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

Re:Ballmer: "We're not saints"

[CodingHero]

When was the last time you felt like you actually own a Microsoft software product . .

No end user OWNS any software he/she buys anymore. Everything is licensed. This software ownership you speak of is so 1980s.

Wow, Microsoft is trying a new approach

[kimvette]

I, for one, am impressed with this new approach Microsoft is taking. Maybe with Apple's engaging in deceptive and anticompetitive marketing methods, Microsoft saw Apple taking tricks from their play book, so it was time for a new plan.

As you're probably aware, Microsoft has long since peaked. The only place they could go was down - and they have been, what with Vista being an epic fail, Office 2007's ribbon with no menu alternative alienating users, and the "vista compatible" debacle. Microsoft is desperate. Maybe they finally realized this: when all else fails, they could try the honest approach. That's right: honesty is Microsoft's new policy, to distinguish themselves from Apple.

Re:Absolutly

[FlyingGuy]

I am not familiar with the inner workings of Wordpress at all but I will offer this observation.

Of the open source projects that I am familiar with, they work fine until something stops working, then your in a bit of a jam, since there is quite often no number to call to get the information that will lead you to the fix for the problem.

Mysql is a prime example. It works wonderfully for most things, but when you really start to put it up against the wall then there are all kinds of little things that really start to show. Not that they are show stoppers, but that are just problematic enough to cause things to run a bit out of sorts.

At that point you are left with only a couple of options, either hire someone who can dig into its guts, recompile it and hopefully solve that problem, without causing any other problems or... purchase a commercially supported version that includes a phone number and access to the guys in the back room who are actually designing and coding the program, and that is not an an inexpensive proposition.

So yes, open source is great and in many organizations it fits the bill, but it many other organizations they need to have a commercial product where they can pick up the phone and get the support they need, now. This is not to say one is superior to the other, it is simply the reality for some business models, although YMMV!