Am 13.01.2014 23:09, schrieb Orchid Win7 v1:
>
http://winsupersite.com/article/office-2013-beta2/office-2013-pricing-packaging-144267
>
>
> Apparently the subscription-based Office product has such a fantastic
> price that "it's a no-brainer".
>
> Is it just me? Personally, I'm appalled at Microsoft's latest attempt to
> suck money out of my wallet. And I'm baffled as to why this reviewer is
> so excited about the prospect...

Well, there's some truth in it being a "no-brainer": System requirements 
apparently include the absence of a fully operative cerebrum.

- Most people don't need 5 copies.

- Most people don't need to upgrade every year (let alone "multiple 
times per year").

- Most people don't need Outlook, Publisher or Access.


Yes, there are probably people who benefit from the subscription. But 
most people probably don't. Which is probably exactly why Microsoft is 
doing this: Their intent is - not surprisingly - to make more money than 
with the traditional licensing model.

> So let's see now. I can purchase a copy of Office, and then use it.
> Forever. (Lest you doubt this, my mother is still running Office 95.)

I'm using Office XP here, and I'm sure I'm using much more of its 
functionality than no-brained John Doe. Although I must confess that 
recently I've seriously contemplated upgrading. But - enter another 
reason why the new license model is anything but a wise choice:

I'm currently low on money, and Office XP is still sufficiently ok, so 
I'll just postpone the upgrade for some more time and save the bucks.

I'd like to see Paul pull off that stunt with a subscription license :-P


> Alternatively, I can pay $100, every single year, for the rest of my
> life, to get... exactly the same thing?
>
> In WHICH UNIVERSE is that better??
>
> Oh, but apparently that makes me a "luddite". Ho hum...

Given that the original Luddites were skilled people protesting against 
an erosion of their living conditions, I've just decided to take some 
pride in that label.

Post a reply to this message