Microsoft: Office 2013 license is for just one PC, FOREVER

Once upon a time..

.. Borland licensed software "as a book" - you can use it anywhere, but only you.

I see some of that idea in the OSX App Store approach which allows you to install the software you bought on any Mac you have a personal account on (and quite a few other software suppliers follow the same route, for instance, Omnigraffle are quite OK with that too - and are quite taken with people asking about that, because it means we play fair.

From a business perspective it creates a great incentive to buy the more expensive stuff too because I know I can use it where I want to - otherwise I'd have to think on which machine to install it, and plan to be near it when I have an idea that involves that software. Plus - the major risk with the MS approach - if the machine borks I can simply use anther one, or restore from backup on a replacement.

Frankly, I cannot see who in their right mind would accept this sort of licensing as soon as they are made aware of the alternatives out there. From a business perspective it's almost criminal because it would up the cost of business Continuity Management substantially for no good reason other than that MS needs more money to keep the Titanic a little bit longer afloat.

365/2013, radio ads

Commercial radio has been playing adverts for Office 365 for the past month or so, with its main selling point being the ability to install on *5* devices, so that should be good enough for all the family bla bla.

Now I don't use MS Office other than Office 2003 in an XP VM, so I have no idea what other differences between Office 365 and 2013 may be, and I would expect the majority of their target customers don't either. How many will hear "Office, install on 5 computers" on the radio and go buy a copy in PC World which may or may not be the one that grants them 5 licenses...

Loophole!

Use a virtual machine of windows. It is the same PC, as its virtual. Store the VM on a removable disk which means you can change machines as much as you like as long as you load the same VM.

Or the intelligent option is to move to a free office suite which is actually standards compliant. But if you do this you may find you could use linux instead of windows which saves even more money. As steam is moving over there is strong potential for some of its customers to move too.

Even Adobe aren't this stupid!

I thought Photoshop was annoying but at least you can de-activate and reactivate on a new machine when you want to move, you can have as many installs as you like with only one active at a time, all you need is a net connection to shift it from machine to machine. This MS things is step further and step too far!

excellent ranting!

some really great anti MS ranting taking shape on the reg today, bet seeing this article to rant on made some peoples day lol

Stupidity

Eventually Microsoft and all other similar companies will realise a few truths. Quite a lot of software companies have already realised and moved their models, but those hell bent on the most profit possible now at the expense of the future are still lagging behind. I suspect terms such as this will cause Microsoft even more issues before the EU soon.

Microsoft should either give away their operating systems and office products for free, or a nominal amount to cover distribution etc. The money they make on them retail is simply not worth the trouble and bad press. Also, people running these products at home is part of the reason why companies buy them. People already know how to use them, saves training etc. In other words, home sales drives business sales. Business sales is where the money is.

When home users are faced with having to shell out constantly for Office on top of the already silly costs of Windows (assuming not OEM), they are likely to move away and then the benefit of having the same software at home and work is lost. Maybe if people are mostly skilled in OpenOffice or whatever, companies might switch as well? The ubiquity of Microsoft is largely due to ensuring they remain on almost all computers sold. If this starts to be eroded, they will suffer financially in the future.

Open office anyone

ex-msft, just sold my last msft shares (clearly if the company is going to try this sort of tactic it is going to fuck off whatever its users it has left

I won't be getting another copy of MS office if the licence agreement doesn't allow me to transfer it from a broken machine to a replacement - more common for me than 'upgrading'.

Frankly its fucking rude.

Worse than that of course Microsoft has gone into complete la la la la land and sticks its collective fingers in its ears and won't even let you send a comment on its website.

Pity I can't give them thunbs down, wtf and fail at the same time.

Idiots, greedy stupid blind and ignorant idiots. God I hope the whole damned company disappears up its collective backside and goes bankrupt.

Before ranting please check:

Does this actually apply to your country?

It does i.e NOT apply for germany where this type of licence is simple illegal and invalid! The EULA is generic and not always binding. MS Germany has upon queries by german media already stated that the bundling will not happen there.

IIRC the laws behind that are EU nor german so quite a few countries are getting the same rule.

Fuck 'em

I've already got a pirated version of 2013 for use at home. Through the nature of my job the bastards get more than enough money as a direct result of my existence, without me having to personally bankroll them as well.

What is a PC?

So exactly what defines a PC?

The Hard Disc, mother board, power supply, OS, Cabinet/Case?

I would think that for most its the cabinet since all other aspects are considered upgrades -- I can upgrade my disc drive, I can upgrade my motherboard, I can replace my power supply, and surely Microsoft will want me to upgrade my OS (they get money for that one).

The only thing most people would consider a different PC is when we replace the physical cabinet/case -- so it would be logical, and in my opinion a totally defensible legal argument, that only when replacing the cabinet/case are you moving the software to another PC. This I may not like but I can live with.

Who's at the front door now?

I installed 2013 two weeks ago. Last week the hardware suffered a major failure and I am buying a new system. I intend to physically transfer the hard disk from one machine to another. I am not re-installing software. But by reading the statement I would technically still be in breach.

If MS want it removed, they are welcome to make an appointment to come to my house at a mutually convenient time to perform the un-install.

i am still using my student version, but still teaching, albeit now grandchildren. However, I am guessing that my next machine may not have windows office on it. Open Office has problems sure, but the current stupidity of windows is draconian an irresponsible.

Thought though, so I load MS Office onto a machines ssd, use that machine as solely having office on it and gain access by using it as a server for say the next 20 years does that mean that MS is OBLIGED to give service and so on.

That will mean all my computers can use it and so can others via the internet. Its only installed on one computer Mr MS policeman.

Gotta go door bell, Oh gosh its the MS police!!

Doing nicely with Office 2003, thank you!

I cannot for any reason imagine why I would want to upgrade to the latest version of Office!? Office 2003 does a great job!