Dynaverse.net
Off Topic => Engineering => Topic started by: Nemesis on July 03, 2008, 07:12:20 pm
-
Link to full article (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080702/ap_on_hi_te/microsoft_office_subscription;_ylt=Aglfs.0Rrm.XlMNYRXVQuI5Y.3QA)
SEATTLE - Microsoft Corp. will begin selling its Office programs to consumers on a subscription basis starting mid-July, in a bid to reach thrifty PC buyers who would otherwise pass on productivity software.
ADVERTISEMENT
The move may also set the stage for Microsoft to offer its consumer-oriented programs as "services" over the Web, by acclimating people now to the new pricing model such a shift could require.
-
I've been using openoffice.org for a few years now. Admittedly, certain features like footnotes are easier with MS Office, but the average consumer probably wouldn't have a problem. I consider it to be 80% as good as MS Office with a price that is infinitely better. I really don't see people "renting" office, when they can haver openoffice for free.
-
Software as a service is the wave of the future. Thank McAffee, Ever Crack, and online subscriptions for proving this business model will work.
-
Software as a service is the wave of the future. Thank McAffee, Ever Crack, and online subscriptions for proving this business model will work.
Actually, I think the proof that this business model can work comes from Microsoft's software assurance program. That said, any cost minded consumer who goes for something like this over something free like openoffice needs to have their head examined.
-
I've been using openoffice.org for a few years now. Admittedly, certain features like footnotes are easier with MS Office, but the average consumer probably wouldn't have a problem. I consider it to be 80% as good as MS Office with a price that is infinitely better. I really don't see people "renting" office, when they can haver openoffice for free.
That is what I intend to do if I ever have to give up Office 2000.
-
I've been using openoffice.org for a few years now.
The same here. It does everything that *I* need it too. Recently while job hunting I used it to produce my resume without issue. I have neither the need nor desire to "rent" Office software.
Myself I look forward to ODF (Open Document Format) becoming the standard for document interchange thereby allowing people more choice what Office software they choose to use.
-
After the nightmare I went through with MS's "Trial" version that was pre-installed on my computer, I'll wouldn't use an MS Office product for free. The are still a couple OEM versions of Word Perfect Office available for under $20.00. I'd use Open Office, but WP is worth paying for. To Hades with MS renting out their product! Unless it goes out and does the research for me, it can't be worth the price.
-
After the nightmare I went through with MS's "Trial" version that was pre-installed on my computer, I'll wouldn't use an MS Office product for free. The are still a couple OEM versions of Word Perfect Office available for under $20.00. I'd use Open Office, but WP is worth paying for. To Hades with MS renting out their product! Unless it goes out and does the research for me, it can't be worth the price.
Open office can save in word .doc format, which is what I have set to default, and can also save files as pdfs. I've found that I have fewer issues with running documents from open office in word, than I do with word perfect documents. The only complaint I have is that adding footnotes is alot less user friendly.
Edit: did I misread your post. Did you say that a word processor is worth paying money for (what I originally thought you said), or that word perfect was worth spending money for?
-
After the nightmare I went through with MS's "Trial" version that was pre-installed on my computer, I'll wouldn't use an MS Office product for free. The are still a couple OEM versions of Word Perfect Office available for under $20.00. I'd use Open Office, but WP is worth paying for. To Hades with MS renting out their product! Unless it goes out and does the research for me, it can't be worth the price.
Open office can save in word .doc format, which is what I have set to default, and can also save files as pdfs. I've found that I have fewer issues with running documents from open office in word, than I do with word perfect documents. The only complaint I have is that adding footnotes is alot less user friendly.
Edit: did I misread your post. Did you say that a word processor is worth paying money for (what I originally thought you said), or that word perfect was worth spending money for?
And text editor can save its file as a .doc file, or htm, or html, or xls...
-
Googleapps is what's driving this. They're competeting directly with Microsoft at pennies on the dollar.
-
Googleapps is what's driving this. They're competeting directly with Microsoft at pennies on the dollar.
I am skeptical of Google's business model. Advert-driven software usage is a can of worms I'm not comfortable with from a user stand point.
-
After the nightmare I went through with MS's "Trial" version that was pre-installed on my computer, I'll wouldn't use an MS Office product for free. The are still a couple OEM versions of Word Perfect Office available for under $20.00. I'd use Open Office, but WP is worth paying for. To Hades with MS renting out their product! Unless it goes out and does the research for me, it can't be worth the price.
Open office can save in word .doc format, which is what I have set to default, and can also save files as pdfs. I've found that I have fewer issues with running documents from open office in word, than I do with word perfect documents. The only complaint I have is that adding footnotes is alot less user friendly.
Edit: did I misread your post. Did you say that a word processor is worth paying money for (what I originally thought you said), or that word perfect was worth spending money for?
And text editor can save its file as a .doc file, or htm, or html, or xls...
So can open office. I just listed what I felt were the most important formats for compatibility. Despite everyone's efforts to create an open standard, I feel that .doc has become the default standard for documents, and if there ever is a compatibility issue, the pdf will be sufficient to guarantee the document can be read on another computer.
-
I think that this has more to do with Microsoft having a steady revenue stream rather than the periodic surges when they release new versions and the risk each time that people will stay with the older version. Once people accept yearly subscriptions for Office the next thing will be to do the same with Windows itself.
-
I think that this has more to do with Microsoft having a steady revenue stream rather than the periodic surges when they release new versions and the risk each time that people will stay with the older version. Once people accept yearly subscriptions for Office the next thing will be to do the same with Windows itself.
It already works that way for some of MS's large corporate clients. They pay a subscription fee, and receive free updates to their software. MS even developed a stripped down version of XP so they could upgrade their older computers to a more modern OS. I think MS is trying to see if that model will work for them on a consumer level. While this program works great for corporate clients with a lot of computers, I don't think the average consumer with only 1-2 PCs will go for it.
-
It already works that way for some of MS's large corporate clients. They pay a subscription fee, and receive free updates to their software. MS even developed a stripped down version of XP so they could upgrade their older computers to a more modern OS. I think MS is trying to see if that model will work for them on a consumer level. While this program works great for corporate clients with a lot of computers, I don't think the average consumer with only 1-2 PCs will go for it.
That is true. I think that they want to extend it across everything. Homes, schools, small and midsize businesses so that everyone pays them every year no exceptions.
Except of course those who say to heck with Microsoft and go off to other systems. Like myself on Linux as just one example.
-
It already works that way for some of MS's large corporate clients. They pay a subscription fee, and receive free updates to their software. MS even developed a stripped down version of XP so they could upgrade their older computers to a more modern OS. I think MS is trying to see if that model will work for them on a consumer level. While this program works great for corporate clients with a lot of computers, I don't think the average consumer with only 1-2 PCs will go for it.
That is true. I think that they want to extend it across everything. Homes, schools, small and midsize businesses so that everyone pays them every year no exceptions.
Except of course those who say to heck with Microsoft and go off to other systems. Like myself on Linux as just one example.
Which is why MS is still offering office for sale. They are only testing the waters to see if people go for it. I don't think they will. MS office would be easier for me to use, and I would switch to it in a heartbeat if I could OWN it for a reasonable price, but while it is a little harder for me to use openoffice is free, and that is what i'll use unless I find some phenomenal deal on MS office.
-
I think that this has more to do with Microsoft having a steady revenue stream rather than the periodic surges when they release new versions and the risk each time that people will stay with the older version. Once people accept yearly subscriptions for Office the next thing will be to do the same with Windows itself.
It already works that way for some of MS's large corporate clients. They pay a subscription fee, and receive free updates to their software. MS even developed a stripped down version of XP so they could upgrade their older computers to a more modern OS. I think MS is trying to see if that model will work for them on a consumer level. While this program works great for corporate clients with a lot of computers, I don't think the average consumer with only 1-2 PCs will go for it.
From what I understand SA is a major success in the business sector.
-
I think that this has more to do with Microsoft having a steady revenue stream rather than the periodic surges when they release new versions and the risk each time that people will stay with the older version. Once people accept yearly subscriptions for Office the next thing will be to do the same with Windows itself.
It already works that way for some of MS's large corporate clients. They pay a subscription fee, and receive free updates to their software. MS even developed a stripped down version of XP so they could upgrade their older computers to a more modern OS. I think MS is trying to see if that model will work for them on a consumer level. While this program works great for corporate clients with a lot of computers, I don't think the average consumer with only 1-2 PCs will go for it.
From what I understand SA is a major success in the business sector.
Because its cheaper when you have to equip large numbers of computers. I think it would be a failure at a consumer level because most people are only looking for software for one or two computers.
-
I've been using openoffice.org for a few years now.
The same here. It does everything that *I* need it too. Recently while job hunting I used it to produce my resume without issue. I have neither the need nor desire to "rent" Office software.
Myself I look forward to ODF (Open Document Format) becoming the standard for document interchange thereby allowing people more choice what Office software they choose to use.
The only thing it doesn't do is e-mail which office does with outlook which I like.
-
I've been using openoffice.org for a few years now.
The same here. It does everything that *I* need it too. Recently while job hunting I used it to produce my resume without issue. I have neither the need nor desire to "rent" Office software.
Myself I look forward to ODF (Open Document Format) becoming the standard for document interchange thereby allowing people more choice what Office software they choose to use.
The only thing it doesn't do is e-mail which office does with outlook which I like.
Mozilla thunderbird is also free
-
I've been using openoffice.org for a few years now.
The same here. It does everything that *I* need it too. Recently while job hunting I used it to produce my resume without issue. I have neither the need nor desire to "rent" Office software.
Myself I look forward to ODF (Open Document Format) becoming the standard for document interchange thereby allowing people more choice what Office software they choose to use.
The only thing it doesn't do is e-mail which office does with outlook which I like.
Mozilla thunderbird is also free
Yes so is Outlook Express built into windows but I prefer Outlook as I did try out T-Bird.
-
I've been using openoffice.org for a few years now.
The same here. It does everything that *I* need it too. Recently while job hunting I used it to produce my resume without issue. I have neither the need nor desire to "rent" Office software.
Myself I look forward to ODF (Open Document Format) becoming the standard for document interchange thereby allowing people more choice what Office software they choose to use.
The only thing it doesn't do is e-mail which office does with outlook which I like.
Mozilla thunderbird is also free
Yes so is Outlook Express built into windows but I prefer Outlook as I did try out T-Bird.
Understandable. I prefer MS Office too. However, I don't think the price to own it is reasonable, and there is no way in &*%% that I am renting it.
-
Yes so is Outlook Express built into windows but I prefer Outlook as I did try out T-Bird.
From my perspective Thunderbird has 2 advantages over Outlook:
1/ Cross platform. If I switch Operating Systems I can take everything with me.
2/ Non proprietary data storage. This allows easier transfer of stored messages to another program if you should switch.
I like non proprietary data formats so that I can choose what software works for me without worrying that my stored data will be lost or "distorted".
I would like to see Thunderbird have an Inport/Export function to make moving my stored messages easier.
My current stored messages go back several years and have been transferred to a new computer at least twice under Thunderbird. I won't say it was easy but I was able to do it.
-
Yes so is Outlook Express built into windows but I prefer Outlook as I did try out T-Bird.
From my perspective Thunderbird has 2 advantages over Outlook:
1/ Cross platform. If I switch Operating Systems I can take everything with me.
2/ Non proprietary data storage. This allows easier transfer of stored messages to another program if you should switch.
I like non proprietary data formats so that I can choose what software works for me without worrying that my stored data will be lost or "distorted".
I would like to see Thunderbird have an Inport/Export function to make moving my stored messages easier.
My current stored messages go back several years and have been transferred to a new computer at least twice under Thunderbird. I won't say it was easy but I was able to do it.
I'm suprised you're not using Groupwise and Novell.
-
Thunderbird is what I use for my personal use I don't have need of things like Groupwise personally. The company I *was* working for used a Webapp for E-Mail and I strongly dislike the lockin to one company that did. With the shutdown people only had one way to save messages that they had a legitimate right to retain and that was to E-Mail forward it to another account. Forwarding is not nearly so good as import / export.
To me the ability to transfer data from one program to another is critically important. Lockin is anathema.