Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Microsoft Businesses Operating Systems Software Windows

Microsoft Will Sell Office, Windows as a Bundle (axios.com) 263

An anonymous reader shares a report: Microsoft announced plans on Monday to start offering Windows 10 and Office together in a single subscription service. Microsoft 365, as the service is known, will also include security and management tools and come in two flavors: one for large enterprises and the other for small-to-medium businesses. The company didn't say how much it will charge for either version of the service.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft Will Sell Office, Windows as a Bundle

Comments Filter:
  • Not just no. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Chas ( 5144 ) on Monday July 10, 2017 @09:09AM (#54778003) Homepage Journal

    HELL FUCKING NO!

    I am NOT going to rent my OS from Microsoft. Not now. Not EVER.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 10, 2017 @09:13AM (#54778033)

      One too many cups of coffee this morning?

      • by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 10, 2017 @09:20AM (#54778105)

        look at that low sid
        he's a grognar that probably still writes in perl and doesn't have anything on his gnu/linux system that isn't 100% free
        shake that cane at the times, pops

        • by msk ( 6205 )

          AC can't be bothered to post under own ID when there's no obvious reason to post AC.

          AC is not worthy of any more attention.

      • Just upgraded to a systemd-enabled system?
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      HELL FUCKING NO!

      I am NOT going to rent my OS from Microsoft. Not now. Not EVER.

      Depending on pricing, I could see how Windows as a Service could make sense for businesses. As for you, maybe you should use Linux or Mac. Might be better for your blood pressure.

      • Well, I hate Windows 10 quite a lot already, paying for it forever would indeed be throwing a lot of salt into the wound. The only thing that really ties me to Windows at home is games I should probably just use it for that. Buying a console is out of the question since they more often than not not let you use your old games on the new hardware.
      • Depending on pricing, I could see how Windows as a Service could make sense for businesses.

        If they are big enough to have real influence on forward compatibility, maybe. Otherwise, there is a reason that businesses are typically very slow to upgrade to new versions of major software products they use: change is expensive and stability is important for getting real work done. Any sort of X-as-a-service offering that is subject to arbitrary changes, price rises, or even discontinuation is a business risk. Paying for long term support of your existing, tried and tested platforms (as with XP and pres

    • Couldn't have said it better myself. Thank you, Chas.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 10, 2017 @09:20AM (#54778107)

      Linux users: the vegans of the computing world.

      • Re:Not just no. (Score:5, Interesting)

        by RazorSharp ( 1418697 ) on Monday July 10, 2017 @09:25AM (#54778155)

        Linux users: the vegans of the computing world.

        Following this analogy, I would compare Windows users to fast food junkies who occasionally sit down for a fancy meal at Big Boy. I guess that would make MacOS users the patrons of gourmet.

        These comparisons won't fly around here since they don't involve cars.

        • These comparisons won't fly around here since they don't involve cars.

          Did someone mention flying cars!?

        • by hey! ( 33014 )

          Well, I think it's a bit of a stretch to put all "windows users" into a single group, but I do go on a week long Windows jag every couple of months, just to keep up with what the rest of the world is experiencing. And every time I do I'm astonished that people still put up with it.

          Leaving aside the inevitable and clunky upgrade I go through; the whole system is clunky. It's not that it's slow, exactly; that would show up in benchmarks. It's just inconsistent enough you can't really get into a good workin

      • Shit, I need to switch to Linux now? I just finished my payments on that 2010 Mac mini!

        • Hey, don't knock the Mac Mini! Recent models have been below par, but for several years we used some of the older ones as lightweight Linux servers. They were cheap, were small, and drew little power, which significantly cut the server room or colo costs, and the specs were good enough for most purposes.

          Alas, like a lot of Apple hardware and software, what they've produced under the same brand in recent years has been disappointing. These days for the same kinds of job, you'd probably buy one ludicrously hi

        • by gnunick ( 701343 )

          Ubuntu works fantastic on the Mac Mini I'm using to write this...

          • Only reason to get a Mac anything is to run OS X. If you're running Ubuntu, you could get a more heavily configured PC for the same money
            • by gnunick ( 701343 )

              > Only reason to get a Mac anything is to run OS X. If you're running Ubuntu, you could get a more heavily configured PC for the same money

              The machine belongs to my employer. I would never buy a Mac desktop.

              I also cleaned OSX off my company-supplied MacBook Pro, and I have to say that with the addition of a decent OS (Ubuntu), it's the nicest laptop I've ever used, and with the best battery life. That said, I probably still wouldn't buy one of those, either...

        • you can buy the 2014 mini at the 2014 price today!

          With an 1.4 GHz cpu / 4GB ram / and an 500 GB 5400 rpm for only $499

      • by chill ( 34294 )

        Hail to Vega!

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYzc_H9cgqM#t=01m13s [youtube.com]

        Note: Scene from Contact.

    • Re:Not just no. (Score:4, Informative)

      by Tim99 ( 984437 ) on Monday July 10, 2017 @09:26AM (#54778159)
      "I am NOT going to rent my OS from Microsoft. Not now. Not EVER"

      You rented it before, by MS not providing updates to fix broken stuff and then including new brokenness in the newer version: "That problem has been fixed in the new version". This was worse if you used MS Office. You might not have noticed, because they forced new versions on you, that would normally only work with the current and previous versions of Windows/Office. Windows XP and 7 broke that for them, hence the "new" rentier capitalism model.

      • So by that logic what you said applies to the entire IT industry.

      • Re:Not just no. (Score:5, Insightful)

        by iampiti ( 1059688 ) on Monday July 10, 2017 @11:28AM (#54779169)
        I disagree. With the previous model you made a one time payment and had X years of fixes but you could use that license afterwards.
        With the new model either you keep paying every X months or you can't keep using the software (in theory at least).
        I'm still running 7, not because I'm cheap or specially attached to old software but because I dislike many things about Windows 10. If I liked it I'd gladly pay the upgrade.
      • Sure they fixed things and added new things, but if things worked for you, you could stay where you were OS-level wise. Hell, I know someone who still has XP machines on an airgapped network that do what they need and it works fine - and they paid their one-time ticket to ride per machine, no additional costs ongoing to MS.

        This new model? Why buy an OS license one time for $129 (OEM) when you can pay us every month and give us more money after month 14 than if you bought it outright!

    • by ai4px ( 1244212 )

      I will gladly rent my O/S from microsoft. At long last, I loved Big Brother.

    • HELL FUCKING NO!

      I am NOT going to rent my OS from Microsoft. Not now. Not EVER.

      This is how enterprises already license their MS software--through an Enterprise Agreement. This is probably an attempt to scale down that licensing model to the home, small, and medium sized business (and, honestly, it will be easier for most businesses too small for much of an IT staff). It's not for you so you don't need to react so strongly.

      • Licensing is one thing, but name me one enterprise-scale customer that is subject to Microsoft updating their systems in arbitrary ways without the enterprise's knowledge or consent, or to Microsoft discontinuing a product line so the enterprise had to stop using it at short notice. The rules are entirely different in that game to what the small businesses and independent professionals have to deal with.

    • I hope you enjoy ads then. All indications are that Microsoft intends to push people toward buying Windows Enterprise by disabling professional features and including extensive advertising in all non-Enterprise versions.

      And still, people won't consider dropping Microsoft.

    • One of the MANY MANY reasons I left the MS ecosystem after I retired from 20 years of dealing with that psychotic corporation....

    • I second the motion. It's bad enough that they violate peoples privacy constantly, treat the computer people own as if it's Microsoft property, and otherwise are shitty, but now they want you to PAY every MONTH? LOL, no, you'd have to be stupid to do that.
    • I have Office 365, but won't have Windows 365. Already, a lot of my work, like checking my accounts, making my payments - I do from my Android tablet. Only thing I really do on my laptop now is Steam games, but once I can get that running on this laptop using PlayonBSD, that too is done. Then the only thing I'll need Windows for would be whenever I need to edit my resume or some document, but for that, I'll simply go to FedEx or a library.

      If I'm forced to start an annual subscription for Windows, I'll

  • security (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    "Microsoft will offer security" reads like "the oven will produce ice cubes" or "the ocean will give dry towels".

  • by amalcolm ( 1838434 ) on Monday July 10, 2017 @09:19AM (#54778095)
    Nice ... now I only have one bundle to avoid buying
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 10, 2017 @09:25AM (#54778153)

    I still use Office 2010. After that version, Microsoft ended the contract that it had with the local company that provided the proofreading tools for Brazilian Portuguese and decided to build a new grammar/style checker from scratch, which as of Word 2016 still is extremely inferior. It has fewer options and misses obvious grammar mistakes. Nevertheless, the LibreOffice checker is even worse.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 10, 2017 @09:38AM (#54778255)

      if you find a pattern that libreoffice is failing to catch, please submit a bug report with as much detail as possible. You too can be a valuable contributor to libreOffice. In fact, I don't think we have any native speakers on the team, so support will only come with help from you and people like you.

    • Ha, I was still using Office Pro 2000 SR3 until 10/22/2016 due to a nasty HDD crash. So, I installed new 64-bit Windows 7 HPE SP1 and its Office 2003 Pro SR3. And then, I got a free copy of Office 2007 Pro SR3. I also have LibreOffice just in case. I don't like the newer Office versions too.

  • by i_ate_god ( 899684 ) on Monday July 10, 2017 @09:39AM (#54778259) Homepage

    paying a monthly bill to Microsoft for Windows? Feels funky to me. Very funky...

    • paying a monthly bill to Microsoft for Windows? Feels funky to me. Very funky...

      $2 a month? I could live with that, more, not so much.

    • Paying [...] Microsoft for (anything)? Feels funky.

      Fixed that for you.

      • by gfxguy ( 98788 )

        Why? I don't really get the hatred these days. Their approach in the past has been incredibly sleazy - the per processor licensing, the bundling; but these days they are a typical software company that makes some products that are pretty useful to people. I won't fight over the privacy concerns - a lot of vendors fall flat in that regard, and concerned people can take steps to limit the "damage," but as far as the quality of end user software is concerned, I've not found anything open source that's bett

    • A lot of businesses already pay for Office365. Makes sense to add Windows and management tools so that they can manage their PCs. This is not meant for home users.
  • by ET3D ( 1169851 ) on Monday July 10, 2017 @09:40AM (#54778275)
    Here's [office.com] the announcement at Microsoft. It's for enterprises only, and I think MS previously offered Windows as a sub for them, so bundling Office makes sense.
    • by ledow ( 319597 )

      Schools have had this for nearly a decade now.

      Annual subscription, pays for both Windows and Office (EDUDESKTOP), stop paying and both go away.

      The only difference is that schools pay per full-time-equivalent staff numbers (e.g. each full-time teaching employee) and then get to install Windows/Office on as much as they like, and remote desktop licences, and Office 365 stuff too.

      Unfortunately, complicated by having to have separate annual licences for Server, Exchange, SQL, etc. still. Why they can't just br

  • by mccalli ( 323026 ) on Monday July 10, 2017 @09:40AM (#54778281) Homepage
    Which recommended explicitly to split MS into two companies - an OS company and an applications company- specifically to stop this kind of bundling from taking place and disadvantaging competitive companies.

    Oh well.
    • by gfxguy ( 98788 )
      When they stop offering it NOT bundled, you might have a point.
    • specifically to stop this kind of bundling from taking place

      Why? I mean it's a 100% optional choice. Actually it's far more optional than say buying a copy of Windows with frigging Norton or Mcafee or some similar shit bundled.

  • by ErichTheRed ( 39327 ) on Monday July 10, 2017 @09:46AM (#54778321)

    I guess it's been coming for a while. From their perspective it makes total sense - keep everyone on a single version of Windows and Office, force all the consumer users to accept every OS and application update, etc. The average consumer is used to the subscription model now - many are on Office 365 and almost everyone pays for their mobile phone every month. I can't say I'm too happy about the idea of having to rent the operating system as well as the office software running on top of it, but hopefully they'll realize they can't trap everyone in that cycle.

    This seems to be the ultimate desired state -- collect revenue on a permanent basis little by little, rather than rely on enterprise agreements and one-off software purchases. It's going to be a big shift though, Windows client licenses have been sold to OEMs for ages, and buying a new computer means it comes pre-licensed for the life of the machine. Windows Server licenses have been either one-off purchases or covered under much bigger enterprise agreements. If you shift to a monthly fee, who pays it, and what happens if you don't pay?

    Being in the IT industry for a while gives an interesting perspective...this is officially the point where we start swinging back toward an IBM mainframe style model. IBM still rakes in massive amounts of money by selling companies a mainframe, keeping it fed with parts and software, and charging monthly for the use of computing power. They used to be pretty much the only game in town, and the PC/x86 ecosystem was the break from that. Microsoft's got this going on the Azure side, and now will have another revenue stream on the device side, so we're back to central control of everything. I guess it makes sense because consumers are used to locked-down phones. But, I wonder if as PCs become a niche product for doing actual work rather than consuming entertainment, how many businesses will be happy with having to buy the same software over and over for eternity?

    • how many businesses will be happy with having to buy the same software over and over for eternity?

      What, you've never heard of annual licensing? This is hardly new. Even monthly licensing has been done by Adobe and others for several years now.

    • I guess it's been coming for a while. From their perspective it makes total sense - keep everyone on a single version of Windows and Office, force all the consumer users to accept every OS and application update, etc. The average consumer is used to the subscription model now - many are on Office 365 and almost everyone pays for their mobile phone every month. I can't say I'm too happy about the idea of having to rent the operating system as well as the office software running on top of it, but hopefully they'll realize they can't trap everyone in that cycle.

      This seems to be the ultimate desired state -- collect revenue on a permanent basis little by little, rather than rely on enterprise agreements and one-off software purchases. It's going to be a big shift though, Windows client licenses have been sold to OEMs for ages, and buying a new computer means it comes pre-licensed for the life of the machine. Windows Server licenses have been either one-off purchases or covered under much bigger enterprise agreements. If you shift to a monthly fee, who pays it, and what happens if you don't pay?

      Being in the IT industry for a while gives an interesting perspective...this is officially the point where we start swinging back toward an IBM mainframe style model. IBM still rakes in massive amounts of money by selling companies a mainframe, keeping it fed with parts and software, and charging monthly for the use of computing power. They used to be pretty much the only game in town, and the PC/x86 ecosystem was the break from that. Microsoft's got this going on the Azure side, and now will have another revenue stream on the device side, so we're back to central control of everything. I guess it makes sense because consumers are used to locked-down phones. But, I wonder if as PCs become a niche product for doing actual work rather than consuming entertainment, how many businesses will be happy with having to buy the same software over and over for eternity?

      I think in many ways Office 360 was one of the best things done by MS. It lowers the price for home users, and it allows businesses (specially small ones) to turn their MS Office expense from a capex into a opex.

      It does sound funky, and it does remove some freedoms from end users. But on the other hand, it allows more people to use the software (it is cheaper to pay a monthly fee than to fork money for a permanent license at once.)

      It's all about trade-ins. Many costumers will have legitimate objections

    • Being in the IT industry for a while gives an interesting perspective

      Is it the perspective where you are unable to see that this announcement only applies to enterprises and businesses which pay for windows using an annual subscription anyway and have since the NT era?

      What is it about people being in an industry that makes them completely unable to see what is actually happening in their industry?

    • cell phones / tablets are one off and don't need to be paid for each mouth

  • I get lifetime upgrades for my OS, full support, full office, straight up professional support for $10/mo or $99/yr? I'm in. It's a small price to pay to keep all my PC's going strong and not have to worry about going EOL and buying a new OS license every 2-3 years.

    It'll come down to the price and if it's feasible on the wallet.
  • by Danathar ( 267989 ) on Monday July 10, 2017 @10:19AM (#54778597) Journal
    The real question is going to be, how long before this becomes a requirement on new PC purchases for consumers with Windows pre-loaded? And will consumers cough up the 10 bucks a month or so in addition to the cost of the computer?
    • Well considering that we've had windows as a subscription services for enterprises for the best part of 20 years, and Office about equally as long. I'm going to draw a horizontal trend line which I'll correct for the heat death of the universe.

      • Well considering that we've had windows as a subscription services for enterprises for the best part of 20 years, and Office about equally as long. I'm going to draw a horizontal trend line which I'll correct for the heat death of the universe.

        You've missed Danathar's point entirely. Yes, enterprise licensing has been an annual subscription, but there are reasons for that. IT departments want flexibility regarding what they run and CFOs generally prefer a consistent cost vs. large one-time expenditures that are difficult to plan for. The subscription model made both sides happy.

        Neither of these things apply for home users. Most will prefer a one-off cost that will last a few years, and ride it out until things break beyond cost effectiveness of r

    • by Kjella ( 173770 )

      The real question is going to be, how long before this becomes a requirement on new PC purchases for consumers with Windows pre-loaded? And will consumers cough up the 10 bucks a month or so in addition to the cost of the computer?

      Requirement? No, I doubt that but I'm sure they'll eventually become like Xbox Live / Playstation Plus and make some key features paid subscription only. They just need to boil the frog a few more years, 50.33% [steampowered.com] of gamers are now on Win10 according to Steam. If you don't expect funny business from Microsoft when that goes up to 80-90% as Win7 support expires you're naive. And despite the number of games available for Linux the market share is trending down at 0.72% now. As Microsoft has the business market c

  • As much as I hate MS and dislike the "subscription" model, it's not really a horrible idea in a corporate environment.

    I've been stuck behind budgeting concerns which left XP *still* being installed on a sizable portion of our workstations. I'm not even going to talk about the archaic version of office we're rocking.

    For home use; bullshit. For corporate/government, it's got it's appeal.

    • For our parent company, this subscription would be a very bad model. OS and office "upgrades" are extremely disruptive to our operations groups... Excel version changes are so disruptive we plan everything around that as it directly affects business... millions of dollars at stake. We can never go to a subscription for that reason alone.

      Large OS upgrades are not as bad, but are nearly. Any time it changes the interface and people have to relearn how to get around, the workforce complains greatly. And I'm ta

      • I've seen your concerns as well, and share them.

        For me it's a classic "rock and a hard place" type of scenario. I've had to bang my head against training new users on new versions or fixing what an upgrade broke. I've also had to explain to auditors why we're still on an unsupported version of windows and have had to do some Rube Goldberg shit to bring us into compliance. Given the two problems, for me, I'd much rather have the subscription problem over the upgrade problem.

        Of course, if only MS could fuc

  • by Opportunist ( 166417 ) on Monday July 10, 2017 @10:44AM (#54778819)

    Pest AND cholera in a neat package. What more could you ask for?

  • They can't seem to make much of an inroad with hardware, unlike Apple - so they have to make their money somewhere.

    • by green1 ( 322787 )

      The irony is that MS actually makes pretty good hardware, I love their keyboards and mice for instance, and the Surface line of tablets are pretty slick too.

      It's too bad MS doesn't have a clue how to do software.

  • on leap days?

Simplicity does not precede complexity, but follows it.

Working...