Slashdot Mirror


Office 365 Growth Opportunity 'a Lot Bigger Than Anything We've Achieved', Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella Says (cnbc.com)

Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella on Monday suggested that Microsoft could grow more from its Office 365 line of cloud productivity apps than anything in the company's 43-year history. From a report: With business editions of Office 365, Microsoft faces competition from Google, as well as younger players like Box and Dropbox, in the race to get companies collaborating in apps running on remote cloud servers. "The growth opportunity for what is Office 365 is a lot bigger than anything we've achieved, even with our high penetration in the client-server world," Nadella said at the Morgan Stanley Technology Media and Telecom conference in San Francisco. When companies transition from Microsoft's traditional licensing business to cloud-based subscriptions, it's "not a one-for-one move," Nadella told Morgan Stanley analyst Keith Weiss at the event. Microsoft recently introduced the Microsoft 365 bundle, which includes Office as well as Windows, along with enterprise security and mobility services. Nadella also talked up the company's potential in the Azure public cloud infrastructure business, where it competes with Google as well as Amazon Web Services. "We had a good business in our server business, but this business is orders of magnitude bigger than what used to be a successful server business," he said.

153 comments

  1. Yeah no shit. by o_ferguson · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Subscription model is user abuse. Well done.

    --
    - In Soviet Korea, only old people loose all their bases to Natalie Portman's petrified hot grits overlords.
    1. Re:Yeah no shit. by geekmux · · Score: 0

      Subscription model is user abuse. Well done.

      Couldn't agree more, but this is the future consumers obviously want, as they vote with their wallets and support this bullshit by the droves.

      I laugh every time I hear about the "cord cutters" bragging about how they're saving money. HBO, Netflix, Disney, Hulu, UFC...the content fracturing is endless, and soon the aggregated monthly cost to access all the shit you want to watch will be twice as much as cable ever was.

      The concept of ownership will soon be completely dead.

    2. Re:Yeah no shit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I laugh every time I hear about the "cord cutters" bragging about how they're saving money.

      Then you're missing the big picture. I am saving money, because I used to subscribe to cable then satellite.
      Now I subscribe to nothing and I don't miss TV at all. There really wasn't anything on worth watching anymore, so I've tuned out completely.
      There are just so many better ways to spend your time and money.

    3. Re:Yeah no shit. by bondsbw · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Disagree. There's nothing inherently "abusive" about a subscription model.

      If your TCO is higher and you don't care for the cloud service benefits or any of the other perks, then say that. It's a different issue.

      --
      All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
    4. Re:Yeah no shit. by o_ferguson · · Score: 1

      Most cord cutters I know don't pay for shit they use pirate torrents or else streaming set-top boxes.

      --
      - In Soviet Korea, only old people loose all their bases to Natalie Portman's petrified hot grits overlords.
    5. Re:Yeah no shit. by wardrich86 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      cloud service benefits

      I'm still trying to figure out the benefits of storing your data on multiple servers that you have no control over, and no idea where exactly they are. When you delete a file from the cloud, is it actually properly deleted? If the cloud is attacked, how long will it take for the parent company to admit they were hacked? I like the concept of cloud storage, but I have 0 trust or faith in that system at all.

    6. Re:Yeah no shit. by o_ferguson · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Capitalism is inherently abusive, so I guess I can see your point. But why even make it? Do you want to pay monthly for your OS? That is where this is going.

      --
      - In Soviet Korea, only old people loose all their bases to Natalie Portman's petrified hot grits overlords.
    7. Re:Yeah no shit. by subanark · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Let's see here.

      Benefits: Your data is managed by experts whose main focus is keeping everyone's data secure, available and reliable. Multiple servers ensure redundancy and if needed globally available to allow for minimal latency.

      "you have no control over", "is [a file] actually properly deleted"
      Is this any different than trusting your local IT professional? What would be the fallout it if your AWS, Azure, Google, ect... was found to not treat a customers data in a secure and private way (please don't use a counter example from a middle tier service like iCloud, one drive, or google drive)?

      "If the cloud is attacked, how long will it take for the parent company to admit they were hacked?"
      A lot sooner, now that the EU is putting GDPR into place.

      -- A personal opinion from your friendly Azure engineer

    8. Re:Yeah no shit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      .the content fracturing is endless,

      That's the goal. We want content a-la-carte.

      shit you want to watch will be twice as much as cable ever was

      I will never pay more than the price to see four movies a month in the theater. I will never want to consume TV content badly enough to pay $300 a month in today's dollars for it. Cable only makes sense for people who have kids.

    9. Re: Yeah no shit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Meanwhile, the rest of the internet is agog that in 2018 the combined skills of every Microsoft employee on the planet still appear to be unable to configure its legion of crappy mailservers correctly. Forward DNS, reverse DNS, TLS certificate and EHLO names not matching, and a lovely little hole that allows them to act like open relays (no, I'm not broadcasting how that one works). In short, they can't even get the basics right, what hope does a user have of a decent service?

    10. Re:Yeah no shit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Benefits: Your data is managed by experts whose main focus is keeping everyone's data secure, available and reliable. Multiple servers ensure redundancy and if needed globally available to allow for minimal latency.

      I, personally, already achieve all of the benefits presented and can do so with greater security and performance, for I only have my own organization to take care of and can prioritize all expenses to their valued ends.

      "you have no control over", "is [a file] actually properly deleted"
      Is this any different than trusting your local IT professional?

      Yes, as stated above. A "local IT professional" has a greater concern for the organization they work for than random, ever changing clients. The only assurances a "friendly Azure engieer" can provide are relative ones with veiled absence of self-benefit, for client happiness is merely a byproduct of their paycheck.

      What would be the fallout it if your AWS, Azure, Google, ect... was found to not treat a customers data in a secure and private way

      Complete and total disaster. Potential business collapse. Being sued by anyone impacted. Congressional Inquiry. Loss of all data of which the assurances of cloud engineers cannot conjure up form the bit bucket nor delete from APT storage mediums.

      "If the cloud is attacked, how long will it take for the parent company to admit they were hacked?"
      A lot sooner, now that the EU is putting GDPR into place.

      Speculation about the future actions of others is a foggy mire. If you could predict such things, you would already be retired on your investments instead of presenting self-Azure assuring platitudes for one's-self.

      --Expertise, not opinion, from a security and High Availability SME.

    11. Re:Yeah no shit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Benefits: Your data is managed by experts whose main focus is keeping everyone's data secure, available and reliable. Multiple servers ensure redundancy and if needed globally available to allow for minimal latency.

      That's marketing advertisement right there!

      Is this any different than trusting your local IT professional? What would be the fallout it if your AWS, Azure, Google, ect... was found to not treat a customers data in a secure and private way (please don't use a counter example from a middle tier service like iCloud, one drive, or google drive)?

      And then you know whom you would be after. On the cloud? Hmm...

      A lot sooner, now that the EU is putting GDPR into place.

      Well, then you are f*** if you are in the U.S.?

    12. Re:Yeah no shit. by wardrich86 · · Score: 1

      Thanks man - I'm the one the other guy replied to, but you beat me to the draw on the comment and nailed it head-on.

    13. Re: Yeah no shit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I subscribed to Amazon Prime for free shipping - the streaming is annoying with all the ads. I don't understand what the fuck they're doing inserting ads for shows I can watch for "free" on a service I'm already paying for. Why do they so desperately want me to watch Sneaky Pete? Are they trying to drive up the value of product placement?

    14. Re:Yeah no shit. by OneHundredAndTen · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I laugh every time I hear about the "cord cutters" bragging about how they're saving money. HBO, Netflix, Disney, Hulu, UFC...the content fracturing is endless, and soon the aggregated monthly cost to access all the shit you want to watch will be twice as much as cable ever was.

      As you say, only if you want to watch all that shit. One can lead a perfectly fulfilled, complete life without accessing all that shit, as you appropriately call it. And save for other undertakings.

    15. Re:Yeah no shit. by OneHundredAndTen · · Score: 1

      Cable only makes sense for people who have kids.

      Less and less - these days, through YouTube and a few other outlets, one can get enough free material to keep kids entertained.

    16. Re:Yeah no shit. by dave562 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      We are starting to use Azure. We have an E5 license for ~5000 seats of Office 365, including OneDrive and Skype for Business. Given all of that, I am a bit biased. Also for full disclosure, we are building out a hybrid cloud with Azure to augment our four data centers (2 in the US, 1 in the UK, 1 in Dubai). I have also been doing IT for 20 years, so I have seen some trends come and go.

      This whole FUD about "don't trust the cloud with your data" is getting REALLY old. Microsoft (and AWS) have more redundancy and security built into their infrastructure that you could ever hope to build into a private setup. I say this as someone who is managing close to 4 PB of data being remote replicated via SRDF (for our EMC gear) and array based replication (for the Pure stuff).

      By the end of next year, we will have moved the majority of our remote office file server data into OneDrive and MS Teams. We are going to be able to save huge amounts of money by not having to buy Data Domain hardware to replicate back to our core data centers, and we are going to get better reliability, versioning and recovery options.

      I trust Microsoft's security team of hundreds of engineers, analysts and support staff more than I trust the half dozen guys in house. And I say this as someone who has been interested in, and responsible for computer security since the mid-90s. There is no way that a small SOC at a mid-sized corporation can hold a candle to a 24x7 global operation like Microsoft (or Amazon). It just is not going to happen.

      While we still run a lot of our applications in house, we are using Azure for development and proof of concept work. When you look at the costs of enterprise class storage with all of the compliance boxes checked (at rest encryption, remote replication, etc.) there is no way that we can provide storage in a cost competitive way to the business.

      Our clients are slowly coming around to trusting the cloud as well. We work with heavy regulated industries including financial services and healthcare. We have a lot of sensitive data on our networks. But as our clients shift their own workloads to the cloud (I hate that term), they are becoming more permissive of allowing us to move the data that we host for them there as well.

      I think that in 10 years from now, the only companies that are going to still be hosting their own infrastructure are going to be big banks, tech and manufacturing firms that are still building things and need strict controls over their IP. Other than that, the costs of paying other people to run infrastructure for you are just too compelling. There is no way to stay competitive with that.

    17. Re:Yeah no shit. by painandgreed · · Score: 2

      cloud service benefits

      I'm still trying to figure out the benefits of storing your data on multiple servers that you have no control over, and no idea where exactly they are. When you delete a file from the cloud, is it actually properly deleted? If the cloud is attacked, how long will it take for the parent company to admit they were hacked? I like the concept of cloud storage, but I have 0 trust or faith in that system at all.

      It's not like the CxO or even any random director knows the answers to those questions even if their own IT are running things. However with an organization like Microsoft, there are SLAs, Business Agreements, HIPAA agreements, and all sorts of contracts that spell out exactly what happens if something goes wrong. With their own IT, they get a shrug and "It'll be fixed when it's fixed". One of the reasons MS has probably been doing so well is that in our experience, they are willing to sign those agreements, particularly the HIPAA ones, not only agreeing to follow all federal guidelines but our interpretation of them as spelled out in the contract we give them. So, with those contracts in place, a demonstrable savings in operational costs, they have about as much trust and any other business they deal with.

    18. Re:Yeah no shit. by Darinbob · · Score: 2

      No, I'm not buying every single channel I used to get with satellite. No one ever watched all channels they could receive. It does save money to cut the cord, lots of it. Even if I got all of HBO, netflix, amazon, and hulu, it's still half the cost of satellite (which in turn is much cheaper than cable). People aren't cutting the cord because it's the cool thing to do, but because they realize they're paying for an expensive service and they're not getting their money's worth, it's an economic decision.

      Microsoft is pushing the subscription model becuase they've seen the writing on the wall that users are not upgrading as regularly as they like which cuts into profits. Why users are going with this model, I have no idea. It's very clearly a trap, but there are a lot of enterprise customers who are in a romantic relationship with Microsoft.

    19. Re:Yeah no shit. by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Or more accurately, your data is managed by people you hope are experts and whose main focus you hope is keeping everyone's data secure and hopefully reliable.

    20. Re:Yeah no shit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love hearing people say the cloud is stupid and I can do to better than > 1000 engineers. 99.9999% cant. for o365 you get email, files, im, automation data mining, sso, content mgmt, etc, etc. You cant beat the cloud. Also if you dont like Microsoft, use AWS or Google. mix and match.

    21. Re:Yeah no shit. by swell · · Score: 1

      "servers that you have no control over..."

      And while you are at it, give me the name of the executive who will take FULL RESPONSIBILITY for the security of my data. No, not the guy in the mailroom, the guy with the million dollar salary.

      --
      ...omphaloskepsis often...
    22. Re:Yeah no shit. by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 1

      How about: fuck all three.

    23. Re:Yeah no shit. by tzanger · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Cable only makes sense for people who have kids.

      Nonsense. Cable is the worst thing for kids. A constant stream of commercials demanding their attention, a thousand channels of shit. My three (14, 9, 5) only ever see commercials when they're at a friend's house and the interruption drives them nuts. Netflix has a good selection of kid's content and between plex and what we rent from appletv... the rest is covered.

      Cable TV is an abomination and needs to die.

    24. Re:Yeah no shit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Microsoft is pushing the subscription model becuase they've seen the writing on the wall that users are not upgrading as regularly as they like which cuts into profits.

      As with music, failing to make a sale is not cutting into profits. Profits come from actual sales. If a company assumes it will reach a certain target and don't, this does not mean something is 'cutting into profits'. I've never understood the thinking that a company is somehow entitled to make money and that the buying public has some sort of obligation to spend their money. This seems to me to be the result of supply side economics. It is as stupid as thinking that somehow, if one only offers beef in India or pork in places that are predominantly Jewish or Muslim, everyone must change their dietary practices. Why not just offer chicken, lamb and fish? I know - 'Don't wanna!' Then, to get beef and pork consumption to rise, just remove all other options.

      In the case of Microsoft, their last two OS generations are not very popular. Microsoft has been doing everything they can to push the issue, especially with Windows 10. Their methods wouldn't be needed if the product was more compelling than previous versions. I doubt most people running Windows 10 are doing so because they made a deliberate choice. Most people hate change, hate having to relearn new icons for the same programs, etc.,... They put up with it, sure, but they don't volunteer.

      I know that where I work, Windows XP was popular as is Windows 7 mostly because they are pretty much the same and there was little learning curve. Windows 8 and 10 are not popular because the interface is radically different than what they know. Just search for the name of the program you want you say. Well most people in my office don't know to find their email program, they need to type Outlook. Most staff where I work will be unable to find an icon on their desktop if it is moved to a different spot. It may be easy for tech people to adjust so 'It's easy, you just....'.

      What is easy for tech people is not the same as what is easy for most people. In what way does changing the interface help the average person who simply wants to USE the computer? Gordon Ramsey, for example, can cook - for him it is easy to learn new recipes, work the line and run a restaurant. In Kitchen Nightmares, he goes into new places every show and hits the ground running. Then again, that's what he does every day. Lebron James can sink baskets with ease - not surprising since that's what he does every day. Techies adjust to change and learn new tech easily - also not surprising since this is what we do every day. That we find something easy (subjective) doesn't mean it actually is objectively easy.

      Do Microsoft and other companies have representative samples from their actual user base when they do UI focus group? It sure seems like they find people who have never used Windows or Office before to avoid bias from previous versions. Well, people using previous versions are by far the largest group in the customer base so shouldn't THEIR opinion hold more weight than people for which all versions of Windows/Office are new?

    25. Re:Yeah no shit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the TCO is higher and the vendor is doing everything possible to push all my stuff into the cloud whether I like it or not, then I consider the subscription model to be abusive. If I have a choice in the matter, then I see your point. However, most vendors are removing choice from the equation. I also disagree about 'cloud service benefits or any of the other perks'. The terms 'benefits' and 'perks', depending on opinion, may not match the dictionary. For you, being pushed to the cloud may be a benefit. For me, having to constantly fight to prevent data from going to the cloud is hardly a benefit or perk, it's just a new headache. Presenting the end user that doesn't understand the consequences prompts to setup Microsoft accounts, default save locations pointing to OneDrive, uninstalled programs re-appearing after an update, non-granular updates... Yeah, from a risk management perspective, it's a REAL improvement.

      But but but, you CAN control all of that - there are firewall rules, you can setup a WSUS server on the LAN, you can do this and that. I'm not thinking about larger enterprises that have the resources. I'm thinking of most small/medium businesses that DON'T have the resources. These companies run Windows 10 Professional not Enterprise. They don't have a WSUS server. They don't have the time to constantly tweak their setups. Think a private dentist office, small accounting firm, or small insurance agency. These businesses may have regulations to follow but may have no clue they are in violation. Heck, Home Depot is huge but their hack was because of an HVAC vendor with an unsecured system on the internal network. If Home Depot can't keep an HVAC system secure, or didn't like the inconvenience of it because it took the coolest part of the 'new shinny' away from management, then what can we expect from Bob's sub shop, processing your credit card? Bob is a sandwich guy. He's not really thinking about how his office computer is uploading all his customer data to the cloud. Sure, he's not PCI compliant but that's ok, he just pays the higher fees because it's cheaper.

    26. Re:Yeah no shit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      -- A personal opinion from your friendly Azure engineer

      Engineer? Are you using that term in the same way a mechanical engineer would meaning that you are licensed and personally liable if a bridge fails and you signed off on the blueprint? Until you have the same kind of skin in the game (and I mean the profession, not you personally) as actual engineers, pardon my skepticism of your motives. What you say may be entirely true. The only assurance I have so far is your word.

      You also mentioned middle tier services like OneDrive. Do you mean the software that pushes the end user with default save locations, re-installations, Windows 10's Microsoft account prompts for new machines again to tie people to the cloud? Sorry, Azure/OneDrive/Windows 10 is all from the same company. Since everything is going the route of lowest common denominator (dumbed down interfaces), then trust goes there as well. A company is as trustworthy as it's least trustworthy division. Rather than defend yourselves, maybe you Azure people should go have a chat with the OneDrive/Windows 10 people about making you look bad.

      Lastly, you mentioned the EU putting GDPR into place. So it takes legislation? So a company won't admit to a data break that could lead to credit fraud, identity theft and other problems unless it is compelled by law? I wonder why such laws need to exist and why trust in corporations, especially the larger ones, is at an all time low. Maybe things like credit default swaps leading to bank bailouts and diesel gate have something to do with it?

      It has nothing to do with the idea of the cloud. It is all about being tricked, cajoled or forced into the cloud when it should be opt-in and easily and permanently avoidable by the average end user.

    27. Re:Yeah no shit. by subanark · · Score: 1

      It's your choice, you can trust a big/medium/small corp, or you can trust someone who you spent a few hours interviewing. Ultimately, to live in society, you need to trust people.

    28. Re:Yeah no shit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It just is not going to happen.

      The fappening already did happen, several times. Cloud outages already have happened, several times. Escapement and data loss has already happened, several times.

      Greater the complexity, greater the attack surface, greater the number and magnitude of possibilities for attackers.

      Simple as that.

      they are becoming more permissive of allowing us to move the data that we host for them there as well.

      Listen to yourself. "Becoming more permissive" That is not security nor reliability, that is an expansion of trust. It only takes one person, one crack for all of it to crumble. Has happened, is happening, will happen again.

      I think that in 10 years from now,

      This fluctuation has been going for 30 years.

      Centralized with big iron batch processing, decentralized with workstations, centralized with mainframes, decentralized with cheap servers, centralized with racks, decentralized with ubiquitous PCs, centralized with value-added services, decentralized with cheap storage, centralized with VMs and clouds. Guess what happens next. Cheapening and more specialized builds, more IP, and a few (more) headlines involving VM escapement and the pendulum will swing in the other direction. We are already more than half a decade into a cycle that typically reverses every eight to ten.

      You said you have been doing this since the mid 90's. You said you have "seen some trends come and go". I foresee in ten years everyone moving to private ownership again and your sort being relegated as dinosaurs of a bygone age unworthy of further employment the same way that the majority of mainframe people are thought of now. I foresee in ten years you having more experience but not more wisdom and blaming your bad decisions on ageism right here in the even more depopulated slashdot comments section.

    29. Re:Yeah no shit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but it is your management (that controls them engineers) that I do not trust when things go pear-shaped or the bottom line is affected!

    30. Re:Yeah no shit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I'm not worried about the cloud as such - the whole business model depends for its success on reliability and trust, much more than what is the case for on-site storage. My worry is more about the fact that this is a model that will further consolidate the power of a few, very big players, to the exclusion of all others, because it is something that requires huge, initial investments. Large, trans-national corporations have far too much power that reaches beyond the world of business and right into governments, for one thing, usually bypassing any democratic scrutiny.

    31. Re:Yeah no shit. by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2

      The danger of the cloud is that it's a single point of failure and a high-value target. Your 12 guys may not be the most competent in the world, but that doesn't matter unless your data are the most valuable in the world. Someone attacking Azure might not be attacking you, but if they happen to get your data at the same time then selling it is just bonus money for them. Similarly, people are more likely to try to DDoS Azure or AWS than they are your in-house server.

      Meltdown allowed you to dump the contents of memory of other VMs on the same nodes as you (including those in Azure Secure Cloud SGX enclaves, if you have access to the preview of that). Microsoft has now rolled out some mitigations, but the vulnerability existed from before the creation of Azure until recently. Anything in multi-tenant systems in that window may have been compromised. What's your plan for preventing that in the future and for dealing with it if it's happened?

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    32. Re:Yeah no shit. by dave562 · · Score: 1

      Meltdown allowed you to dump the contents of memory of other VMs on the same nodes as you...

      I know of at least one other critical Azure vulnerability that would have let tenants in separate VMs on the same hyper visor futz with each other's memory addresses. That one never made it public though, because the researcher responsibly disclosed. The only reason I know about it is because a guy I grew up with was in the Incident response chain at Microsoft and helped to coordinate the patching.

      I got Azure patches for the Meltdown flaw a good couple of days before Cisco had the UCS patches available. MS even initially allowed us to schedule VMs in patches to mitigate the application impact. Though when we were about half way through, MS forced the reboots because the vulnerabilities were disclosed at that point.

      What's your plan for preventing that in the future and for dealing with it if it's happened?

      The future plan is the same as the current plan. Detect the breach. Verify the accessibility and integrity of the data. Notify the client.

      Similarly, people are more likely to try to DDoS Azure or AWS than they are your in-house server.

      Nobody can DDoS all of Azure. Have you seen how many regions they have? Plus, lots of luck DDoSing those ExpressRoute circuits. Totally different infrastructure and paths into the data center than the stuff that they front out via Azure to clients. Besides, haven't you heard of local caching? How long is the DDoS going to last? The business impact will be minimal. The drives in our laptops are 250GB of SSD. They can cache plenty of recently accessed files, and thanks to OneDrive, do so just fine. (Of course there are plenty of other places to get file services in the cloud, Box, etc.)

      MS also offers geo-redundant storage for ridiculously affordable rates. All you need is a like set of VMs in another region and you can be back up and running in minutes, if that. Besides, the web tier for all of the major apps is already redundantly load balanced across regions. How long do you think it takes to play the transaction logs into a recovery database? That is assuming that you aren't already replicating the changes at the DB layer.

      The danger of the cloud is that it's a single point of failure

      A cloud failure is no more scary than an on-prem failure. Downtime is downtime. At the end of the day, who is going to give you the most resources to get your job done? The cloud is just another stack of hardware in a building somewhere. Or multiple stacks of similar hardware all over the global, depending how much you want to pay for redundancy. Who is going to recover from the failure faster?

    33. Re:Yeah no shit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So personal/air gapped storage doesn't exist in your world? Everything must be on a server somewhere whether local or cloud based?

    34. Re:Yeah no shit. by Anon-Admin · · Score: 1

      > However with an organization like Microsoft, there are SLAs

      Has anyone actually asked them what the SLA's are? I did in a meeting with the rep, I simply asked what the guaranteed uptime was on the O365 service. Considering it would be taking over all business functions from email to document storage.

      The answer was "We guarantee a 99% uptime" My next question was "99 point what? 99.9%, 99.99%, 99.999%?" Nope just a 99% uptime. IT management ignored me when I suggested that 99% was way to low and signed the agreement anyway.

    35. Re: Yeah no shit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Itâ(TM)s still giving a complete stranger the keys to your house.

    36. Re:Yeah no shit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And then you hit a bump and actually look into the contracts and they're entirely word salad with no recourse on your part.

    37. Re:Yeah no shit. by datavirtue · · Score: 1

      Every Exchange installation I have ever seen required at least one full-time engineer (small company) and outages were not uncommon. Moving to Office 365 is a no-brainer. You immediately free up an engineer to do things other than manage servers, perform database maintenance, plan and implement upgrades that were pretty much back-to-back, manage space and user expectations.... Good riddance.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    38. Re:Yeah no shit. by datavirtue · · Score: 1

      "There is no way that a small SOC at a mid-sized corporation can hold a candle to a 24x7 global operation like Microsoft (or Amazon). It just is not going to happen."

      Agreed. I think the simple fact that Microsoft and AWS are technology companies allows them to focus on the technology. IT shops have so much politics and red tape to deal with that technology takes a back seat to a myriad of ancillary concerns that have no bearing on the goal. The Azure/AWS teams focus on developing tech every day...based on what works the best or what will pave the way for a better future. They don't have to deal with managing a CIO that doesn't like GitHub (and therefore we can't use Git) because one of the developers uploaded a bit of company code to a public repo once.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    39. Re:Yeah no shit. by datavirtue · · Score: 1

      But you will not DDoS Azure....and if you try to buy DDoS protection for your on-prem services the bill will be total sticker shock.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    40. Re:Yeah no shit. by datavirtue · · Score: 1

      Back to bed grandpa.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    41. Re:Yeah no shit. by datavirtue · · Score: 1

      "Yes, it is. My IT professional works for me, for my business." ...and they are tired of your lame shit and would like to move to the cloud so they can have a life.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    42. Re:Yeah no shit. by datavirtue · · Score: 1

      Way too pedantic dude. You are not making yourself look good...or trustworthy. I doubt the business ever experienced 99% uptime with an on-prem Exchange server(s).

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    43. Re:Yeah no shit. by dave562 · · Score: 1

      You have a pretty sharp tongue and a harsh attitude for an AC.

      You seem like one of those trolls who expects perfection and is uncomfortable living in a world where nothing is perfect. Data breaches will happen to anybody. It is not a matter of if your systems are breached, but when.

      Your future where things move back to private ownership are overlooking the increased scarcity of resources. Getting into, or staying in, the co-location business is only going to increase in cost.

    44. Re:Yeah no shit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um, that's not that hard to do. We target 99.95% uptime for production systems. That's about 4 hours a year of unscheduled downtime.

    45. Re:Yeah no shit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "This whole FUD about "don't trust the cloud with your data" is getting REALLY old."

      It is getting really old, but so is the idea that the cloud is 100% of the way to go as well. The thing that gets me is that people will argue one way or another with out really considering the actual business case about it. The assumption that one solution will work for all businesses is foolish as every business will have different requirements based on their industry, processes and even culture. There are both upsides and downsides to both sides of the argument as well as the fact that there are different hybrids that can be taken into consideration. Some data should always be stored locally, not just for the companies who require strict IP control but also those who carry a significant legal liability as well, this would include such things as health care providers and legal professionals.

      The thing is that if you argue for either extreme of the argument (cloud or local) you are missing the fact that the cloud is just someone elses computer and some information is just not ok to store on someone elses computer. Liability, access and security are the big things to consider with each type of data and that should be throughly investigated as what is the right thing to do with each data type.

  2. We will rake you over hotter coals than ever b4! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is truly an excellent opportunity to make money off of charging people a monthly fee for what used to be a fairly affordable one-time purchase. Sad that the big thing Microsoft is pumped about is a stale word processor and spreadsheet package. Satya's idea of innovation is a payment plan almost nobody actually likes.

  3. Insert MICROS~1 advert on the Microsoft slashdot by najajomo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    'When companies transition from Microsoft's traditional licensing business to cloud-based subscriptions, it's "not a one-for-one move"'

    Instead of paying the once for the software, you'll be paying a yearly rent into perpetuity. Does anyone here remember when this was a technology forum?

  4. I use LibreOffice by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I used open office for several years and it closed on functionality.

    Then there was the kerfuffle and I switched over to LibreOffice.

    I have a legit full license to Microsoft office 2012. I never use it.

    --
    She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    1. Re:I use LibreOffice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But... Clippy!

    2. Re: I use LibreOffice by peragrin · · Score: 2

      During the libre open office kerfuffle I just stopped using an to be ok f them. I didn't use them at home often enough to deal with in the the updates.

      Switched to Google docs and sheets. Covers all of my needs and best yet I can work on stuff like bill paying during lunch at work.

      MS office does have some useful features I use at work (index match in arrays) but for home that just isn't needed.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    3. Re: I use LibreOffice by FaxeTheCat · · Score: 1

      And I think you point to the current state of competition. It is between cloud services (MS vs. Google vs..... some others), not between Office suites.

    4. Re:I use LibreOffice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who sold you *that* license? There's no such thing as Office 2012. It went from 2010 to 2013.

    5. Re: I use LibreOffice by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      I use google docks (on OneDrive) but I have many documents which are hundreds of pages long with many tables and graphics. I haven't found google docs to be a good fit. Plus, I'm an old-timer and I like having the executable for any critical software i use available. Google could drop google docs tomorrow. They probably won't. But they could.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    6. Re:I use LibreOffice by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      Who sold you *that* license? There's no such thing as Office 2012. It went from 2010 to 2013.

      It's a corporate license. It's probably 2010 but I purchased it for $20 in 2012 as part of a program that microsoft offers to employees at large customers. It installed. It sits on my machine unused.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    7. Re:I use LibreOffice by MMC+Monster · · Score: 1

      I love LibreOffice Writer and Calc. I use both of them quite extensively.

      That being said, I'm not a fan of Impress (their PowerPoint clone). I give presentations to lay people and Impress doesn't have as many WOW features as Keynote (my presentation software of choice).

      --
      Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
    8. Re:I use LibreOffice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That doesn't sound very Impressive.

  5. Fuck you,Satya. by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I use LibreOffice... 90% of the functionality at 0% the cost. Suck on this, M$.

    1. Re:Fuck you,Satya. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This... has nothing to do with LibreOffice. O365 is an entire set of enterprise IT management and productivity tools. This would be like you telling Home Depot they're worthless because someone gave you a hammer for free.

    2. Re:Fuck you,Satya. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      how does LibreOffice compare to the last version of OpenOffice??? hell is open office still in development for that matter??

    3. Re:Fuck you,Satya. by alvinrod · · Score: 2

      Yeah, but why buy the cow when you can get the hammer for free?

    4. Re:Fuck you,Satya. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You need to move on with the times. The Cloud is the future. Don't get left behind.

    5. Re:Fuck you,Satya. by FaxeTheCat · · Score: 1

      Ah the old "M$". Does it not feel a little behind the times to to still use that one?

    6. Re:Fuck you,Satya. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So do you have several full time security engineers working 24/7? Do you also have deep insight into the real security world where the code is generated and exploited? And do you have a globally accessible datacenter with multiple ingress/egress points so downtime is basically no longer a concern? Can you update before general release of vulnerabilities to the public?

      I cant answer yes to anyone of those points. So O365 makes a whole lot of sense for small to medium companies that cant afford what you apparently have.

      Unless Im wrong on the above points, I damn well guarantee you they keep that data much more secure and accessible than you ever will. I get why companies dont want to go cloud, but the whole "on someone elses servers" is overplayed. And most IT people Ive been around are really just lucky anything works anyway - they really dont understand why things work but they followed some Google article and got lucky. Not to mention running exchange 2010 on 7 year old servers.

    7. Re: Fuck you,Satya. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your comment makes less sense once you replace "The Cloud" with "other peoples computers," whereupon you realise that you've just become yet another victim of cockroach marketing. Sorry, that was uncalled for; cockroaches are far more wholesome than marketers. If your personal data holds little worth to you (which presumably it must not if you allow it to pass through and reside in foreign countries each with their own multitude of ultraparanoid eyes), then why pay for that privilege?

    8. Re:Fuck you,Satya. by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 1

      The issue isn't outside (malicious hacker) access to the data. The issue is MS itself having access to it. I'd rather keep mine on-site, where at least I KNOW if it's compromised.

    9. Re:Fuck you,Satya. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This... has nothing to do with LibreOffice. O365 is an entire set of enterprise IT management and productivity tools. This would be like you telling Home Depot they're worthless because someone gave you a hammer for free.

      But if what all you need to do are to hammer nails, why do you need Home Depot for? That's the point of parent.

    10. Re: Fuck you,Satya. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its already on other peoples computers. For one the NSA's.

      Unless you own the whole path to and from its on someone else's computer before it leaves your site.

    11. Re:Fuck you,Satya. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And how do you know? You got someone looking at the captured data 24/7? If you're like most admins, you'll notice if ransomware or a virus comes in, but what about if the Chinese/Russians decide to lay in wait and siphon off data a few KB at a time?

    12. Re:Fuck you,Satya. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't, that's why comparing the two is idiotic. O365 isn't a word/spreadsheet/presentation processor. It's an entire IT platform. I'm honestly embarrassed reading these knee jerk reactions from people thinking O365 is a simply the web version of Microsoft Word/Excel/PowerPoint. It's basically just saying to everyone that you have no idea what the platform is for, who the target customer base is and what's actually included with the licensing.

    13. Re:Fuck you,Satya. by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 0

      It's an entire platform only for people who want their data stolen by Microsoft. Cloud = data theft.

    14. Re:Fuck you,Satya. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The subscription model is all about removing the ability to hammer your own nails because too many people would do exactly that. It is far better for a vendor's balance sheet to ensure you can only hire them to hammer the nails for you. Besides, you may have infringed on the copyright of the nail manufacturer and a subscription puts the liability for that on a properly licensed third party. Forget the EULA, there is no way a commissioned sales person would lie about that to make a quota or earn a bonus; just ask them.

      Don't you know the world will end if you don't do business with Home Depot - what's wrong with you? I'm happy to give you my Home Depot rep's number. My rep served me a tall glass of cool-aid before giving a totally objective explanation of all of this. Funny, looking back, my rep was drinking water... Did you also forget that the reason you consume food is simply because farmers need to sell their crops? The only reason you take a dump is so you can help drive the sale of toilet paper. Its clear that you don't get it but I don't see why its so difficult to comprehend the grand perfection that is seller side economics. Customers servicing businesses is the pinnacle of human achievement.

    15. Re:Fuck you,Satya. by higuita · · Score: 1

      basically no, openoffice is mostly dead. Apache did try to pick it up, but most developers moved to libreoffice and even release security patch for openoffice took several months, if ever released.

      Is someone is still using openoffice, he/she/it is basically using a several year old office without updates. Just move on to libreoffice already!
      Libreoffice in the other hand had lot of development, new features, bug fixes and cleanup (they finally removed old trash that SUN kept still from staroffice and even DOS support).

      And yes, libreoffice replaced office 386 just fine, and lot cheaper too. Yes, it is not perfect, but neither all MS office have perfect compatibility between then, people just accept it fine because "it's my fault, i still didn't upgrade my office" thinking.

      --
      Higuita
    16. Re: Fuck you,Satya. by datavirtue · · Score: 1

      It's not just a lump of computers in a data center you jack off. It is a collection of services and resources that all work together as advertised (well...) and can be provisioned without an act of congress or a massive project kick-off led by a planning committee. It is an ecosystem of software that is cloud-enabled, as in 12-factor, where automated deployment and scaling are a reality. Hand waving comments like "other people's computers" shows your complete lack of relevance and one of the driving reasons for cloud adoption. Get with it.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
  6. Unsubscribe. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unsubscribe.

  7. The Joy of Rent-Seeking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1
  8. Re:We will rake you over hotter coals than ever b4 by Joce640k · · Score: 1

    Yep. The only real message in that headline is that it's overpriced.

    --
    No sig today...
  9. You asked for it by not supporting LibreOffice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You always said but i need that one feature or that one closed data format. Now you are in the extinguish phase of EEE. Same goes for gimp vs photoshop who is also now a subscription.

  10. Translation to plain english: by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 4, Insightful
    What he said:

    When companies transition from Microsoft's traditional licensing business to cloud-based subscriptions, it's "not a one-for-one move," Nadella told Morgan Stanley analyst Keith Weiss

    What is means: We were foolish to have sold perpetual licenses for just a one time hit. People who can move out have already moved out of MsOffice. Those who have not moved out, could not so. So we have them by their balls. We are going to make them all pay month after month to get access to their own data. Dont worry about users holding on to their old licenses. We make life hell for them, and they will eventually succumb and move to cloud and pay us our due share, our daily bread. It might be their data, but they stored it in our formats. Now they are our prisoners, we will never release them, but continue to bleed them dry.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    1. Re:Translation to plain english: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You forgot that MS will read, analyze, copy, and share all your documents with anyone that has money.

    2. Re:Translation to plain english: by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 2

      You can still save locally without cloud-fucking your documents, even if you pay monthly. OneDrive is easy to disable.

    3. Re: Translation to plain english: by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Formats are "open." I'm not even sure if MS's own implementation matches the written spec.

    4. Re:Translation to plain english: by geekmux · · Score: 1

      ...OneDrive is easy to disable.

      For now. Don't think for a fucking second that will continue to be allowed forever.

    5. Re:Translation to plain english: by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

      You can still save locally without cloud-fucking your documents, even if you pay monthly. OneDrive is easy to disable. ^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H It is easy to make the user interface say OneDrive is disabled.

      Fixed it for you.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    6. Re: Translation to plain english: by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Open? You mean the OOXML abomination? With binary blobs that can not be parsed by anything other than the old MS office functions? MsOffice has an emulator in which old code is executed to parse these blobs. They have still not provided a reference implementation of their own standard. And their own standard is, "feed this to the old ms office binary, what ever it spits out is the standard behavior"

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  11. Ha ha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A sucker is born every minute. I haven't used MS Office since the cloud bullshit. Office Libre or Open Office for me.

  12. Why pay once when you can just keep paying by Revek · · Score: 1

    I refuse to buy subscription software. I'm sure its a win win for macroshaft though.

    1. Re:Why pay once when you can just keep paying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't buy it. You rent it and get assraped by an dotty every month.

    2. Re:Why pay once when you can just keep paying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what does "an dotty" mean? Are you just throwing gibberish letters together?

    3. Re:Why pay once when you can just keep paying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You get a tad Clippy then.

    4. Re:Why pay once when you can just keep paying by rogoshen1 · · Score: 1

      he's making a statement about the heritage of MS's CEO (and seemingly 70% of their engineers)

    5. Re:Why pay once when you can just keep paying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He was referring to his Aunt Dotty. She booked a monthly appointment with him on O365

  13. Re:We will rake you over hotter coals than ever b4 by Joce640k · · Score: 0

    Next up: Windows 10

    Pretty soon there's going to be an "Insert credit card to continue" nag screen on every Windows 10 machine.

    --
    No sig today...
  14. Really? Because.... by Zorro · · Score: 2

    Mine has been trying to connect for the last 30 minutes without success. This happens often everyday.

  15. Re:Insert MICROS~1 advert on the Microsoft slashdo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    We used to be engineers during the early days of Slashdot. We have all now been promoted to the management.

  16. users are not coporations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They dont rent software.
    Especially when I like Open Office better.

    1. Re:users are not coporations by higuita · · Score: 1

      openoffice is dead for several years already, switch to libreoffice

      --
      Higuita
  17. Re:We will rake you over hotter coals than ever b4 by guruevi · · Score: 2

    Affordable? MS Office for businesses was $700-1200/user depending on your licensing model and often you didn't even get CAL's for your Exchange and other servers, even the home edition was like $100-200. Even if you had 10,000 licenses or more, you still were on the hook for ~$2-3M/year for Microsoft licensing.

    --
    Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
  18. Re: Insert MICROS~1 advert on the Microsoft slashd by peragrin · · Score: 1

    You never paid once for Ms office. Not since it went to windows

    You paid $350 every 3-6 years or you got lucky and got a three year with your $1500 new computer that was also replaced every 3-6 years.

    You always paid for office. Now you pay byonth or year for it. It works. It also allows rivals to slip in as you start charging enough that instead of a once every thing 3-6 year write off able expense it is a recurring expense. And reoccurring expenses are the first to get trimmed.

    --
    i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
  19. Re:We will rake you over hotter coals than ever b4 by Alain+Williams · · Score: 2

    Sad that the big thing Microsoft is pumped about is a stale word processor and spreadsheet package.

    Satya will fix that when he has enough users running cloud software with any component that resides on a PC being frequently updated. Release a whole bunch of ''improvements'' that just happen to require a change to the file format - things that really matter ... thus making problems for Libreoffice. 6 months later once Libreoffice has caught up; do it again; then again. Eventually most people will give up with Libreoffice. Yes: the EU will sue Microsoft and say that its file formats must be documented, but in a fast moving environment the competition will never quite get the opportunity to catch up.

  20. Re:We will rake you over hotter coals than ever b4 by tlhIngan · · Score: 2

    This is truly an excellent opportunity to make money off of charging people a monthly fee for what used to be a fairly affordable one-time purchase. Sad that the big thing Microsoft is pumped about is a stale word processor and spreadsheet package. Satya's idea of innovation is a payment plan almost nobody actually likes.

    Obviously you never bought Office.

    A year of O365 is around $100. A full blown standalone version of Office (yes, you can buy those, the cards actually are right where the O365 cards are - look carefully and you'll find them) is around $3-400.

    If you're a student, it's around $80 and you get a pile of more benefits, namely the $80 gives you 4 years of O365.

    And the Office you get from O365 is good on 5 PCs (and 5 "other devices"), while the standalone Office is good for one PC only.

    Yes, the Office is the same - you download the same software and can use it offline. Though the O365 version comes with cloud storage, which for 99% of home users out there, is essential as it'll be backed up automatically.

    So yes, they do make O365 quite attractive - especially for home. You get the latest version of Office, you can run it on 5 separate PCs and given there's a new version every few years, it costs around the same.

    And like I said, you can still buy the standalone version if you want. Just don't try to install it on more than 1 PC at a time.

  21. Microsoft: shrivel up an die. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pretty Please. I want to see that while I'm still around.

  22. They need to stop botching upgrades by RonVNX · · Score: 1

    A client had *months* of problems because of them constantly screwing around with their licensing back end. It needs to stop.

    1. Re:They need to stop botching upgrades by greenwow · · Score: 1

      I'm sure Microsoft would fix that problem if they could. They're preventing paying customers from accessing software that they paid for. They can't even fix the problem where Windows loses its activation.

  23. Re:We will rake you over hotter coals than ever b4 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Check eBay for 5 computer Office licenses for some $40.

  24. Glad I switched to Waterfox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I’m fed up of Mo$illa (notice the dollar sign) messing up the browser. There must be a payment from ad tracking companies to cripple something as critical as cookie management in this way.

    Join the resistance, switch to Waterfox or even Pale Moon.

  25. You guys don't get it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I understand the "renting software" argument, from a personal individual perspective. I have and previously only used LibreOffice. But not anymore..

    Now I have a personal Office 365 subscription, not for Office, but for OneDrive storage specifically. I love OneDrive and the features and interface it offers. The fact that MS Office software is included is the BONUS for me, and increases the value of my subscription.

    Now for businesses, Office 365 is a no brainer. For what you get, and you do get a lot, the value proposition is excellent.

    If you think an Office 365 subscription is just for MS Office, then you're either missing out on 80% of the other features, or you don't need those features and therefore are not Microsoft's target audience for the platform.

    Good on Microsoft for creating a platform of services that integrates well and helps enable businesses from small to large.

  26. We've had nothing but problems with o365 migration by MindPrison · · Score: 4, Informative

    ...at one of the biggest companies in the world.

    I'm an IT supporter there, and we're currently drowning in migration issues from the old system to o365. Profiles messing up, shared mails not working properly, license issues prohibiting our users from reading the mails and thus working. Literally thousands of calls, hundreds just at my department every day about Outlook o365 migration issues.

    Get it working before you brag!

    --
    What this world is coming to - is for you and me to decide.
  27. Re:Insert MICROS~1 advert on the Microsoft slashdo by FaxeTheCat · · Score: 1

    'When companies transition from Microsoft's traditional licensing business to cloud-based subscriptions, it's "not a one-for-one move"' Instead of paying the once for the software, you'll be paying a yearly rent into perpetuity.

    Most large businesse have/had a subscription, which cost quite a bit. Also, the O365 for business subscription cover a lot more than traditional Office. And nobody prevent you from purchasing the traditional licenses.

  28. Re:We will rake you over hotter coals than ever b4 by greenwow · · Score: 1

    > You get the latest version of Office

    And that's the problem. 2013 was recently removed as a download option which means you can no longer run Office on anything but 7 with the latest SP and later. The next version of Office that is going to be released and that will be the only allowed version to install from Office 365 will only work with 10.

    Outlook 2007 can't even connect to outlook.office.com any longer. Microsoft dropped support for it last November and about a month ago, our users were no longer allowed to connect.

    Office 365 is a disaster unless you run the newest version of Windows and are willing to stay on the upgrade carousel. We can't since most of our customers use older versions of IE.

  29. Re:We've had nothing but problems with o365 migrat by greenwow · · Score: 3, Informative

    We migrated to Office 365 last week. Most people still can't read email despite the fact we hired someone Microsoft recommended to help. The company is named SkyKick, and their office is near us here in Seattle. They were nice enough to send someone to our office to try to help, but I don't think they've been able to get anyone working yet. They seem sharp, but the migration has been a disaster.

  30. Nadella the preacher? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That sure sounds like what I've heard from Baptist Preachers.

    Oh we've had a good time! Weee've had good times!

    Keep following our path and we'll see the promise land of plenty.

    There are glorious opportunities there and better times than we've ever had can be seen.

    So follow us and we'll take your money and we'll be rolling in the rewards of those promises.

  31. Re:Really? Because.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At least it sounds like your AD is syncing so you can login in the first place! For us, new accounts don't start working usually until over a week has passed and password changes can take days. You have to annoyingly remember to use your old password with Office 365, but then when it updates, you often shoot yourself in the foot by using your old password and disabling your account because of too many failures.

  32. Same as it ever was by Tablizer · · Score: 0

    MS has always been a "subscription" service. Even though you used to make a one-time payment for a particular version, getting upgrades to be compatible with everyone and everything around you was a de-facto subscription.

    Since subscriptions will typically be bought for about 2 years' worth, it's not much different than the old way of paying every 3-to-5 years for an upgrade.

    However, the utility of the old version generally gradually "rotted" instead of having the plug suddenly pulled when the subscription expires. However, I suspect MS will offer a grace period for bigger orgs such that a nag message gradually grows more annoying over time, possibly with a delayed late-fee. Diminishing compatibility and nag messages are roughly comparable in pain.

    MS cannot make subscriptions too annoying, otherwise too many customers will bolt for alternatives. However, if one day they get into a financial funk, they could turn to milking current customers for as much as possible via strict terms, and sell out their longer future to survive the short-term. Remember when IBM went through a bean-counter fad where instant-profit was more important than customer good-will?

    1. Re:Same as it ever was by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 1

      Nope.

      Back in the day, they cared about their older software and compatibility. They released a (free) package that made Office 2000-2003 able to read and write .docx, .xlsx, .pptx, etc files (2007 and later).

    2. Re:Same as it ever was by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      True, but it became increasingly annoying to share between those different formats for multiple reasons. And MS was not always friendly across products: VB6 customers were left holding the bag, as VB-NET had too many differences to be auto-translate-able.

    3. Re:Same as it ever was by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you fucking piece of cunt shit

      fuck you

      fuck you

      you evil piece of shit

      what you said, first, is ridiculous

      second makes no sense

      third: THE FILE FORMAT CHANGES WERE FAKE

      you goddamn fucking shill cunt

      this forum is now 100% microsoft shills, because it did nothing for 2 decades

  33. Re:We've had nothing but problems with o365 migrat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did you use their "Outlook Assistant" program? From what I can tell, it doesn't work at all. We had to manually create new profiles when we moved to O365, and with our slow Internet connection at work, it looks like it will finish downloading email for everyone sometime about the end of August.

  34. Re:We've had nothing but problems with o365 migrat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're holding it wrong.

  35. Blacklist by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 1

    Nice thing is that you can whitelist with local storage. Non-US IPs aren't connecting from outside.

  36. I have Office 365 administration exp on my resume. by Kaenneth · · Score: 1

    An I get a *TON* of inquires from employers all over the US about it, even though I've been on perm disability for the last 2 years.

  37. Re:We will rake you over hotter coals than ever b4 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    An hindu chimp trying to rip people off. Shocked, shocked I am.

    Does anyone else gasp in ore at how many of these fuckheads have made it to top position's in American business?

  38. The problem with O365 is you have to use it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The biggest problem with o365 is you have to use it. I pity the fool.

  39. Re:We've had nothing but problems with o365 migrat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Clearly you're not up to the task. You should leave those things to professionals, instead of meddling in things you do not understand. I don't believe for a second that you work at "one of the biggest companies in the world", because real companies have outsourced IT a long time ago. Only two-bits small businesses with bad managers still have an IT department. You obviously work at one of these and have no professional credentials whatsoever.

  40. Re: Really? Because.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sounds like someone did a super shitty job configuring AD Connect. Maybe revisit that?

  41. Re:We will rake you over hotter coals than ever b4 by StormReaver · · Score: 1, Insightful

    ...and often you didn't even get CAL's for your Exchange and other servers....

    CAL's were my first major indicator back in the late 80's/early 90's that Microsoft's customers really were stupendous morons. They paid a TON of money for software they weren't actually allowed to use in any meaningful respect.

    Microsoft: That will be $1200, please.
    Customer: How many users will your software support?
    Microsoft: That depends on how much more money you pay us.
    Customer: What? I just paid you $1200!
    Microsoft: You paid for the right to pay us, not for right to use the software.
    Customer: Oh, okay. How much more may I pay you?
    Microsoft: How much do you make? Send it in.
    Customer (singing): Everything is Awesome!

    And now, the modern subscription scam just reconfirms it all.

  42. Re:We will rake you over hotter coals than ever b4 by i.r.id10t · · Score: 1

    And if you are a student taking certain "IT" courses (ie, any programming, networking, or desktop/server OS class at the tech college I work for) and you can download ISOs and a personal license key (not time limited, etc) for the OS, Office, Visual Studio, etc. via MS "Imagine". Tuition for that one course would be about $300 for an in-state resident...

    --
    Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
  43. Re:We will rake you over hotter coals than ever b4 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Microsoft Toolkit 2.6.3 does not seem to understand what "subscription" or "payment plan" means.

  44. That's good news by OneHundredAndTen · · Score: 1

    For me, at least - I don't use MS Office, and couldn't care less about it. I have been able to use other tools for many years, without any problems whatsoever. And producing more professional-looking documents to boot: most MS Office documents that I have seen look pathetically MS Office.

  45. Re:We've had nothing but problems with o365 migrat by dave562 · · Score: 2

    What is your problem with O365? We moved ~5000 global users out of Exchange and into Exchange Online over a year ago at this point and it works great. We have a pretty complex Active Directory forest, with multiple domains.

    Sounds like you guys borked your transition. The technology itself is solid. Way better than managing the Exchange infrastructure ourselves.

    We did a phased rollout over the course of 18 months.

  46. Re: We will rake you over hotter coals than ever b by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We all gasped in awe at the ironic ore you mined right there.

  47. Re: I just want to say... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not at all. Slashdot helps spread information. For instance has anyone asked why office360 is taking off? Not good marketing, but fear. All those people hanging on to office2007 got informed it is end of life on that product so upgrade or get hacked.

  48. Re:We've had nothing but problems with o365 migrat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't be so sure. I worked for one of the 5 biggest IT companies, and they thought Lotus Notes was an enterprise email solution. Maybe if they had at least out-sourced management it may have kept running all week long.

  49. Re:We've had nothing but problems with o365 migrat by dave562 · · Score: 2

    Not only is it unlikely that he works for one of the biggest companies in the world, even if he does, they are blowing it big time.

    We are only a mid-sized enterprise with ~5000 licenses from Microsoft. They have a whole squad of employees dedicated to our account. We have dedicated engineers and support escalation matrixes for the major technologies that we use (Skype for Business, O365 / Exchange and Azure). Anything I need a resource for, I can just email our account rep and he gets me connected with someone who actually knows what they are talking about. If we open a support ticket and are not happy with engineer assigned to it, we contact our support rep and she starts rattling cages.

    When we did our O365 / Exchange migration, we had weekly meetings with Microsoft engineers and account reps to make sure that things were going well. It was all included "for free" as part of our enterprise agreement. I do not know how MS treats other clients, but they want us to succeed. Maybe it is the markets we are in, or the clients we work with, but they really treat us like a showcase for their technology. We have also been in a couple of Azure "Preview" programs for various technologies (mostly around backup and SQL), and their product managers are extremely receptive to feedback and product enhancement ideas.

  50. Re:We will rake you over hotter coals than ever b4 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Got acquired to a company that is a big Microsoft fan. They went whole hog with the Office 365 and other online compnaies, and now all our services are now in the cloud. All the security training about being wary of third party sites goes out the door when you've now got everything as a third party site using single sign-on.

  51. Re:We will rake you over hotter coals than ever b4 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It was bragged at a training for Office 365 that the new mothership company uses that it was only $17/mo per user.

    Of course, they could save money by also not making it mandatory to upgrade Office every time there's a new and broken version. MS Office got "good enough" twenty years ago. If they had only stuck wot bug fixes and performance improvements since then it would have been an awesome product by now. Instead it's gotten worse and is the primary source of profanity in the workplace.

  52. The only top ranked Microsoft product by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Office is basically the only top ranked or great Microsoft product. Everything else is third or fourth place ranked in terms of quality.

  53. Re:Insert MICROS~1 advert on the Microsoft slashdo by jezwel · · Score: 2
    Instead of having to manage the status of 10's of thousands of PCs (ordered, in transit, deployed, in hotswap pools, in storage awaiting disposal, disposed) I now check the O365 portal for the number of users with O365 licences.

    What used to take several days (normally) to several months (when under audit) is now literally a few minutes work at any time.
    It is significantly easier to justify costs to the CFO when it comes to budget time - $X/user times number of users.

    You bet I like an annual user subscription cost with automated federated user management to O365 portal. When you're already paying for an enterprise agreement, the cost increase to change to subscription models vs the reduced compliance effort is a no brainer.

  54. Re:We've had nothing but problems with o365 migrat by jezwel · · Score: 1

    Don't be so sure. I worked for one of the 5 biggest IT companies, and they thought Lotus Notes was an enterprise email solution.

    To be fair, it wasn't that bad at email, especially if you were owned the platform, ie: IBM. It was used a fair bit in the enterprise before Microsoft had Outlook ready in '97.

  55. Re:We will rake you over hotter coals than ever b4 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Satya's idea of innovation ...

    Microsoft's idea of innovation has for a long time consisted in changing the colour scheme and making changes to ensure incompatibility; and adding features that look impressive. Personally, I use LibreOffice - not just because it is good enough for my needs, but also because I have now got a routine of rescuing my friends and family from disasters they have got into in MS Office. The problem is that all these oh-so-clever features in MS Office allow the casual user to do things that they don't fully understand the consequences of, so that when they later try to reformat things, the document doesn't behave as expected. LibreOffice is perhaps less 'innovative' - or less permissive, in that it stops you from doing many stupid things.

    Some of the things I have had to repair are bizarre - I once came across a table that seemed to consis of several, overlapping tables side by side. I can't even imagine how such a thing can be made - a table should just be a table, in my view, but there you are.

  56. Why TV ? Go out in the sun ? by DrYak · · Score: 2

    I laugh every time I hear about the "cord cutters" bragging about how they're saving money. HBO, Netflix, Disney, Hulu, UFC...the content fracturing is endless, and soon the aggregated monthly cost to access all the shit you want to watch will be twice as much as cable ever was.

    Or, you know, you could realize that the "glowing box with moving pictures on it that dumbs you down" isn't an absolute requirement to fill your life.
    Watching series or movies, no matter where from (/HBO, Netflix, whatever) isn't the only form of entertainment available to humanity.

    You could also go out more and do some outdoor activity.
    Yes, I know, /. and basement dwellers.
    But doing some outdoor exercise could be also good for your general health, extend a bit your life expectancy and even more increase your quality of life.
    (And there are a lot of simple out-door activities that costs a lot less than a gym/fitness membership, and certainly a lot less than any TV-media combination).

    Yes, some people are replacing cable TV with an almost cable-TV-like situation, where the only advantage is to be less at the mercy of a single local monopolies, but a few competing companies with differing content.
    But other people just wax their skis and go to have fun on the snow in the Alps.

    (DISCLAIMER: I live on the European side of the Atlantic pond, where cable didn't have such a huge success as in the US, and where there's even a significant choice of totally free TV/Radio media - either off-the-air (DVB-T), or (in bigger cities) relayed un-encrypted for free on you appartment's cable antenna connection port, even if you don't subscribe to any cable company at all.
    We aren't as much cable cutter as we didn't have that many cables to cut to begin with).

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  57. Re:We will rake you over hotter coals than ever b4 by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

    Yes, the Office is the same - you download the same software and can use it offline.

    It's also worth noting that the O365 subscription gives you access to the Windows, Mac, Android and iOS versions. Unfortunately, my employer set it up in a stupid way. If I use the web version then I'm redirected to a web page run by our org that handles the authentication, but for the mobile apps I have to type in my credentials directly to the app (which is then sent to our servers for authentication). This would be fine, except that they don't let me set a different password for that and the systems that give access to a bunch of information that is considered highly confidential and where I'd probably be breaking the law (GDPR) if I provided the password to Microsoft.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  58. Re:We've had nothing but problems with o365 migrat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now. now, be kind. It may just be the mysterious case of a network error.

  59. Tried it for fun and was shocked what I found by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not only do you need an evil data-slurping / data-perv Microsoft account but if you now disable the Officeruntoclick service, no office products will run!

    They've turned Windows 10 in to a user-hostile, untrustworthy worrisome piece of advertising garbage that it's unusable not just because of that but because it's so poorly layed out. Hot keys don't work any more, that stupid metro interface doesn't flow well and finally the Microsoft store is only a mechanism for evil greed and user-control / data-perv style slurping.

  60. MS Office "compatibility" by IGnatius+T+Foobar · · Score: 1

    Isn't it funny how the naysayers kept saying that OpenOffice/LibreOffice was a non-starter because it didn't have 100.000% compatibility with data exported from MS Office ... but the very same people think Office 365 is wonderful, and its compatibility is *way* worse?

    --
    Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
  61. Re:We will rake you over hotter coals than ever b4 by datavirtue · · Score: 1

    "We can't since most of our customers use older versions of IE."

    Time to roll out a deprecation and upgrade notification.

    --
    I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
  62. Has the market expanded? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Has the market expanded, or has MS just figured out better ways to fleece their sheep?

    It doesn't seem like there has been much of a market expansion for Office-like software since maybe the mid-2000s. So, where does all of this optimism come from if not the realization of new and better ways to squeeze their existing flock.

  63. Is expensive by HermMunster · · Score: 1

    A company that I'm consulting for currently has 28 e1 licenses. They pay nearly $300 a month. The only feature they use is email. That's it. They are paying far too much.

    I'm setting up (currently nearing finalzation and runs well) a Linux postfix email server with dovecot (imap and pop3), spam assassin, virus scanning, backup, a additional web interface, all without local accounts. The server is configured to handle multiple domains.

    In my own business I have this set up with it constantly running for the past few years with only minor problems typically requiring only a reboot to resolve.

    It took a few days to set up and has been in testing for a couple of weeks, but it will save the small business thousands of dollars a year and require little to no maintenance.

    --
    You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.