"place their own customers directly in their crosshairs. Your immediate reaction may be to blast the previous sentence as hyperbole, but you would be wrong to do so."
As a Microsoft employee, I can confirm that this is true -- but only when he needs a break from "roaming the halls of Microsoft swinging a baseball bat".
My company is migrating away from office. We use google docs and Libre Office for internal documents and only few copies of office for the external.
With html and css, and the paperless office gaining traction Word and Powerpoint will have a hard time defending their existence, as is the majority of other apps. For me it seems that the only really good application that is worth the money right now in the suite is Excel.
Not paperless but paper reduced, point taken. I know we are changing toner cartridges less often than a decade ago. So we are using less paper than before.
What I meant for the html + css is that anchoring your documents to the a4 sheet, while people are consuming more and more content on screens of various sizes and less on paper is somewhat strange. Also google docs are html + css and a lot of javascript :)
Office has great advantage and is not going anywhere soon. But while in 1999 it was impossible to not have office, now depending on your company and employees can go from mildly inconvenient to annoying.
5 years from now - will you worry that some content looks great on paper, or that it looks great on the person's tablet or google glass. If your answer is the second - word is in for a rough ride.
Depends on the industry. In the financial services industry it is still essentially impossible to not use Windows + Office. Everyone in the industry knows how to use them, no training required, and it ensures everything is interoperable.
Theres also not much of an incentive to change. Using open source software won't save that much money, and would require training almost every employee. If open source office software is ever going to break its way into big enterprise, its going to have to get widely used by consumers first.
Exactly how is this enforced? Is it just "forbidden" or are you actually blocked from using the retail activation code on a new computer? Is it tracked via your Microsoft cloud account? What if you change some of the hardware in your PC, will Office 2013 complain that it's a new computer?
I'm very interested to see how Microsoft attempts to prevent spoofing. Does anyone with experience in this type of DRM have a comment on how a device with no real unique identifying property is tracked? As mentioned above, using the hardware configuration would have serious issues, and is certaintly not unique. A "cloud account" I can't imagine can tie itself to a device any easier (IP, obviously not, MAC address, not a good idea, etc.). How can MSoft allow re-installing it on a reformatted device, but not taking it to a new device?
I tend to switch machines at least once a year for various reasons. My office license goes with me and is removed from the original machine. If they won't allow that, then I won't be upgrading and will be preemptively migrating to something else.
I don't think Microsoft realise how easy it is to just move to another platform/tool these days!
The original australian article states two non-definitive answers:
A: "A perpetual license of Office 2013 can only be installed on one personal computer. This means that the customer can only install it on one device, either a desktop or laptop, but not both. If the customer has a system crash, they are allowed to reinstall Office on that same computer. If there are problems with this process, customers can contact Microsoft technical support"
B: "No, the customer cannot transfer the license from one PC to another PC."
I would bet on A and and a confused PR department. Of cause if you wan't to report some kind of "news" you would root for B rather than investigate further.
'Can I transfer the software to another computer or user? You may not transfer the software to another computer or user. You may transfer the software directly to a third party only as installed on the licensed computer, with the Certificate of Authenticity label and this agreement. Before the transfer, that party must agree that this agreement applies to the transfer and use of the software. You may not retain any copies.'
From the Microsoft Software License Agreement for Microsoft Office 2013:
1. Microsoft office technical support is a whopping great big dinosaur sized turdzilla. If you have any activation problems, you usually get "tough shitted". I've been on the end of this. Fortunately I'm a member of a" Gold Partner" (paid goon) and could kick the crap out of them from that side of things. Partner reps have a little more spine than office support people.
2. This does not cover warranty replacement PCs so if you have a hardware failure, it doesn't count.
I never really understood this line of thinking. Rather than trying to "hack" the license terms, you should just buy a new license when you buy a new computer, since that's what you agreed to.
If you're willing to violate the license, why not just pirate the thing in the first place?
It's things like this that drive those pirating numbers up!
VM's and the like may be fine for us tech/power users, but for most normal users who just pop the DVD in and install, then to be greeted with a "sorry, buy another copy" this is going to be very annoying!
I agree, but some things you just cannot get away with NOT using. Too many people are used to using MS Office. As good (or bad) as the open source alternatives are, too many of my friends/relatives are used to the interface. It's a huge re-training exercise to get them to use something else unfortunately.
I still use Office 2007, because there is nothing in 2010 and doubt 2013 that I will use outside of a business environment.
So what? I fly commercial airlines even though they are terrible because sometimes I have no alternatives. I still pay for my ticket instead of sneaking on board.
Microsoft gets to extract a high price for Office because its popular and the product has a strong network effect. That's one of the advantages of having an immensely popular product. Either use it or don't--don't try to justify pirating it.
I didn't justify pirating it, I said it would drive numbers up, there's a difference.
And your comparison is flawed. When you buy an airline ticket you know you are buying a single use ticket. If you want a travel comparison then it is like buying a car and saying you can only use it in a single state.
Microsoft gets to extract a high price for Office because its popular and the product has a strong network effect. That's one of the advantages of having an immensely popular product.
Sure, a high price is one thing but charging people twice for different devices or charging again for changing your machine is going a little too far. The _price_ is not the issue, it's the pricing model.
Either use it or don't
Like I said, it's not as black and white as that. With this pricing model I won't use Office 2013.
Even as a power user, should I pay for a license to software just to be be subjected to the decreased performance and annoyances of basic file sharing of a VM? No thanks.
Because pirated copy will annoy you with how it's not genuine, while real copy you use on more computers then you are allowed to (or that you reinstalled or something) will shut up and work?
I guess. I don't use Microsoft software when I can get away with it.
IMHO, paying for a license and then willfully violating its terms to get more than you paid for doesn't really seem morally or legally superior to just stealing it in the first place. I mean, you could also fraudulently claim to be a school teacher to get a cheaper Office license...
Regardless, you're setting your startup up for an embarrassing and expensive situation if a potential investor or acquirer decides to audit your licenses as part of their due diligence...
I don't believe any of what I suggested would be a violation of the license, unless there is language in the license forbidding virtualization, or giving a solution to the ship of Theseus problem.
The VM example is interesting. At what point does a VM qualify as a different computer? For example if I shutdown my VM and then "upgrade" it by allocating more RAM or changing some of the emulated hardware does that mean I lose my office license?
What happens if you keep the same hardware but install a different version of Windows?
The same questions apply to a real computer. When MS introduced activation on Windows XP, they spelled out what hardware changes would require a reactivation. Which was just an inconvenience, it didn't terminate your license to use Windows.
Microsoft should tell us what hardware changes they're looking for, if any. Maybe it is only tied to an installation ID of Windows.
People are pissed because many of us have two devices. In addition, it's almost impossible for many of us (like me) to avoid Office. Finally, this is the sort of thing many people were concerned about in the '90s, when Microsoft achieved hegemony in office suites, and in the 2000s, when Product Activation became ubiquitous.
The fact that you've successfully installed Office 2011 for OS X on at least two machines only means that the installer doesn't actively prevent this. It does not mean that the license agreement for the software says that this is ok.
Because Google Docs is better than it was in 2010, has more market share than it had in 2010, and is free for individuals. It's fascinating to watch a market leader gradually being chipped away because it is unable/unwilling to cannibalize itself.
That's pretty much what "OEM license" means. The whole point of the retail license was that it wasn't tied to hardware; what's news is that this is no longer offered.
Yes, the loss of the ability to install on a second portable device used by the same person who has the desktop license is a huge step backwards. They should cut the price in half to make up for this. As if that will happen.
Why didn't Techdirt just deactivate Office 2013 and install it on another PC? Uninstallation is a one-click Fixit at http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2739501
Uninstall Microsoft Office 2013 or Office 365
You've obviously not dealt with Microsoft support then?
I have had an activation issue open for 6 months before I got a resolution in the past and I had to go through my Gold Partner membership to get it resolved.
In that 6 month period, I used a cracked copy of Office.
'[…] You may not transfer the software to another computer or user. You may transfer the software directly to a third party only as installed on the licensed computer […].'
Microsoft is the Office company right now. A great many people run windows just to run Office. This is not a boat I would rock quite so hard just now if I were them.
Office is more important to them now than Windows. I believe that they are pushing the subscription model hard so that people will pay monthly for Office as a cross platform solution.
I hope they succeed in making Office cross platform, but I hate the subscription model and hope they fail in making that the norm.
I, on the other hand, want them to succeed with the Office subscription model.
Nothing will doom them so fast than constant predictable revenue.
In fact, I think this will also help Office alternatives, as they could try a cheaper subscription. Nowadays any Office alternative has to be free, and this means almost no funds for development.
Different business models are evaluated in a different way.
A small one off fee is not a viable business model. You either have to charge small recurrently fees, or have a big one off fee to be able to sell to business.
AFAIK, Google Apps for Business already charges a subscription for some customers.
For every micro-second Libre/Open Office stays ugly or slow, I pass the time by thinking about how cripled/proprietary MS Office is, and time flies fast. YMMV.
Sure, but Office is a tool that lets my users do their job. I don't have time for a philosophical war. I'm supposed to tell Excel power users that they need to use Calc now? They would laugh in my face (and rightfully so).
Nothing philosophical about it. We use Libre Calc to manage 3 million dollar / week budget. I am happy with it, coworkers are happy with it, and its liberal license has never stopped us from doing our job :-)
You're replying to a post in a thread about Microsoft limiting the number of installs per license. I don't know about your definition, but that qualifies as "crippling" in my book.
I choose to use Free software because I value my time and freedom. It's Libre/Open Office for me. You are free to choose whatever you want.
Enjoy your crippled - functionally - piece of software.
There, I said it. LibreOffice may be alright, but it's certainly not good. It looks like it came out of the 90s, and it, nor anyone else's, spreadsheet making will never even come close to Excel's.
I work in the financial services industry, so no I don't have a choice. I love Free software and dual boot Linux on all my personal machines, but I give credit to MS where credit is due - Office is a very good suite of software.
Meanwhile, if you get it online, it's $99.00 a year for up to 5 devices, and moving the license from one machine to another is as simple as logging on and deregistering the invalid device.
Microsoft have been skeevy in the past when it comes to licences, but I've no complaints with the current system.
I have a hard enough time justifying upgrading Office. Versions n-1 are almost always "good enough" and I see no killer features that justify these new licensing restrictions that at a minimum double the cost for the same install base. I usually skip at least every other release. This has given me the justification to stay on Office 2010 indefinitely, particularly given the fact that I will probably rebuild at least 20% of our PCs in the next year, and we take full advantage of the second install on a portable device. Viva la Office 2010!
Until free/open alternatives like libreOffice or googleDocs catch up MSFT has no incentive to hold down the bloat or demonstrate good customer service.
66 comments
[ 5.6 ms ] story [ 195 ms ] threadOf course this is hyperbole. Don't be ridiculous.
Story at 11.
With html and css, and the paperless office gaining traction Word and Powerpoint will have a hard time defending their existence, as is the majority of other apps. For me it seems that the only really good application that is worth the money right now in the suite is Excel.
Really? Is there any evidence of this? Most attempts I've seen at the paperless office have been failures.
Also, even in the attempts I have seen, nobody is writing reports in HTML + CSS. Everything is in Word/ppt/Excel, usually on SharePoint.
What I meant for the html + css is that anchoring your documents to the a4 sheet, while people are consuming more and more content on screens of various sizes and less on paper is somewhat strange. Also google docs are html + css and a lot of javascript :)
Office has great advantage and is not going anywhere soon. But while in 1999 it was impossible to not have office, now depending on your company and employees can go from mildly inconvenient to annoying.
5 years from now - will you worry that some content looks great on paper, or that it looks great on the person's tablet or google glass. If your answer is the second - word is in for a rough ride.
Theres also not much of an incentive to change. Using open source software won't save that much money, and would require training almost every employee. If open source office software is ever going to break its way into big enterprise, its going to have to get widely used by consumers first.
Well there's a buzzword I haven't heard in a long time. What is this, 2004?
My question follows his:
Exactly how is this enforced? Is it just "forbidden" or are you actually blocked from using the retail activation code on a new computer? Is it tracked via your Microsoft cloud account? What if you change some of the hardware in your PC, will Office 2013 complain that it's a new computer?
I'm very interested to see how Microsoft attempts to prevent spoofing. Does anyone with experience in this type of DRM have a comment on how a device with no real unique identifying property is tracked? As mentioned above, using the hardware configuration would have serious issues, and is certaintly not unique. A "cloud account" I can't imagine can tie itself to a device any easier (IP, obviously not, MAC address, not a good idea, etc.). How can MSoft allow re-installing it on a reformatted device, but not taking it to a new device?
I tend to switch machines at least once a year for various reasons. My office license goes with me and is removed from the original machine. If they won't allow that, then I won't be upgrading and will be preemptively migrating to something else.
I don't think Microsoft realise how easy it is to just move to another platform/tool these days!
a. One Copy per Device. You may install one copy of the software on one device. That device is the "licensed device."
b. Licensed Device. You may only use one copy of the software on the licensed device at a time.
c. Portable Device. You may install another copy of the software on a portable device for use by the single primary user of the licensed device.
from http://www.theage.com.au/technology/technology-news/does-you...
The original australian article states two non-definitive answers:
A: "A perpetual license of Office 2013 can only be installed on one personal computer. This means that the customer can only install it on one device, either a desktop or laptop, but not both. If the customer has a system crash, they are allowed to reinstall Office on that same computer. If there are problems with this process, customers can contact Microsoft technical support"
B: "No, the customer cannot transfer the license from one PC to another PC."
I would bet on A and and a confused PR department. Of cause if you wan't to report some kind of "news" you would root for B rather than investigate further.
From the Microsoft Software License Agreement for Microsoft Office 2013:
http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/products/microsoft-softwar...
1. Microsoft office technical support is a whopping great big dinosaur sized turdzilla. If you have any activation problems, you usually get "tough shitted". I've been on the end of this. Fortunately I'm a member of a" Gold Partner" (paid goon) and could kick the crap out of them from that side of things. Partner reps have a little more spine than office support people.
2. This does not cover warranty replacement PCs so if you have a hardware failure, it doesn't count.
Or install office in a VM you can shuffle around at will forever. Perhaps even a Thinapp.
You could even keep your virtualized office on Dropbox and use it on all ten of your personal computers (but not concurrently of course).
If you're willing to violate the license, why not just pirate the thing in the first place?
VM's and the like may be fine for us tech/power users, but for most normal users who just pop the DVD in and install, then to be greeted with a "sorry, buy another copy" this is going to be very annoying!
I still use Office 2007, because there is nothing in 2010 and doubt 2013 that I will use outside of a business environment.
Microsoft gets to extract a high price for Office because its popular and the product has a strong network effect. That's one of the advantages of having an immensely popular product. Either use it or don't--don't try to justify pirating it.
And your comparison is flawed. When you buy an airline ticket you know you are buying a single use ticket. If you want a travel comparison then it is like buying a car and saying you can only use it in a single state.
Microsoft gets to extract a high price for Office because its popular and the product has a strong network effect. That's one of the advantages of having an immensely popular product.
Sure, a high price is one thing but charging people twice for different devices or charging again for changing your machine is going a little too far. The _price_ is not the issue, it's the pricing model.
Either use it or don't
Like I said, it's not as black and white as that. With this pricing model I won't use Office 2013.
I guess. I don't use Microsoft software when I can get away with it.
Regardless, you're setting your startup up for an embarrassing and expensive situation if a potential investor or acquirer decides to audit your licenses as part of their due diligence...
Drop MS Office. Free. Your. Docs.
What happens if you keep the same hardware but install a different version of Windows?
Microsoft should tell us what hardware changes they're looking for, if any. Maybe it is only tied to an installation ID of Windows.
People are pissed because many of us have two devices. In addition, it's almost impossible for many of us (like me) to avoid Office. Finally, this is the sort of thing many people were concerned about in the '90s, when Microsoft achieved hegemony in office suites, and in the 2000s, when Product Activation became ubiquitous.
I don't know, but I do know that Office 2011 for OS X allows installs on at least two machines. Because I've done it.
The fact that you've successfully installed Office 2011 for OS X on at least two machines only means that the installer doesn't actively prevent this. It does not mean that the license agreement for the software says that this is ok.
Either way, it's something Techdirt should have covered....
I have had an activation issue open for 6 months before I got a resolution in the past and I had to go through my Gold Partner membership to get it resolved.
In that 6 month period, I used a cracked copy of Office.
http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/products/microsoft-softwar...
What determines if my virtual machine is one "system" across host systems, visible "hardware" changes and/or windows license keys?
I hope they succeed in making Office cross platform, but I hate the subscription model and hope they fail in making that the norm.
Nothing will doom them so fast than constant predictable revenue.
In fact, I think this will also help Office alternatives, as they could try a cheaper subscription. Nowadays any Office alternative has to be free, and this means almost no funds for development.
A small one off fee is not a viable business model. You either have to charge small recurrently fees, or have a big one off fee to be able to sell to business.
AFAIK, Google Apps for Business already charges a subscription for some customers.
http://www.libreoffice.org/
Seriously what is wrong with Libre/Open Office's slow ugly UI? I mean even GIMP finally managed to modernise its look and feel.
I hope open source catches up, I really do, but saying MS Office is crippled is plain false.
I choose to use Free software because I value my time and freedom. It's Libre/Open Office for me. You are free to choose whatever you want.
There, I said it. LibreOffice may be alright, but it's certainly not good. It looks like it came out of the 90s, and it, nor anyone else's, spreadsheet making will never even come close to Excel's.
Java.
Microsoft have been skeevy in the past when it comes to licences, but I've no complaints with the current system.
Until free/open alternatives like libreOffice or googleDocs catch up MSFT has no incentive to hold down the bloat or demonstrate good customer service.