>> M$ Office 2007, full package, £350.
> 
> ...but some people do (usually if they are a company) and so companies 
> need to take advantage of this.  Notice how the "home" version of Office 
> 2007 is 60 pounds but the full version is 350 like you said.  What's the 
> difference? The 6x price increase certainly doesn't seem to be 
> justified, but I suspect that way it makes the most money for MS overall.

That's because the "home" version has most of the stuff missing. I 
actually fell into this trap myself; I was asked to obtain a copy of 
Office, so I bought the home version. When we got it, we discovered that 
it doesn't contain the required components. So then we had to go spend 
*more* money...

>> If you think that's "cheap", then good for you.
> 
> It seems completely in-line with other software available, which I 
> assume has kind of settled down to the market price.

Are you crazy?? Most of the software I see around me costs £20 - £40. 
£350 is seriously expensive!

Hell, even Apple sell their stuff for less than that, and Apple are 
legendary for being expensive.

I wouldn't mind paying vast amounts of money for something if I got a 
quality product for it. (E.g., I own several software synthesizers which 
cost almost as much as M$ Office, or even more.) What makes me angry is 
paying vast sums of money for a crap product.

>> If I paid that amount of money for something that didn't work right, 
>> I'd be *pissed*! o_O
> 
> I don't think they expect individuals to buy their software...

Well, true, but you'd think in a commercial environment, wasted time due 
to preventable software issues would be an even bigger deal...

Post a reply to this message