dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
16
share rss forum feed


intok

join:2012-03-15
reply to natedj

Re: $100 a year to USE MS Office - lol

said by natedj:

I think this is a good deal, for the simple reason being, it lets you install on up to (5) computers. So basically you're paying $20 a year to have the latest MS office suite on a computer. This would be better if you can only pay $20 per PC in lieu of the $100 minimum for five.

LibreOffice and AbiWord are free and can be installed on an infinite number of computers running damn near any OS for the low low monthly cost of $0.00


JohnInSJ
Premium
join:2003-09-22
Aptos, CA

said by intok:

said by natedj:

I think this is a good deal, for the simple reason being, it lets you install on up to (5) computers. So basically you're paying $20 a year to have the latest MS office suite on a computer. This would be better if you can only pay $20 per PC in lieu of the $100 minimum for five.

LibreOffice and AbiWord are free and can be installed on an infinite number of computers running damn near any OS for the low low monthly cost of $0.00

Yep, and if they work for you, they are a great value. They don't do everything Word does, however, so they're not a perfect fit for everyone. They're also not 60 minutes of skype calling per month, or 20 extra GB of skydrive.

Did you know you can get TV over the air for $0 a month too. Some people still pay for Dish, or Cable.

You can get free music over the radio. Some people still pay for Sat. radio, too.

Free options are great. But they're not what we're talking about here.
--
My place : »www.schettino.us


intok

join:2012-03-15

You are welcome to keep paying for crap if you like but the vast majority can actually get by just fine without it and only use it because of the tragic disease known as "thats what I've always used" syndrome.

No need for Skype, I have a cellphone and I've been able to video chat since about a decade before Skype even existed.

No need for TV, theres nothing good on 99% of the time anyways and for the few good shows there is Bittorrent.



Alcohol
Premium
join:2003-05-26
Climax, MI
kudos:4
Reviews:
·Comcast
reply to intok

said by intok:

said by natedj:

I think this is a good deal, for the simple reason being, it lets you install on up to (5) computers. So basically you're paying $20 a year to have the latest MS office suite on a computer. This would be better if you can only pay $20 per PC in lieu of the $100 minimum for five.

LibreOffice and AbiWord are free and can be installed on an infinite number of computers running damn near any OS for the low low monthly cost of $0.00

Yeah, they're also just shitty versions of office. Try making a powerpoint in Libre.
--
I found the key to success but somebody changed the lock.


JohnInSJ
Premium
join:2003-09-22
Aptos, CA
reply to intok

said by intok:

You are welcome to keep paying for crap if you like but the vast majority can actually get by just fine without it and only use it because of the tragic disease known as "thats what I've always used" syndrome.

No need for Skype, I have a cellphone and I've been able to video chat since about a decade before Skype even existed.

No need for TV, theres nothing good on 99% of the time anyways and for the few good shows there is Bittorrent.

Indeed, if you need something, just take it.

I've been using FOSS software for 20+ years. Doesn't mean I also won't pay for something that's worth paying for.

The vast majority actually pay for stuff. Like iPads. And iPhones. And Windows. And Office, if they need it. Not because it's what they've always used, but because they find value in it.
--
My place : »www.schettino.us


intok

join:2012-03-15

1 recommendation

said by JohnInSJ:

Indeed, if you need something, just take it.

I've been using FOSS software for 20+ years. Doesn't mean I also won't pay for something that's worth paying for.

The vast majority actually pay for stuff. Like iPads. And iPhones. And Windows. And Office, if they need it. Not because it's what they've always used, but because they find value in it.

No, it's because thats what someone told them to use because thats what that someone has always used. Go ahead, ask a Mac user what kind of computer you should buy.

I'm not against paying for things, I'm more often then not unable to pay for things under acceptable terms. I'd gladly pay for single shows like The Walking Dead, but I'm not going to pay $100 a month for TV service I'm only going to use an hour a week for 12 weeks out of the year.

So yes, go on, keep being a good little consumer, burning all of your hard earned money on trash that has a reproduction and distribution cost of $0.0000000000001.


JohnInSJ
Premium
join:2003-09-22
Aptos, CA

said by intok:

So yes, go on, keep being a good little consumer, burning all of your hard earned money on trash that has a reproduction and distribution cost of $0.0000000000001.

I have worked in this space for my entire career, so my hard earned money comes from people paying for software. The cost of the product isn't the cost of the media or distribution.
--
My place : »www.schettino.us


intok

join:2012-03-15

True, but This is Microsoft Office we're talking about. Each new version adds little of value over even long EOL'd versions yet sell by the billions as people are forced to via planned obsolesce from the breakage of file format and lack of security updates.

If you where talking about some specialty software where there is a real need for it yet the market is small, then sure, you can jack up the price. But for mass commodity software that is churned out as cheap as possible and at maximum price to billions of users?



JohnInSJ
Premium
join:2003-09-22
Aptos, CA

said by intok:

But for mass commodity software that is churned out as cheap as possible and at maximum price to billions of users?

Microsoft Office2013 has a lot of new features. I am going to go way out on a limb here and suggest that the programmers that work at Microsoft don't just sit around eating donuts, but they in fact program every day. Even the ones working in the office division.
--
My place : »www.schettino.us


CylonRed
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-06
Bloom County
reply to intok

said by intok:

True, but This is Microsoft Office we're talking about. Each new version adds little of value over even long EOL'd versions yet sell by the billions as people are forced to via planned obsolesce from the breakage of file format and lack of security updates.

Forced obsolesce? Hmmm - I seem to remember .docx viewers for Word that anyone could download. Plus - Word has always allowed previous formats - if it was true obsolesce then the older version would not be supported at all - only the new one would be supported.

I have had VERY few issues skipping several version of Word/Office. I went from Office 95 to 97 (97 at least a year after it was available) then skipped to 2010. This has been since 1995 - 3 versions in 13 years...

If they are forcing people to move to the newest - they are not doing a very good job at it.
--
Brian

"It drops into your stomach like a Abrams's tank.... driven by Rosanne Barr..." A. Bourdain


intok

join:2012-03-15
reply to JohnInSJ

If that where the case it would get better over time, not stagnate and offer only horrible re-skinning gimmicks.



JohnInSJ
Premium
join:2003-09-22
Aptos, CA

said by intok:

If that where the case it would get better over time, not stagnate and offer only horrible re-skinning gimmicks.

Ah, so now you're trying a different argument? Look, you don't need to buy it. I am happy for you to not buy it. Doesn't mean this isn't a good deal for people who were going to buy it anyway.

Frankly, it's a fantastic deal for someone who was going to buy office 2013 pro. That's not you.
--
My place : »www.schettino.us


intok

join:2012-03-15

said by JohnInSJ:

said by intok:

If that where the case it would get better over time, not stagnate and offer only horrible re-skinning gimmicks.

Ah, so now you're trying a different argument? Look, you don't need to buy it. I am happy for you to not buy it. Doesn't mean this isn't a good deal for people who were going to buy it anyway.

Frankly, it's a fantastic deal for someone who was going to buy office 2013 pro. That's not you.

I still don't see how it's a deal, especially when compared to what it was before if you where a student. Tons of home users used that loophole to get it for a vastly reduced price, one that was still too high, but still around 1/4th of retail.

So what you get 5 seats, most won't need the extra seats and will be charged many times what even a single seat of the retail version used to go for.

And you where the one that changed the argument. Fact is it's not worth it as the new versions still don't offer anything of value over the old versions or free alternatives outside of the forced upgrades over time. Such is the way of monopoly consumerism.


JohnInSJ
Premium
join:2003-09-22
Aptos, CA

said by intok:

said by JohnInSJ:

said by intok:

If that where the case it would get better over time, not stagnate and offer only horrible re-skinning gimmicks.

Ah, so now you're trying a different argument? Look, you don't need to buy it. I am happy for you to not buy it. Doesn't mean this isn't a good deal for people who were going to buy it anyway.

Frankly, it's a fantastic deal for someone who was going to buy office 2013 pro. That's not you.

I still don't see how it's a deal, especially when compared to what it was before if you where a student. Tons of home users used that loophole to get it for a vastly reduced price, one that was still too high, but still around 1/4th of retail.

I will leave aside cheating. It is a deal if you do the math and calculate the cost of 1 license for Office Pro ($400) or 5 licenses of Office Pro ($2000) and then compare that to 5 installs per year at $100.
quote:
So what you get 5 seats, most won't need the extra seats and will be charged many times what even a single seat of the retail version used to go for.
I already agreed YOU don't see it as a deal. In my home there are three users and multiple devices including Macs, PCs, and Tablets. It would be a great deal for me.
quote:
And you where the one that changed the argument. Fact is it's not worth it as the new versions still don't offer anything of value over the old versions or free alternatives outside of the forced upgrades over time. Such is the way of monopoly consumerism.

No, you went from "it's a bad deal, free stuff can do it" to "the new version is crap and offers nothing new". How is that a fact? You've done an analysis of the versions? You've published this fact sheet? I must have missed that.

I'm more than happy to agree that you don't find any value in this. Is there any universe where you could agree that SOME people would find value in this, or must everyone be like you in your world?
--
My place : »www.schettino.us


intok

join:2012-03-15

Having used every version of office since Word 5.5 on Windows 3.11 in 6 years in IT and 3 in politics I've yet to find anything that I can't do in Office '97 let alone the free versions that is offered by the new versions that isn't directly the cause of file format breakage to force an upgrade.

You actually need full blown office on a tablet? Sounds like a painful experience to say the least. Of your 3 users how many actually need full blown office?

How is it cheating if they are still raking in money hand over fist? The student price is much closer to the actual cost of developer time + massive profit margin then the full retail.

said by JohnInSJ:

Microsoft Office2013 has a lot of new features. I am going to go way out on a limb here and suggest that the programmers that work at Microsoft don't just sit around eating donuts, but they in fact program every day. Even the ones working in the office division.

Right here is when you started changing your argument. Of those new features have you ever used? How many have you ever seen in use? Or are they as useful as a scanner on your phone for tracking the migration pattern of sparrows?

For all the developers they have the end products don't show for it. If that where not the case the behemoth wouldn't have so many bombs that would have crushed any company that doesn't have a stranglehold on the market.