Slashdot Mirror
Retail Copies of Office 2013 Are Tied To a Single Computer Forever
An anonymous reader writes "With the launch of Office 2013 Microsoft has seen fit to upgrade the terms of the license agreement, and it's not in favor of the end user. It seems installing a copy of the latest version of Microsoft's Office suite of apps ties it to a single machine. For life. On previous versions of Office it was a different story. The suite was associated with a 'Licensed Device' and could only be used on a single device. But there was nothing to stop you uninstalling Office and installing it on another machine perfectly legally. With that option removed, Office 2013 effectively becomes a much more expensive proposition for many."
This is so not the point.
not if it phones home
You can haz open source solution with full MS Office compatibility...
Log into your Office account and deregister the current installation. That will free it up for installation to a new/different machine. You can do this as often as you want.
Doesn't affect us too much, since we've switched most of our internals to Libre Office, and it won't affect most of our clients who're quite happy with Office 2010 and a few who still use Office 2003. If your org needs new installations, there are better places to spend money than the office suite.
If computers were people, I'd be a misanthrope.
install to virtual machine, then make copies of that virtual machine. problem solved.
I do not think that this "solution" will work for a typical user. VM machines are not simple to setup and use for the masses as they are for /. users.
As a matter of fact I do not think this will impact the majority of users at all. Most people buy their software with their computer system and are not adverse to having to buy a new version when they get a new machine.
"Maybe this world is another planet's hell"
Aldous Huxley
What happens if your CPU or Motherboard dies, and you cant get that socket type CPU/Motherboard now... Or your HDD dies even
In some countries, this stipulation would be against consumer laws I'm sure (maybe the EU, also NZ is quite possible)
Rather than mess with a VM and slightly degraded performance I'd opt for a free alternative (e.g. Libre Office) although a VM would provide some added security...
"install it in a virtual machine, run it from there, this is lame."
I would be inclined to go with one of 2 "solutions":
(A) Use a software crack. What the hell. I paid for it, it's mine, I'll do what I want with it.
(B) The choice I would more likely make: go with Open Office or Libre Office.
It's really not much of a contest, is it? I've been using Open Office and Libre Office for more than 10 years now, precisely because of this kind of horseshit from Microsoft.
Non-commercial use: Any number of Macs that you own and control. Commercial use: Any number of computers used by the same single person, or one computer used by any number of persons.
One computer and can't move to a different computer? That's ridiculous. So if sell your computer and buy a better one, you have to re-buy the software? Or if your computer breaks? Or your computer is stolen? I wonder what your insurance company will say if your computer is stolen, they pay for a replacement, and then you say that instead of restoring your apps from your backup you want them to pay for new copies?
install to virtual machine, then make copies of that virtual machine. problem solved.
I do not think that this "solution" will work for a typical user. VM machines are not simple to setup and use for the masses as they are for /. users.
As a matter of fact I do not think this will impact the majority of users at all. Most people buy their software with their computer system and are not adverse to having to buy a new version when they get a new machine.
Ok, let's expand a bit. It should be relatively straightforward for a knowledgeable person to create a self-contained virtual appliance with a copy of Window Du jour plus a copy of Office 20-whatever with all the common options (or every option) and require the user to only input the license key for the OS and the license key for Office. Install procedure would be to insert disk, run Setup, get prompted for the required license keys, and get an icon on your desktop that when invoked, brings up Office in a virtual box.
This is, of course, non-trivial to create. But all it takes is a single (not inconsiderable) effort, the results of which are replicated endlessly.
Or, we could all stick with a previous version of Office, and Microsoft can go screw. I'm still using Office 2000. Works fine on Windows 7.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
I use Excel & Access 2003 on a daily basis (Access provides a simple front end to SQL databases). The only time I load up Excel 2010 is when the sheet has more then 256 columns (rare) or ~65k rows (more common now). The ribbon is a pain as I lose all my custom menu bars (and the after thought of a hack put into the ribbon for this sucks). What is there about 2013 that would appeal to a non-corporate end user? Saving to a cloud? We have Google Drive/DropBox folders for that.
That can't be true, because it's too good to be true. If a copy of office were tied to a single machine forever, that copy of office would die with the machine and eventually office would become extinct. You'd see beat up computers with yellowed cases and burned in screens in endangered software sanctuaries. Or the world would realize that equivalent software is available elsewhere for less money (or free). But we all know Microsoft won't let that happen because software survives by being propagated from computer to computer, paid or not.
...they'd rather see Home users use a different licensing model... something with more long term revenue for the company. One way to help such a new model would be to make the current purchase model less attractive.
nahh. That couldn't be.
install to virtual machine, then make copies of that virtual machine. problem solved.
This is why most "normal" people don't understand nerds. Every problem always has a technical solution. Always. Even if that problem isn't technical in nature and the solution completely misses the point. The issue isn't that it's physically impossible to install to multiple computers, as a hack will be around shortly to eliminate that limitation. The problem is in the license that's trying to bleed more money out of the user. The solution to that problem is to not buy the new version of Office. Either use an older version or switch to something more open.
If I add a disk, is it the same device?
If I swap the disk, is the same device.
If I keep everything but swap the CPU, is it a new computer?
If I keep the CPU but swap the motherboard?
If I swap components incrementally, when do I need to buy a new license?
Does the software actually check?
in many countries whose law permits the sale of second hand software licenses (eg pre-owned games). What Microsoft's legal team has forgotten (ignored?) is that state and federal law override any and all conditions they put in their EULA and they have no legal recourse when they blatantly ignore local law.
Or, we could all stick with a previous version of Office, and Microsoft can go screw. I'm still using Office 2000. Works fine on Windows 7.
This is the correct answer.
I am still using Office 2003 because (a) It works just fine and does what I need. Newer versions contain absolutely nothing of benefit to me. (b) No "activation" or other bullshit required, which means I can easily transfer it to another computer when needed. (c) It doesn't have the god awful ribbon that was introduced with Office 2007 and rendered the program unusable.
Virtual machine machines might not be simple, but virtual machines can be.
I'll subscribe to Slashdot when I see a month without a dupe, a typo, or an article the "editors" didn't read.
You know, I think I know a better solution. Tell the whole world about this abrogation of natural rights. Tell your friends. Spread the MS hate. Go post it to Facebook, twitter or whatever. Do it now.
The ribbon is good in that you can set things by example visually that actually tick multiple settings at once. After learning it, I actually prefer it and don't like using a word processor without it anymore.
Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
I just posted this on my facebook account. Feel free to post it everywhere.
Microsoft has just raised the bar on greed. MS Office 2013 has a non-transferable license, it can only be installed on 1 computer. So, you lose this computer or it dies or you upgrade, you lose your license to MS Office 2013. See http://www.geek.com/articles/geek-pick/retail-copies-of-office-2013-are-tied-to-a-single-computer-forever-20130213/ for moredetails.
This *will* be the year of Linux on the Desktop!
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
I am still using Office 2003 because (a) It works just fine and does what I need. Newer versions contain absolutely nothing of benefit to me. (b) No "activation" or other bullshit required, which means I can easily transfer it to another computer when needed. (c) It doesn't have the god awful ribbon that was introduced with Office 2007 and rendered the program unusable.
And I'll continue to use Libre Office :) No activation, no ribbon, works fine and does what I need.
There will be the inevitable response: I need feature X that only MS Office has. This will not get an argument from me. If you need MS Office, go for it. Do what you have to do. I'm just happy that I don't need it myself and don't have to deal with all this nonsense.
Yes and no.
I did a bit of IT consulting a while back for a small company owned by a friend of mine that upgraded one of their (dead) machines to Win7 from XP. One of their pieces of software (that isn't supported by the vendor anymore, natch) had some copy protection on it that ABSOLUTELY REFUSED to run on Win7. As in "every single post I could find about it on Google said 'don't bother'" and no amount of backwards-compatibility junk would get Win7 to make it work, period (though admittedly this was Win7 Home Prem, so no built-in VM stuff).
The solution: VirtualBox, running a spare XP license, and just this one application. With the VBox tools installed, I set it to resize the desktop automatically when the window's resized, put the taskbar on autohide, and it works great (nice and snappy for an office-type app). When you click the close box on the window, VBox suspends the VM. When you open it back up again, it un-suspends. Plus you get snapshotting and portability of the environment.
They were not sophisticated enough to pull this off, but their local IT guy (me) was, and this is a little 5-person extermination company...
"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana." --Groucho Marx
Fire up a virtual machine every time someone emails you a document, and then move that document over to the virtual machine (after it books), open up your Office suite, and then move the document back.
Man, that is sure convenient.
It is almost like Microsoft is trying to encourage people to move over to the perpetual subscription method by making the traditional way of purchasing 2013 a pain in the ass.
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
I'm waiting to see how the resident MS shills are going to positively spin this one. No unbiased person could be in favor of this.
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
The story linked from the Slashdot article mostly just summarizes Turner's already-concise (but still more-detailed) article, and wraps it in a different set of ads.
~Idarubicin
You can create deep ties between guest and host and exchange data between them trivially. Setup a folder that both OS's can reach, problem solved. If done right its the same as tabbing through windows.
Good-bye
In Adam Turner's article (on which the blog post linked in the Slashdot summary is based) Microsoft declares that " If the customer has a system crash, they are allowed to reinstall Office on that same computer..." but with the caveat, "No, the customer cannot transfer the license from one PC to another PC." Sounds like I'm allowed to upgrade my computer, and I'm allowed to replace broken parts...I just can't "transfer" the license between PCs.
Who knows the way to fix an old Fiat?
Step 1: Raise hood.
Step 2: Turn the radiator cap counterclockwise until fully loosed.
Step 3: Lift radiator cap straight up, at least six inches.
Step 4: Remove old Fiat from under radiator cap. Replace with new Fiat.
Step 5: Screw radiator cap back in place.
Step 6: Close hood.
Clearly, the solution in this situation is similar. Disconnect your mouse. Replace the computer underneath. Plug in a new computer. The license, obviously, transferred with the Theseus-mouse.
~Idarubicin
But there was nothing to stop you uninstalling Office and installing it on another machine perfectly legally. With that option removed, Office 2013 effectively becomes a much more expensive proposition for many
Or just use the pirated version of office 2013 that will come out 3 months before the official release, have no such limitations, will be much more configurable, and, of course, is free...
I don't know whose the single computer will be, but it won't be mine.
Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
It'd be nice to think this would boost use of OpenOffice and/or Libre Office, but probably not.
Fire up a virtual machine every time someone emails you a document, and then move that document over to the virtual machine (after it books), open up your Office suite, and then move the document back.
Man, that is sure convenient.
Why would you do it that way? When I read the VM suggestion, I thought it basically meant live in the VM full time. There is a post above where a person used an XP VM in Win7 for a legacy app that wouldn't run in his Win7 set up. But that was one app, not an office suite.
If you're using MS Office for everything, including Outlook for email, and you're using a VM so you can change hardware by moving the VM instead of reinstalling Office, why not fire up the VM as soon as Windows boots and put all your apps in there?
I mean, 1) you're going to spend so much time in the VM, you might as well stay in, and 2) you've done the work of making your system easy to restore to get around reinstalling Office, why not take advantage and make all your software as easy to restore?
Moving files between levels of virtualization wouldn't be an issue. You pay a price at start up, as the OS and VM boot, but a small price. And I'm in the minority as someone who still shuts down PCs. Don't most folk use sleep or hibernate, or for a desktop, just leave it one all the time?
I've only used VMs on beefy servers, never on consumer desktop or laptop hardware. Is there a performance reason you wouldn't live in the VM full time? The top level OS could be light; the only thing it is doing is handling the VM (and passing off messages between the VM and outside world? I don't know where VMs live on your OSI model.).
Anyway, I just had an issue with MS Office 2010 where my wife's HD crashed, I reinstalled (I just back up data, because you can always reinstall software, right?), then her MB went, and when reinstalling on a new machine and trying to register, it got denied as too many installs. This is legal, paid for, copy of Office.
So I downloaded a crack.
* Hey Steve! How's it going.
- Terrible, Bill, terrible. Nothing's going the way we expected. I mean, we tried our best with Zune - we made it brown even! - but it's no good. Some people even liked the Zune software.
* I see. What else have you tried?
- Well, we replaced the toolbar in Office with - get this - a ribbon. We told everybody it would improve their workflow.
* Bet that shook things up!
- No, people kept buying Office. The ribbon even had fans! They wanted it extended to other apps! But then I thought... XBox!
* XBox?
- Yeah... we'll put ads all over the thing! There'll be a tiny button in the corner to start the game and everywhere else... ads!
* Yes!!!
- No! People complained, but XBox Lives subscriptions are up and game sales are through the roof! Hell, we even canned Bungie and sold more Halo games than ever!
* Oh dear.
- Then I'm sure you heard about Windows 8 and Metro.
* Oh yes, terrific job there. And you tied it to Surface and Windows Phone too!
- Yes, we're all very proud of that. And now this thing with Office 2013; we're tying it to a single computer. No reinstalls. If your motherboard craps out, well, you'll just have to buy a new license!
* Surely that will work. No one will be able to ignore the message we're sending now.
- I don't know, Bill. I don't know. People liked the whole Office365 subscription thing, after all. They'll probably like this too. You know and I know that Windows and the Microsoft ecosystem is an abortion and a disaster, and that we've been striving desperately to get people to leave it for greater and better things - I can't help but remember the excellent work you did with "The Road Ahead" and leaving out the Internet entirely; you'd have thought that might have clued them in that we're just hacks - but it's just not working. But look, what if I try this next: security updates only available to people who have a paid subscription. Yeah, that might do it, don't you think?
* Never give up hope, Steve, never give up hope. I can't think of anyone better for this job. And here, toss a chair. It'll make you feel better.
and that's exactly the reason I don't send docs in Office format, instead I use PDF.
Mod me up/Mod me down: I wont frown as I've no crown
and until I find a usable replacement for the features it has, I'm stuck with Office 2007. Sure it works but I'd like something that's open source instead and using a Wiki setup just doesn't cut it for me as it means installing to much additional software.
Now if I can find something that gives me 90 percent of the features (individual notebooks, insert media, text and such), I'd be able to move back to open source as my only online game now has a link to setting things up in Wine along with links to doing so in RH/Deb/Suse and others.
Mod me up/Mod me down: I wont frown as I've no crown
Honestly, virtual machines made a BIG mess out of Microsoft licensing across pretty much their whole product line. It's likely the reason they went from being the "bad guy" to the "good guy" with their friendliness towards running VMs in a flexible manner on their server products in the last couple years. (Unless they made some drastic changes, their licensing would become pretty much a joke in the world of corporate I.T. with virtual machines.)
It's still really complicated and I'm pretty sure most people don't even really understand all of it, or license their purchased MS products correctly.
For example, do you know when it's economically feasible to purchase Windows Server "Datacenter edition" (despite it's massive cost) vs. "Enterprise edition", or Enterprise vs. "Standard"? In most real-world scenarios today, everyone would be just fine buying copies of "Standard" if they wanted a Windows Server license, EXCEPT for the virtualization rules. (With "Standard", you're allowed to run 1 virtual copy as well as 1 physical installation of the product, but your virtual copy *must* be on the SAME box you installed the physical copy on. So basically, you pay for the rights to install the product on a single machine and it gives you the right to run Microsoft's "Hyper V" virtual machine solution on top of it. When you shell out about 4x the price for an Enterprise edition of the same server product? You're actually granted 4 virtual machine installations, AND they're "stackable". So if you have a big, multi-processor, powerful server and you want to fire up 8 virtual servers on the thing? You can do it by buying 2 of the Windows Enterprise edition licenses, and you'll still have a license left over to install another physical Windows server on some other box (but not with a VM running on top of it).
All fine and good, but as you can probably see -- keeping track of this stuff in a corporate setting quickly gets kind of insane. "How is this server here legally licensed?" "Well.... I have this license I purchased here for this other box, and it gave me a spare license to use on THIS one -- but you can't add X or Y to THIS box now without buying an additional license that lets you do that to it....." And we haven't even STARTED talking about Microsoft's CALs yet ("Client access licenses", which you also have to buy based on how many people are going to CONNECT to a given server!)
Frankly, I think the best bet is to flat out AVOID their products, if you care at all about remaining provably legal on your purchases. The claim that typing one of their products to a specific PC "won't affect most users at all" is dead wrong, IMO. I've seen far more times than I can count where someone called a PC service place for a computer repair, had a new motherboard installed, and now the software considers it a different PC. Only reason this didn't cause rioting in the streets YEARS ago is Microsoft's leniency in letting someone basically break their licensing rules on demand. The license key for Windows/Office/whatever complains it's not properly licensed (since it was an OEM version). Tech knows user won't pay for ANOTHER copy of the product, so he takes advantage of having access to some "not for resale/personal use only" type license keys that came with his "Microsoft Action Pack" subscription or TechNet or what-not and enters one of those. Product works again and customer is none the wiser..... But it ain't legal.
How would it phoning home make things different? All the software sees is the inside of the VM, which remains the same.
Phoning home could prevent two different copies of the VM running at the same time - which is not the point. If my computer dies, I should be able to transfer legally acquired software from the old, dead machine to the new one. By running Office inside a VM, the user can do that - and Microsoft would not be able to tell, no matter how often it phones home.
What? Apple is no better because the MS Office Lic applies equally to PC or Mac hardware? The problem is the license, nothing to do with the hardware.
In fact my $20 upgrade to Mountain Lion travels with my Apple ID. I sold an older MacBook and bought a new(er) one that had Lion on it. After I signed into the AppStore my Mountain Lion install worked fine...
Or the $20 Pages or $20 Numbers applications I bought.. once... that work on any Macs I own... at the same time.
And I'll continue to use Libre Office :) No activation, no ribbon, works fine and does what I need.
Another nice drop-in replacement is Kingsoft Office, a pretty full MS office clone without all the post-2007 braindamage the Microsoft added. I've been installing it for friends and family who need to work with Office documents but don't (or can't) want to pay MS's Office price (don't even get me started about Office 365, from the folks who also brought you Win8). Oh, and the whole suite is a 39MB download, compared to a DVD's-worth for MS Office. Even if you want the full-on commercial version rather than the free one (which only adds VBA and macros) that's all of $49.95.
(Not affiliated with Kingsoft in any way, just happy to have something I can drop on people's machines when they need to occasionally work with Office documents).
IMO, MS is not a software company. It is an abuse company that uses selling software as a way of delivering abuse.
I'm not sure how true the summary is tbh.
I bought Office 2013 Pro Plus through my university's website and it said it was quite clearly licensed for a maximum of 2 machines at once.
That implies that at very least the license can work on two computers and I honestly don't think there's anything magical about the copy and license I purchased even if I did get a student discount (there are perks to remaining a student for life, even alongside working full time!) - certainly the media I received looks like any other copy of Pro Plus and there is no mention of "Super special student offer that magically allows you to run it on two machines at once" though that doesn't of course mean that there aren't regional/license differences - perhaps bundled OEM copies with new machines have the restriction mentioned in TFA rather than retail versions which I presumably received?
Further, the wording "maximum of two at once" almost seems to imply that you can change the machine it's on, just as long as you don't exceed the maximum.
But in my case I was actually pleased to see Microsoft had explicitly decided to authorise you running one copy on multiple machines, if anything this is a step forward - an explicit recognition from Microsoft that people do have multiple machines and expect to not buy a copy per machine, and expect their license to work on multiple computers as mine does.