News - Office 2013 retail is “permanently assigned” to a single computer

[jim]

Instinctively I thought this, but I can't imagine it's as simple as that. I refuse to believe that lots of thought hasn't gone in to this. Maybe it's intentional to drum up some interest just for MS to then go "naaaah of course we're not doing that" before updating the license to make it seem much more attractive (and so drumming up yet more interest and sales)

I remember a spate of game devs/publishers doing that with DRM ages ago, and people really seemed to fall for it. I'd be surprised, but I guess you never know.

[jimftr]

Is this even legal? Surely a license can be used on any machine as long as it is only one machine at a time. I don't see the logic, and personally, there's no way microsoft will do this, i mean come on? Are they REALLY that stupid?

I hope not.

[aidanjt]

Is this even legal?

Probably not in Europe.

Surely a license can be used on any machine as long as it is only one machine at a time. I don't see the logic, and personally, there's no way microsoft will do this, i mean come on? Are they REALLY that stupid?

I hope not.

They released Windows 8, did they not? All bets are off while they're pretending to be a hip mobile software company dabbling on the desktop.

[peterb]

There is a simple workaround to this...

http://www.corel.com/corel/product/i...lb_wp16_113012

It has always been a far better featured word proccessor than Word.

[Saracen]

There is a simple workaround to this...

http://www.corel.com/corel/product/i...lb_wp16_113012

It has always been a far better featured word proccessor than Word.

Maybe so, but Quattro v Excel, and Access v.... ?

[Saracen]

I know that when I really had a need for an office suite at work, for presentations or large spreadsheets, Open Office usually failed me, but it's possible that it has become good enough since I last tried it.

....

Ditto. Like the time I built some spreadsheets for a client that was using Office, so I did them in the same version of Excel that they were using. But then, as they decided to add a few more PCs, they put OpenOffice on them, and then moaned that the spreadsheets didn't work, without telling me they were running them on OO. It rapidly became clear that some macros wouldn't work, and there were issues with data validation and conditional formatting too.

But that too was a few years ago. It could have changed.

[peterb]

Is this even legal? Surely a license can be used on any machine as long as it is only one machine at a time. I don't see the logic, and personally, there's no way microsoft will do this, i mean come on? Are they REALLY that stupid?

I hope not.

IIRC, when XP came out, there was talk of moving the licensing to a subscription model, ie you paid an annual fee to use it. Whether that would have applied to the home market, or whether that would have given better support, was never made clear as the plan was quietly dropped in the face of opposition from the big corporate uses.

[aidanjt]

Ditto. Like the time I built some spreadsheets for a client that was using Office, so I did them in the same version of Excel that they were using. But then, as they decided to add a few more PCs, they put OpenOffice on them, and then moaned that the spreadsheets didn't work, without telling me they were running them on OO. It rapidly became clear that some macros wouldn't work, and there were issues with data validation and conditional formatting too.

But that too was a few years ago. It could have changed.

The Problem is OO/LO is always playing catchup with MSO since they only release format/enhancement documentation after release day and by the time format compatibility is looking good there's another MSO. What we should be doing is stop passing OOXML files around, and only distribute ODFs, then pray that Microsoft doesn't EEE the hell out of it (which they're arguably already engaging in with their current state of OO/LO-compatible ODF support).

[Smudger]

That's a lot of TLAs...

[TheAnimus]

The Problem is OO/LO is always playing catchup with MSO since they only release format/enhancement documentation after release day and by the time format compatibility is looking good there's another MSO. What we should be doing is stop passing OOXML files around, and only distribute ODFs, then pray that Microsoft doesn't EEE the hell out of it (which they're arguably already engaging in with their current state of OO/LO-compatible ODF support).

And loose all the functionality which ODF doesn't support?

Just because your use case doesn't demand it, doesn't mean you should try and force people away.

Its the very worst kind of evangalisim, to say "oh xyz is better". Sure it might be technically better, but if it doesn't suite their workflow, if it doesn't support all they need, it just entrenches people against change.

[aidanjt]

And loose all the functionality which ODF doesn't support?

Then they should work to get the functionality included into ODF.

Just because your use case doesn't demand it, doesn't mean you should try and force people away.

Its the very worst kind of evangalisim, to say "oh xyz is better". Sure it might be technically better, but if it doesn't suite their workflow, if it doesn't support all they need, it just entrenches people against change.

You're right, lets bring back the good old IE/Netscape days of HTML/CSS incompatibility. Because, you know, that was awesome. Speaking of evangelism...

[Saracen]

The Problem is OO/LO is always playing catchup with MSO since they only release format/enhancement documentation after release day and by the time format compatibility is looking good there's another MSO. What we should be doing is stop passing OOXML files around, and only distribute ODFs, then pray that Microsoft doesn't EEE the hell out of it (which they're arguably already engaging in with their current state of OO/LO-compatible ODF support).

The thing is, I was using Office 2003, and a version of OO from, IIRC, 2007, maybe 2008. And it's not as if the features I was using were especially advanced or obscure. It was VERY simple macros, like inserting today's date into a cell with very basic manipulation, and basic data entry validation, and some simple conditional formatting. And OO couldn't cope with spreadsheets from a version of MS Office from some 4 or 5 years earlier.

[spraint]

Looks like software is many years behind games. We already moved from one time payment to subscription based games (MMO) a while ago. Now it's time to move to the F2P model, and add an in-app store that sells fonts, menu items, the ability to create more than 10 documents over the lifetime of the software, and skins.

There is the other model - that employed by Apple. Pay for the software and it is linked to your account, not your hardware. You cannot sell it on, but, in return, you can install it on all the hardware you control.

Having said that, Microsoft is pushing its subscription model quite heavily. Office is a mature product and there has been little of any genuine interest added the last decade. Somehow MS has to keep the money rolling in or will have to come up with some other new compelling products. I cannot see that with Ballmer at the helm. He is a follower and not a leader.

[TheAnimus]

Then they should work to get the functionality included into ODF.

Why?

I mean simply why the hell? Take something like Sparklines which have been a feature of OOML published, standardised for three years etc. Open Office still doesn't support them, at all. (Patent alert!)

They have a what 90%+ market share?

The question comes is such interoperability a needed feature? For me no. PDF interopability is far more lacking in their suite whenever I'm sharing things outside of MS Office ecosystem. I think that is fairly typical.

At the end of the day they publish their standards once the product goes gold. The issue for me is the delay in which Microsoft take for doing so. I also think they should really improve their file tooling, for example I use a great (open source!) excel library, that allows me to write nice templates and hydrate them with data for reporting. Very handy, but not finished. I would like MS to spend money on such things (which they normally open source) to make getting more from their platform easier.

Which for me is the ultimate critique of ODF. Its easier for me to bung data in to Excel, via OOML, rather than ODF.

So yes, rant about standards and other things, when you've never actually used or implemented what your talking about, because you know your religion makes more sense than a practicality.

On topic, this licensing is stupid, really stupid, and I don't understand where MS think the customer demand for cloud back end is coming from. I've been doing consultancy with 8 multinationals in the last year all of whom are in the Office ecosystem. They like the pile of poo that is sharepoint, because it allows them to be in control of their data, they will not ever use skydrive because of the legal costs involved finding out if its legal for them to use it!

[Lone Fox]

confession...

I know I posted earlier that I ditched MS Office, but after trying Libre Office for over a week I caved and purchased Office 2013.

I'm not happy about the licensing and price, but at least I'm not pulling hair in frustration and all the little "bugs" are gone.

[dlennox04]

I am to tight to fork out the money for MS as open office is sufficient for my needs even though I don't really like it. Can't see me upgrading anytime soon either. OO is just always playing catch up