Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Pays University $250K To Use Office 365
BogenDorpher writes "Microsoft has offered to give the University of Nebraska $250,000 dollars to make the switch from IBM Lotus Notes to Office 365, which they say offers newer technology, greater flexibility, and operational savings. Microsoft did this in hopes that the University would not make the transition over to Google Apps."
At first I was outraged that Microsoft "discounted" (read: bribed) the uiversity to switch but then I realised that the students are probably grateful because
Lotus Notes is a horrible horrible piece of software. Microsoft might be evil but Lotus Notes is the scourge. I would happily endure a Windows only hell over a life of Lotus Notes.
IBM probably did this to the university to begin with, no system administrator would use Lotus Notes willingly.
Slashdot needs Geekcode | Can anyone recommend any good SCIFI? My tastes: Foundation, Startide Rising, CITY, Ringworld,
University of Nebraska: "I don't care what the benefits are. You'd have to pay me to use Microsoft's Office 365."
Microsoft: [Takes out a checkbook.] "How much are we talking about?"
No. RTFA. They discounted conversion services by $250k. The school is still paying for the product. This is commonplace in the industry.
"Sure, we want to swap from x to your product y, but it will cost us too much to transition"
"How can we help out so that we get a revenue stream from your subscription/maintenance (that still makes us money in the long run)?"
Who needs accuracy (though the linked story had the same inaccurate headline)?
$250k is cheap like a whore, the vice chancellor probably gets paid more than that in a year. I wouldn't get out of bed for less than $2.5m, unless that bed had Lotus Notes in it.
Ballmer offers incentives. Gates dictated. I'll take Ballmer over Gates any day, because you can at least turn down Ballmer's incentives. If you stood up to Gates, you were destroyed.
I would contrast Sculley and Jobs in a similar manner, though not nearly so strong.
I use OpenOffice almost daily, but for very simple stuff. The truth is, it still lacks many features that Office offers.
So does Lotus Notes, which is the suite referenced here. I think this was really mostly about trying to get the university to transition from Domino to SharePoint.
Breakfast served all day!
I'm not being sarcastic there, I haven't seen anyone using that since the 90's. I kind of put it in my "assumed they phased it out years ago" file right next to Novell Groupwise (found out not long ago they still make that too).
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Limp Bizket was never cool.
Unless my alarm company is also "paying me $300" by installing my monitoring equipment for free and 3 months of free service so I will then pay them a monthly, 2 year contract guaranteed amount of $30.
The University is paying for the service, but getting free services and a discount. Article makes it sound like Microsoft is paying them to use Office 365, which is untrue.
Considering that they are going to pay 1/2 the yearly licensing fee, umm... yes, we will and it's true.
M$ is trying to get away with marketing unscriptable office apps once again (Office 365 doesn't support VBA macros).
What happened the last time they did this? Office 2008 for Mac dropped support for VBA macros. Customers complained mightily, and now it's back in Office 2011 for Mac.
There's only so much one can do with unscriptable office apps. M$'s new "ribbon interface" is hardly a breakthrough. Things only get interesting when users have access to automation and an easy-to-use programming language like VBA.
That that is is that that that that is not is not.
Wish someone would have told me back in 1998 :(
And how many court filings have been missed because Microsoft Word ate the pleading?
And how many times has Microsoft been sued for it?
Software that makes sure to not lose your work like lyx is very rare.
Work bio at MMWD
No.
They gave them a 250k discount on the fees the University was going to pay to move the data from one system to the next, and deal with conversions and such.
Microsoft basically said 'Look, if you switch, we'll help you with the conversion for FREE!'. I'm not sure about MS's policies, at this company, we 'waive the setup fee' all the time, which is just a different name for the same thing. The setup fee for us is to deal with the issues of getting them converted from their old system to ours.
We never expect to collect it. Its a flag by the sales people, if a sales person collects the setup fee, watch out, thats the salesman flagging the account as obnoxious fucks that are going to be so difficult to deal with, we're going to have to charge them a setup fee to account for the amount of time we'll be wasting on them above and beyond what we would normally do for a new customer.
To our sales people, its simply a feature. 'You know what, I want you guys as a customer, I'll wave the setup fee ... I'll have to get approval, but for you guys, I don't think it'll be a problem' ... of course, all our sales people are told up front not to collect a setup fee unless you expect a problem or there is something specific thats going to require more work. If its something specific, they are instructed to bill it as something other than the plain Jane setup fee, such as document conversion or something like that ... but most of the time, we just don't charge a setup fee. We'll loose some money up front, but if they stay with us more than a couple years, its well worth the up front loss to reel them in.
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
This sort of thing happens in education. Software producers know they need to plan for future users so they give it to the kids who they hope will buy it. Some coworkers of mine at an advertising agency said their professor called Quark (makers of QuarkXpress) asking for educational discounts for 30+ licenses and were told there was no discount. At the time the license cost was something like $1200 per seat. So they called Adobe and asked for educational discounts on InDesign, new at the time, and Adobe just gave them everything they wanted at no cost.
Worked in their favor too. When those kids hit the working world they only knew InDesign and their employers were forced to switch. We did. And never looked back.
"Then Adobe hit the market in 1999 with a program called InDesign (now used by Inc.). In 2003, Adobe launched its Creative Suite, which rolled in products such as Photoshop and Illustrator with InDesign. Quark couldn't come close. Its U.S. market share tumbled from 95 percent to just 25 percent ."
http://www.inc.com/magazine/20100401/can-quark-turn-the-corner.html
If you want to sell your product give it to the educators.
No sig for you. YOU GET NO SIG!
Microsoft can not be sued over Word eating your documents. You need to closely read that EULA you agreed to when you installed Word. They are not liable if it destroys your data. The only thing you can from them is the cost of the software you bought. So if you bought it on sale or under some discounted bulk license agreement then that amount is the most you will be able to get from Microsoft. Yep it pretty crappy how the software industry disclaims everything and all liability. They even go so far as to say they don't guarantee it will work, or work as advertised or work like the box says. Modern software EULAs are basically a pig in a poke. They think you should count yourself lucky that they even allow you to buy the software, now sit down and shut up and do exactly what the software company says. Remember they can change the contract any time they like and you don't have any choice about other than stop using the software, which you never owned in the first place. Why software is allowed to be so different than anything else the average consumer buys I will never understand. Personally I think it is time for the government to step in and smack the commercial software industry around and make software follow all the same laws that everything else does and no EULA can change it, and that consumers do in fact own their software.
You would be wrong, as Microsoft is clearly paying them to switch to their software. If you cut a check for someone to switch to you as a vendor you are clearly paying them to use your products. It doesn't matter how it was spend you gave them cash that they didn't have before. Normally that is called a kick back and is illegal as all get out. Vendors are suppose to compete on the price and quality of their products especially when it involved government groups like a public university.
Personally I think the AG should look in to this as it is absolutely no different from a kick back or bribe which is illegal. I want to know if the software change was sent out as a request for sealed bids and had at least 3 companies bid on it like is usually required for most government contracts. If you ask me Microsoft is playing fast and loose and needs to smacked down hard, because they are doing the same exact monopoly actions that got them convicted by the US and EU. When you are a convicted monopoly the rules you have to play by are completely different from everyone else since you broke the law.
Yes, one is usually not destroyed by one's boss, no matter how much of an asshole he is. However, the competition was destroyed, and, as I'm sure you're aware, that's to what I was referring... though it was a good troll. I rate it 4/5. Would be trolled again. An asset to Slashdot! A++++++++
What, you mean libre-office, the open office fork that doesnt have the good old oracle ball and chain attached to both its feet?
That doesnt have anything to do with quality, that is just basic common sense, get out of there before Larry decides he wants a license fee, and you have to suddenly switch within a few days, or bend over.
People, what a bunch of bastards
I haven't seen that behavior, the only incompatibility I see is when someone sends me a file that is newer than my version. This is easily resolved by downloading the viewer from Microsoft if I can't get the document any other way.
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black