pay the least amount of cash possible to use Microsoft's software. "Customers always find an approach which pays us less money.""

Comments

This is a non-issue for Microsoft's Customers

[mpapet]

I'll give you a hint, their customers are not the admins who actually have to comprehend and create policy/procedure to abide by License terms. They have two primary customers.
1. The retail consumer who doesn't read EULA's and willfully violates them.
2. The purchasing manager/executive class.

Sysadmins aren't on that list.

Moreover, Mr. Ballmer is giving the implicit nod to violate the terms of the license agreements. Guess who loses on that deal? The sysadmin!

Re:Obligatory Open Source comment

[Nerdposeur]

I bought a Dell with Ubuntu back in April. It was cheaper than the equivalent Windows machine AND came with a bigger monitor.

Re:FUD

[conureman]

When I went to school, I told them I didn't want to do Windows, but wanted to learn Unix admin. They said it was "much to complicated for a novice" and I "had to learn Windows first to understand the basics". Translation: they didn't have a Unix curriculum.