Slashdot Log In
Microsoft "Albany" Offers Office and Security as Subscription
Posted by
ScuttleMonkey
on Fri Apr 18, 2008 03:00 PM
from the renting-your-software dept.
from the renting-your-software dept.
News.com is reporting that Microsoft has confirmed a subscription service is in the works for the next consumer version of their Office Suite. "Code-named Albany, the product has a single installer that puts Office Home and Student, OneCare, as well as a host of Windows Live services, onto a user's PC. As long as users keep paying for the subscription, they are entitled to the latest versions of the products. Once they stop paying, they lose the right to use any version."
Related Stories
[+]
Microsoft 'Open Value Subscription' is None of the Above 202 comments
daveofdoom writes "This week Microsoft launched an SMB program that contains the words 'open', 'value' and 'subscription', none of which are common to Microsoft products, culture, or marketing. Digging in a bit I found myself confused not only by what the program portends to be but why it would be called 'Open Value Subscription' unless they were hoping to leverage buzzwords and concepts related to open source and SaaS (software as a service). It's such lame and dishonest branding the marketing group should be ashamed."
[+]
Windows 7 Likely Going Modular, Subscription-based 603 comments
Microsoft CRM writes "When Windows 7 launches sometime after the start of 2010, the desktop OS will be Microsoft's most 'modular' operating system to date. That's not necessarily a good thing, of course; Windows Vista is a sprawling, complex OS. From Microsoft's perspective, though, there are many possible benefits. The OS's developers can add/remove functionality module by module. New modules could be sold post-launch, keeping revenue streams strong. A modular approach could also allow the company to make functionality available on a time-limited basis, potentially allowing users to 'rent' a feature if it's needed on a one-off basis. Microsoft is already testing 'pay as you go' consumer subscriptions in developing countries."
[+]
Microsoft Moves To Patent Time-Based Software Licensing 118 comments
theodp writes "Microsoft's Open Value Subscription offering didn't get the warmest reception. Nor did the follow-up announcement of Albany, a planned MS-Office Subscription Service. Now comes word from the USPTO that Microsoft feels it deserves a patent for the 'invention' of 'Time-Based Licensing,' which aims to make the traditional pay-once perpetual license model a thing of the past. Hey, if your customers were waiting nine years between OS upgrades, you'd try touting a three-year lease with a balloon buy-out payment, too!"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Something of a catch... (Score:5, Interesting)
Once they stop paying, they lose the right to use any version.
So, an office suite linked to a security product and you lose both if you stop paying ... does this sound at all unpalatable to anyone else?
(Apparently; currently the survey on the page says 41% prefer the traditional way of buying Office, 38.5% would rather not buy it at all, and 20.5% think it sounds better).
I suppose the deciding factor is the price -- value for money. And as we know Microsoft has never failed to deliver on that one...
Re:Something of a catch... (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Also illegal, at least in Canada (Score:5, Informative)
Up here, it's illegal to make it impossible for a person to access their own data. Therefore, while they are allowed to prevent you from making new documents, spreadsheets, etc., they cannot disable the "read-only" features of the software.
Parent
Re:Also illegal, at least in Canada (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Also illegal, at least in Canada (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Also illegal, at least in Canada (Score:4, Funny)
Wait. Fuck.
Parent
Re:Also illegal, at least in Canada (Score:5, Informative)
I highly doubt this has any applicability to a subscription version of Office. When the subscription runs out, it doesn't suddenly encrypt all of your files. You are still free to bring those files to any of millions of capable machines, any print shop in the world, or use the long existing free "Viewer" versions.
Parent
Hello? Data for Ransome Anyone? (Score:4, Interesting)
But, not edit them or otherwise legitimately salvage your data.
It's easy to brush the idea that Microsoft holds your data hostage. Just don't think beyond your current PC. It doesn't bother you, but some of us WANT to open our children's mishmash of pictures and letters when we are old and gray.
This is the classic strategy where dumb money thinks it's wise to pay month-to-month.
I forsee upgrade problems that require extra support that one must pay for among a whole slew of gotchas.
Parent
Re:Also illegal, at least in Canada (Score:5, Interesting)
Then of course, there's just telling M$ to stick it and continue to use the current version of Office or switch to Open Office. I don't think most users will want or need anything beyond what is available now. I used to teach classes in Office--very few ever use the advanced features. I feel like MS took too long to get something like this out. It's almost like taking a step back to the mainframe days when programs were routinely put out as a subscription coupled with a help/service plan.
What will be interesting is when Open Office can read/write "Albany" documents. Will MS file a lawsuit?
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Also illegal, at least in Canada (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
QFT (Score:5, Informative)
This bears repeating.
Parent
Re:QFT (Score:5, Funny)
Thats an annoying bear.
Parent
Re:Also illegal, at least in Canada (Score:5, Insightful)
Correct, that is how they get around it.
Um, no. Technically, Microsoft could try this gambit; I'm not sure whether, legally, it would work or not. But practically, it'd be a death sentence on Office. Rights to Eleroth the Night Elf is one thing. Rights to your personal correspondence, to the data that your business needs to run, to your personal data, that's another. If Microsoft announced that they owned all the data created by subscription Office, nobody would buy it. Ever.
Parent
Re:Also illegal, at least in Canada (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Re:Something of a catch... (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Something of a catch... (Score:4, Insightful)
renting software always fails. It has no purpose and MSFT is going to charge some obscene amount so that a year of renting you can buy a full version.
Personally for me it doesn't matter. My documents are in ODF, and I can use any numerous applications to open the data, from Open Office, to abi word, to google docs. I can get 100% portable versions of those to stick on a thumb drive, and OS agnostic.
It doesn't matter where I am I can get MY data. Can you do the same with MSFT rentals?
Parent
Re:Something of a catch... (Score:4, Informative)
Otherwise, I honestly find that Ubuntu is a much better value. Besides being free it comes with a huge range of applications (free) that I use. In fact, I find it has a lot more features than Windows.
I'm not completely anti-Microsoft and do think Windows is the right decision for some people -- and gamers go without saying. However, my experience is much the opposite of yours. My Ubuntu desktop is much more capable and pleasant than Vista or XP.
Parent
It Would be Microsoft Doing This (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
People currently don't perceive the cost of MS software as it is included in the cost of the computer.
If this becomes the primary distribution model, cheaper (and free) alternatives will be perceived all the more interesting.
Isn't the one-time purchase cost what made MS popular in the first place (against mainframe subscription model) ?
Re:It Would be Microsoft Doing This (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe. It's certainly true that business operate on a much different and much more complex accounting and budgeting framework than households, and maybe monthly/yearly payments for software better fit into the whole budgeting/life-cycle/depreciation system. But I rather suspect not.
Businesses are much more concerned with reliability than with novelty. Businesses are also very concerned about having control over where, when, and on what their money is spent. A CIO may buy something like MS Office figuring on a three-year lifecycle, but then realize that there's nothing to be gained by upgrading. Thus running the software longer than the three-year term originally planned represents a savings, and money in the budget for other things.
If this were not the case, most businesses would be running MS Vista and MS Office 2007. In fact very few are, and a significant number of businesses still have a significant number of MS Windows 2000 machines running.
The fact is that a word processor/spreadsheet package is much more like a typewriter than like a telephone line. It's a product that you buy and create documents with, not a service that needs the constant attention and maintenance like a phone network with a huge company behind it. And no business would welcome the possibility of being held hostage by one of their vendors. It's becoming increasingly clear that while applications may be proprietary, there is no reason for data formats to be. It's worth paying for a product for the features it delivers, but not worth the liability if what you create is worthless outside of the application.
I tend to think instead that this move by MS is fairly insignificant play in what is becoming a very significant battle that will determine the future of the company. They're being forced to shift the whole direction of the firm into an area where they have never had any success, and in which there are already very formidable players.
This isn't about software subscriptions, it's about hosted services. MS has seen the future and doesn't like what it sees -- systems, applications, databases, communications, etc all living on the network and available anywhere there is a connection (and in many cases where there is not), regardless of platform.
I work in a middling consultancy that is almost exclusively an MS shop, and I've already seen folks at my firm excited about the Salesforce/Google Apps pairing. We recently migrated our CRM system to Salesforce and the consultants we have on the road are very interested in the ability to review and edit contracts and proposals on the fly, from their Blackberries. They also really like the idea of how chat/mail/calendars can be integrated into particular account records without the clumsiness endemic to Outlook.
We've only just begun looking into an official use of the Google Apps, but there is much interest. I certainly think we'll be moving in this direction well before we start planning a Vista rollout, or even an Office 2007 rollout. And I don't believe that we are in a unique position.
MS is terrified of this because their entire existence depends upon the platform -- primarily Windows but also MS Office and the supporting systems that businesses require, like Exchange and MS SQL. Salesforce plus Google Apps chips away at the need for an MS platform, and certainly is a direct attack on the whole one-user/one-system model that MS has always used. I can get to my Saleforce account, company mail, company calendar, company documents, etc. from anywhere, on anyone's system.
Basically, if
Parent
Fantastic (Score:3, Insightful)
Stupidass Microsoft... (And stupidass people paying for that crap...)
If it's like Albany (Score:5, Funny)
the state capital of NY, it'll cost a lot of money, spend years trying to accomplish anything, and work only part of the year.
Re:If it's like Albany (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Hello? ISO? You listening? (Score:3, Interesting)
Not Unreasonable (Score:5, Insightful)
You currently pay $300 for the standard Microsoft Office 2007.
If all they're doing is spreading out the payment over 3-4 years, with a small premium thrown in, that's not such a bad deal. I'd happily pay a $25-50 premium on software like Office in order to receive constant updates. So if what they want is $115 annually instead of 300 at once, that's fine by me. These products don't usually have more than a 3-4 year life-cycle anyway, and this way instead of being stuck with a single version, you get something which improves over time.
Obviously, the question of how they implement it, what they charge, and how good the "free upgrades" really are will determine uptake of this product. But if you take off your microsoft-bashing hat for a second, this isn't as stupid as it looks.
Re:Not Unreasonable (Score:4, Insightful)
No I don't. Maybe if it has something that I need I would, but it doesn't so I don't.
Parent
Re:Not Unreasonable (Score:5, Insightful)
I actually understand why people stick with Windows more than I do Office. To most people Windows appears to come "free" with their computer. Office is always extra. OpenOffice is free, powerful and just as easy to use. Why pay for something when you can get the same feel and functionality for free?
Parent
Re:Not Unreasonable (Score:4, Insightful)
If you have your file spread across 3 versions of office with minor to serious incompatabilities, how do you use your old files?
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That's cuz MS *HAD* to release updates to get more $
With this, they get $ regardless of what they add in.
At the start, they will add really useful stuff that you can only get in "Albany".
Once enough idiots bite, they'll stop improving things, fire half their programmers and hire lawyers.
Why?
-To sue people trying to cancel their Albany subscription.
-To sue OpenOffice for implementing their patented, ISO standard file format.
I Subscribe to OpenOffice (Score:4, Informative)
My security is also free, is updated regularly, and is pretty secure the way I have it configured. BTW, it's Linux.
Microsoft? Naahhhh...
Tired of Subscriptions (Score:5, Insightful)
Cable, phone, utilities all seems standard to us at this point, but now we have music subscriptions (stop paying, lose your music), radio subscriptions (love that satellite radio), game subscriptions (WoW addicts unite), and now more and more software subscriptions (I'm sorry, licensing).
I can perhaps forgive it for something like antivirus software where you are constantly downloading updates (glad my Mac doesn't need that yet), but Office? When do they slip Windows into that model? Would you like to boot today? Your subscription has expired, please enter a valid credit card.
Microsoft Albania... (Score:5, Funny)
Once they START paying... (Score:5, Funny)
Software Maintenance (Score:3, Insightful)
so in other words (Score:4, Insightful)
I believe this because I think it's already real (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm not thrilled with the snappiness of the performance of Open Office but clearly this is the way I will go the next time around.
Other than XP, MS Office and some tools related to scanner and digitizer tablet hardware (which is essentially free once you buy the hardware), I have cost free software on all my machines.
Freespire (Ubuntu) here I come!
Pushing more people away? (Score:3, Interesting)
More agile perhaps? (Score:4, Informative)
Agile development also allows the quality of the software to be under constant incremental improvement. But this has a downside as well: it becomes very hard to pick a point in time to stop releasing patches and instead tell customers "now you have to buy a new version", especially since the next version that the company releases is "just" another incremental improvement over the previous release.
So basically agile development practices can spell death for the "Shiny New Version" business model, and thus an alternative revenue stream needs to be found.
Agile software allows developers to consistently and continuously release incrementally improved versions of an application. It therefore makes sense for companies to continuously pay incremental amounts for use of that software.
Selling the concept of "it will get better over time" to who ever is making business purchasing decisions may not be easy, but in the end, if some sales person can pull it off, it will be to everyone's benefit.
Customers will be able to have a more direct and immediate interaction with software companies, and software companies will be able to practice the software development methodologies that they KNOW they should be practicing.
Note in my defense:
Some people may take offense that agile software means no more big new versions, but I'd argue that it feels intuitively 'wrong' to fix a software bug that is annoying many users, but is too low priority to make the cut for a service pack, and then sit around knowing that users will not get to see this trivial fix for years, just because of the common business model that is used to sell big box software.
Disclaimer: I'm a Microsoft employee (been on
(Besides, I've been here under a year and I work in mobile compilers!)
The Onecare tie-in is cute. (Score:5, Interesting)
Antivirus, though, is the closest thing to an exception(well, that and MMORPGs). People are neither happy nor efficient about it; but they often do end up paying for their subscription.
Connecting a product whose subscription feels "natural"(virus signatures are a service, and are pay per unit time) with a product whose subscription feels "artificial"(Office suites can be priced as services; but nothing about them makes them so) is an interesting tactic. I wonder if it will work.
Microsoft has wanted subscription software for years, so this isn't too surprising; but it may well have gained urgency from the push toward really, really cheap computers. Full upfront software cost is a hard sell on cheap hardware; but you might be able to make it palatable by stretching it into a subscription(plus, there will finally be a way to exterminate those pesky Office 97 users!).
The idea makes me a bit nervous, though, because it points to a model of computer use very, very similar to today's cellphone model. Cheap hardware, low upfront cost; but continual, tightly controlled, nickel and diming throughout the life of the product. Unfortunately, for all the progress they have achieved, cellphones are a really miserable lesson in why the openness of the PC world is so vital.
God, what have we done to deserve this? (Score:4, Insightful)
You have to be incredebly stupid, and still a total masochist, to even think about RENTING it.
Jeesus, please save us from all this ignorance.
Great, for those of us who live in Albany/Troy (Score:4, Funny)
"Albany window repair"
"Microsoft Albany repair corrupt files <technet.microsoft.com>"
"Hot dogs in Albany"
"Albany is about as useful as a hot dog dropped on the floor <technet.microsoft.com>"
"Used Cars in Albany"
"Microsoft Chairman Gates is now selling used cars after the failure of Microsoft Albany <slashdot.org>"
by cutting prices! (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:by cutting prices! (Score:4, Insightful)
Pricing it higher will create the impression that this is a more worthwhile package (and vice versa: a lower-priced package will be less worthwhile). And it creates income that can be used to further build up the open source industry.
Parent
Re:by cutting prices! (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Uh, No It's Not... (Score:3, Insightful)
Microsoft has really screwed up and doesn't seem to know where to go or what to do now that Vista crashed and burned. It will be hard for them to overcome the bad rap they earned on that one.
And Linux being free means that anyone that wants to try it out just needs to download it or copy CDs from someone else. They can try it whenever they want and if they like it, they keep right on using it.
Microsoft's days are numbered. P
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:What Happened? (Score:4, Informative)
From that perspective, I don't see this as out of touch with their customers. I'm sure a majority of the people who buy Office won't want this Albany thing, but I'll bet some do and those customers will be served better.
Large corporations I can especially see going for this. You budget for it and forget about it. It's how they tend to roll.
Parent