Microsoft "Albany" Offers Office and Security as Subscription

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."

Something of a catch...

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...

Don't worry, it'll be cracked in the first day or so.

Also illegal, at least in Canada

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.

Re:Also illegal, at least in Canada

But as long as you save in OOXML you can always read your data ... it's an ISO standard!

Re:Also illegal, at least in Canada

Well you (people who paid for Office) gave the cash which helped to fund OOXML and the possible destruction of ISO

Re:Also illegal, at least in Canada

Up here, it's illegal to make it impossible for a person to access their own data.

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.

Re:Also illegal, at least in Canada

But hold on...who says they're going to MAKE any viewers for the new version of Office. There's no guarantee that older viewers will work. What you'd be better off doing is saving your documents to where they will work on older versions of Office.

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?

Re:Also illegal, at least in Canada

Where the frack do you rent a dictionary? Wouldn't borrowing one at the library be easier?

QFT

you can renew your subscription or even use any of a number of free solutions (OpenOffice)

This bears repeating.

Re:QFT

This bears repeating.

Thats an annoying bear.

Re:Also illegal, at least in Canada

How does this work for other subscription services like World of Warcraft? Technically, your character, etc, is your data, though by the EULA Blizzard claims that all data is theirs, so perhaps that's how they get around it,

Correct, that is how they get around it.

and Microsoft could just do the same.

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.

It Would be Microsoft Doing This

This is Microsoft's way of demonstrating once and for all that you don't "own" the software you purchase. I hope this doesn't catch on and become the primary distribution model. If we don't own the software we purchase then the manufacturer does not have to guarantee any proper functionality.

Re:It Would be Microsoft Doing This

But in the large business market this may well succeed. Businesses are accustomed to budgeting and depreciation and all sorts of accounting practices that people don't have to do at home.

Businesses assume that it costs X dollars a month for a computer, and as long as the subscription costs fits in nicely with whatever cycle they buy upgrades on, they won't mind the rent/buy dichotomy.

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

If it's like Albany

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.

Not Unreasonable

Actually, let's just think about this for a second.

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

You currently pay $300 for the standard Microsoft Office 2007.

No I don't. Maybe if it has something that I need I would, but it doesn't so I don't.

Re:Not Unreasonable

Agreed. OpenOffice does everything I need and no one even knows I'm not doing my work with MS Office. My docs look great and my spreadsheets do everything I need. I don't do many presentations ala PowerPoint, but I could do it with OpenOffice if I needed to.

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?

Re:Not Unreasonable

What about when your files become incompatible with the latest version?

If you have your file spread across 3 versions of office with minor to serious incompatabilities, how do you use your old files?

I Subscribe to OpenOffice

Funny thing, too - it's totally free, I can download and use a copy locally, and I can use it on as many computers as I want to.

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

I can't think I'm the only one getting tired of the subscription model for everything. I remember thinking at one point that I'm going to need to start figuring out what I can afford to have and not, simply because everything seems to be moving in that direction.

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...

...the balkanization of software.

Once they START paying...

Given the wildly unsuccessful way that people took to subscription music services, I can see this being as successful as, say, the Zune.

The Onecare tie-in is cute.

I think the connection to Onecare is an interesting touch. Microsoft, among other "enterprise" software types, has had fair success getting corporate customers paying for subscription or quasi-subscription products for a while now(Software Assurance, anything with a mandatory support contract, some site-licence flavors, etc.); but the idea rubs individual users badly. Even if the economics are actually favorable, software with a self-destruct system just doesn't feel right. People like owning stuff.

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.

by cutting prices!

We'll charge nothing at all for linux and open office, and you're entitled to all upgrades for free.

Re:by cutting prices!

NEW! Ubuntu Linux 8.04, $999.99 with $999.99 INSTANT REBATE!