Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Says Price Increases Coming For Office 2019 and Windows 10 Enterprise Users (zdnet.com)
Microsoft has price increases in store for some of its Office and Windows customers as of October 1, 2018. From a report: In a July 25 blog post, Microsoft officials acknowledged the coming increases. Office 2019, the next on-premises version of Office clients and servers which Microsoft is currently testing ahead of its launch later this year, will see increases of 10 percent over current on-premises pricing. This price increase is for commercial (business) customers) and will affect Office client, Enterprise Client Access License (CAL), Core CAL and server products, officials said.
Microsoft also is rejiggering how it refers to Windows 10 Enterprise E3 and related pricing. As of October, Microsoft will be using the E3 name for the per-user version (not the per-device one). Windows 10 Enterprise E3 per User will be rechristened "Windows 10 Enterprise E3." And the current Windows 10 Enterprise E3 per Device will be renamed "Windows 10 Enterprise." According to Microsoft's blog post, the price of Windows 10 Enterprise will be raised to match the price of Windows 10 Enterprise E3. Windows 10 Enterprise E3 costs $84 per user per year.
Microsoft also is rejiggering how it refers to Windows 10 Enterprise E3 and related pricing. As of October, Microsoft will be using the E3 name for the per-user version (not the per-device one). Windows 10 Enterprise E3 per User will be rechristened "Windows 10 Enterprise E3." And the current Windows 10 Enterprise E3 per Device will be renamed "Windows 10 Enterprise." According to Microsoft's blog post, the price of Windows 10 Enterprise will be raised to match the price of Windows 10 Enterprise E3. Windows 10 Enterprise E3 costs $84 per user per year.
Microsoft can do this because they're a monopoly, which by definition has no serious competition. Sorry, but Linux just isn't up to the task of meeting the needs of most users.
Funny. I don't see them jacking up the cost of the subscription service. Its still a good deal but I'm not to happy with them trying to force it on people.
I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
Windows isn't as dependent to the institutions as they use to be.
Except for Windows Clients, you can have iOS, Andoid, ChromeOS, Linux, OS X as well that will just Citrix into that App or more often then not the applications are web based so you don't need windows for as much stuff.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
it's getting ridiculous.
I wish Excel got the same attention as the convoluted licensing models. Have you ever tried to open more than one file at a time in Excel? I have 4 monitors at work which make it easy to have source, destination, and documentation all visible at the same time with most programs. But Excel is autistic.
And have you ever tried to make a quick CSV file? Check out this level of autism:
*Begin saving file*
The selected file type does not support workbooks that contain multiple sheets.
Expected warning, though the default in Excel is to create a new workbook with multiple sheets. How arbitrary.
Google Sheets does not have this problem, nor default to more sheets until you need them
Book1.csv may contain features that are not compatible with CSV.
Fair enough, though this delay occurs every single save which means they aren't even trying to see if such features even exist.
Google sheets does not have this problem
Now I am done, so it is time to close Excel and be on my merr...
Do you want to save the changes you made to Book1.csv?
I thought I just saved them? It's not like I hit an export button like in Gimp or Photoshop.
Book1.csv may contain features that are not compatible with CSV.
ARE YOU SERIOUS? The SAME message again?
Windows 7 not having SP3 lead to long updates times.
I gotta say, Microsoft has been doing a superb job lately with all their Linux promotion efforts! ;)
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
This will have zero impact on Linux. This is enterprise pricing. If I go to my employer and suggest that we not pay the increased fees and switch to Linux my employer will ask me "How much will that cost and/or save?" As soon as that conversation starts the heads of everyone in the room will start to spin.
Sent from my TARDIS
Imagine back in the 90s you wrote Linux drivers and file converters for OpenOffice/LibreOffice. But no you decided to take the easy route and now your paying the Microsoft tax with added telemetry.
Our company uses Office 365 and Microsoft hosted Exchange email. The hosting part isn't so bad, really. Yeah, it gets really expensive when you have a lot of mailboxes -- but it works far better than the 3rd. party Exchange hosting services we used or considered previously. (Many of the remaining Exchange mail hosts are really "legacy" providers who still have enough clients so it doesn't make sense for them to shut down operations yet. But they're typically still using an older version of Exchange server that's not fully compatible with the latest features in Outlook, and won't give you as much flexibility to change things in the admin control panels as Microsoft does on their own service.)
What drives me crazy though is how the Office 2016 for Mac and Windows code-base was so lacking in features. We paid a lot of money to upgrade to it via O365 subscription vs. using our existing Office 2011 for Mac and 2013 for Windows licenses. And it felt like we lost as many features as we gained with it. Until pretty recently, Microsoft didn't even put back features as basic as allowing images to be inserted in headers or footers of Excel documents! They also broke a lot of font format related stuff on the Mac side, because they decided to scrap the old way of using a proprietary font rendering engine that was part of the code in Office 2011 and earlier, in favor of using native OS X font rendering functionality. I think this was a good move, except people's carefully crafted Outlook message signature lines got mangled and needed to be re-worked.
I'm sure we'll pay the asking price and migrate to Office 2019 eventually, since we're pretty committed to the whole Office suite after over 15 years of employees using it for the majority of our corporate documents and messaging. But I'd really like to see Microsoft do better about not subtracting features that used to work in old versions of the software and charging us money to do it!
Windows 7 is the Best Windows.
2000 was a good deal saner, other than certain security improvements. But, as we know, each other version of Windows is passable: 2000, ME, XP, Vista, 7, 8, ..., 10. Yes, the lack of Windows 9 is not an accident.
Massive adoption of features we're used to for 30 years on POSIX systems gives quite a bit of hope. All that WSL, virtual desktops, curl, tar, sane terminal, ssh, AF_UNIX sockets, etc suggest it's possible that like they switched from DOS to NT, there might be a kernel switch to Linux soon. So Windows 11 might be... interesting.
The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
Nothing to see here.
I disagree. The best windows was win2k.
That may be, but there are still a lot of lurking compatibility problems which means when you're collaborating with people and organizations that use MS-Office, it can quickly turn into a nightmare. Formatting gets screwed, file corruption can happen. LibreOffice is a ways away from a level of interoperability that could make it a solid choice for us. For my personal use, it does everything I need. Heck, Google Docs is close enough that I can do most of my work in that if I want. But unfortunately, when it comes to document collaboration and exchange, neither product is at a point where it can be reliably used. And it's not necessarily the alternatives' fault. Office is a moving target, and it takes a couple of years to bake in the necessary level of compatibility, by which point a new version of Office is out and the clock resets.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Perhaps you feel unfairly treated? .....
I am altering the deal... Pray I don't alter it any further.
But they will, they will.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
It's free and it fills all my needs.
I understand the need to have word if you are at an office that has word.
But ... when I was I bought full Office 2010 for $10.
And I've never used it at home. Just wasn't necessary.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
Funny true story.
I used to be the guy that fixed corrupted Microsoft documents that would no longer load.
I fixed them by loading them in to Openoffice and simply resaving them in Word format.
They would often crash Word when it tried to load them.
The documents usually looked identical or had a few graphics moved around.
Which was fine- one of the reasons word documents crashed then was overlapping graphics boxes.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
I asked once someone with a permanent position at cern, why do they have so great ties with MS, when they (back then it was SLCE) can even have their own distro, with collaboration ofc with other labs like Fermilab?
Why can't they just take a stack of the public money they give to MS for various shitty services, like skype for business, and give it one year to libreoffice and ask them to add X functionality if needed and with the rest just polish the suite?
Why don't they do the same with a chat/video conferencing client?
Why don't they do the same with every small or large piece of S/W they use?
Why can't this be done in universities?
Why can't this be done by governments?
Where are the "good", wealthy and least corrupted countries in those things?
"hey man, we need 6 gorillion Euros each year for office suites and windows licenses. What do?"
and the answer is always, keep paying,
because your useless, uneducated public employee gets upset if the buttons on his office suite changes colours or position.
I wasn't saying it would cost more, or it would save money. I was merely stating that trying to explain such subjects to most CFO's/CEO's would make their head spin. Whether Linux is cheaper, the same, or more expensive to run is not really relevant as long as most people assume it is a hassle to implement.
Sent from my TARDIS
.. to actually own your software, there is little stopping the proverbial landlord from raising your rent once you're nice and comfortable in your apartment. So to speak.
Check your premises.
So now that Microsoft is buried balls deep in your company, they're vigorously driving home the point that you now have a business partner whether you wanted one or not. And this one has no responsibility whatsoever to you or your business.
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
Rather than fixing the root problem: the Windows Kernel can't be patched while running; they're sticking Band-Aids and gimmicks on the problem.
Microsoft is pushing out new versions because no one has gone for their subscriptions so new versions is how they make money. That is all.
Except that's not actually true. And it's the number one thing that makes no sense about Windows 10.
Microsoft makes nearly all of its Windows revenue from OEMs who install it on the computers they sell. With ~90% desktop market share, Microsoft is guaranteed to sell ~200 million copies of Windows every year. If Microsoft never released a new version of Windows and just kept patching/updating Windows 7, OEMs would still keep selling computers, and there would still be a demand for ~200 million copies of Windows every year.
The fact that Windows 7 is still the most widely used version of Windows, 5 years after the release of Windows 8, demonstrates very clearly what consumers want.
I don't know what the fuck they are smoking over at Microsoft, but it is some wacky shit.
If two people job share (eg one mornings, the other afternoons) and they thus sit at the same desk and use the same PC: is the cost twice $84 per year ? If so: why ?
Prediction: Windows 10 start menu tiles will soon become little TV screens of ADs!
Obama's legacy: (N)othing (S)ecure (A)nywhere and (T)error (S)imulation (A)dministration
Businesses DO save a lot by using LibreOffice.
But most businesses are led by PHBs who like what they are used to, and defend it precisely because they are as clueless as they are pussies. And then there is the MS fearmongering targeted at them every time they renew contracts or open their news sites. Resulting in very sluggish changes. But they do happen, as can be seen in the dominance of Linux on servers.
There have not been any meaningful new features in these office suites for a loong time. Most of them have been stolen by MS anyway, and others, including LibreOffice's commercial ancestor, had them first and did them better.
Butnthe "re-training costs" and "compatibility problems" memes are the best. They repeat them like mantras.
*While* MS Office updates *also* require considerable training for those robots that can't handle what they haven't memorized, every time the MS management decides a new design is needed to justify a new version.
And LibreOffice actually is better at opening old MS Office documents than recent MS Office itself.
So: Get real.
LibreOffice, OpenOffice... you say "yeah but it's not fully compatible with MS Office". This is the problem. Start using standard stuff, and everything is to be compatible. Some excel fonctions / macros only exist on MS? Don't use it.
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
On a 4 year old laptop running Outlook 2013, searching for messages was done in a reasonable amount of time. Now on a new laptop with Outlook 2016, searches are extremely slow.
Microsoft is pushing out new versions because no one has gone for their subscriptions so new versions is how they make money.
Except that's not actually true. And it's the number one thing that makes no sense about Windows 10.
Microsoft makes nearly all of its Windows revenue from OEMs who install it on the computers they sell.... If Microsoft never released a new version of Windows and just kept patching/updating Windows 7, OEMs would still keep selling computers, and there would still be a demand for ~200 million copies of Windows every year.
Why no sense? - because that is exactly what they are doing, but with Windows 10. MS have said they are never going to release a new version of Win10, just [forced] "updates". And they will increasingly push for users to rent Win10 too, as it gives them a steady income (which accountants love). They will probably do this by making the "updates" on non-rental copies inferior to those for rented copies - perhaps basic security only, and on new PCs the rental will kick in after the first month or you will get the black screen.
Trump to hang for treason.
Just give the whining, it's become boring. You lost.
It depends on what you need though. I need support for wide-gamut displays and 32-bit colour which I could never get working properly with Win7, but works fine out-of-the-box with Win10. Also, newer power management features like S0ix states are not supported by Win7, and poorly supported by Win8. Win10 will give a significant battery life improvement on newer notebooks. I agree there's a lot that sucks about Win10, but there are many new features that are actually useful.
7's UI is like a dumbed down version of XP. There are add-ons to make it tolerable, but without them it's shite.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
One necdote doesn't make a spring, but personally I've spent less time on that from OO/libre to Office (and back again) than I have between different versions of the latter.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Pretty short term problem, as MS did ship compatibility filters for Office 2007+ formats for older versions of Word. Yes, interoperability between versions, particular from the transition from doc to docx was problematic, and I'd say 95% of the time OpenOffice/LibreOffice can handle MS's file formats. The problem is the 5%, and that's where our problems stemmed from. In the end, everyone was upgraded to Office 2010, which still does handle the newer variants of OOXML found in Office 2013 and 2016 without much of a hitch. In the end, whether we liked it or not (and we don't, Office is bloody expensive in any enterprise environment no matter how you slice it), unimpeded work flow is far more costly. If LibreOffice could ever get sufficient penetration to force more effort at interoperability, then we'd review it, but for now, Microsoft has us pretty firmly embedded in their ecosystem (and like I said, it's not like I like it, particularly as the newer subscription model feels more like being held hostage).
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.