What Microsoft's Personal Plan for Office 365 Means for You

Status
Not open for further replies.
I am not interested in any product that keeps me paying, and paying, and paying, ad nauseum. That model is unacceptable. It is time for people to wake up. Most people's needs could still be met very well with productivity titles of ten or even twenty years ago.
 

spdragoo

Splendid
Ambassador
I am not interested in any product that keeps me paying, and paying, and paying, ad nauseum. That model is unacceptable. It is time for people to wake up. Most people's needs could still be met very well with productivity titles of ten or even twenty years ago.

Well, some people obviously would disagree, or you wouldn't see the popularity of games like World of Warcraft (or Everquest before yet), which also work on the "pay every month" business model. Or, of course, the people that think nothing of paying to download a game app on their smartphone, then continue paying with in-app purchases.

Personally, I don't do either: I don't play games on my iPod unless they allow me to play for free (both to download & while in-game), & I prefer one-time costs for my real software.

However...at $70/year, the cost of paying for a 2-year subscription is roughly as much as buying the stand-alone Office 2013 Home & Student edition. And the stand-alone only lets you install on one device, not "1 PC plus 1 tablet plus 1 smartphone".
 

spdragoo

Splendid
Ambassador
Whoops, hit "submit" too fast, & now it won't let me edit.

Anyway, to continue, if I had to pay separately to install it on a 2nd device as well as my PC, then the stand-alone software becomes more expensive than the subscription model. And especially for the "family plan" model, paying $100/year, or roughly $300 total for a 3-year period, is cheaper than buying separate software for a desktop, a laptop & a tablet. The key, I guess, is whether getting the subscription gives you access to automatic upgrades whenever Microsoft changes the base product (i.e. when they switched from Office 2010 to Office 2013). If so, then the subscription model is just as cheap, if not cheaper, than buying the standalone software.

Just something to think about.
 

Kunari

Honorable
Feb 3, 2014
16
0
10,510
.... If so, then the subscription model is just as cheap, if not cheaper, than buying the standalone software.

Oh sure, they'll make the initial pricing of the subscription plan look attractive. "It's just as cheap as buying the software" Also, most people don't upgrade when a new version of Office comes out, so that $300 cost for Office 2010 is still going strong for Joe-home-user. It's a perpetual license, Joe doesn't need to pay every month or loose access unlike the "just as cheap" subscription plan with no guarantee that they won't jack up the monthly fees next year.
 
A subscription model isn't unreasonable when it is paying for something, such as content upgrades (in the case of games), or ongoing "free" support (in productivity software). It should NEVER be necessary to pay for ongoing bug fixes.
If a current version meets the user's needs "out of the box," however, a one-time payment for it should be sufficient. Remember that "stuff happens," and being bound to a subscription in order to keep a product working could lead to unexpected issues if there are ever communication problems.
 

spdragoo

Splendid
Ambassador
Who says it's only an "initial pricing" plan? This isn't like paying for cable internet, where they'll tell you how much the 'starting at" rate is for the first 12 months, but won't tell you what the actual rate will be for the remainder of your 2- or 3-year contract until after you get that first full-price bill.

If anything, the price is actually coming down, at least in terms of the consumer's buying power. For example, when Office 97 came out 17 years, a full stand-alone cost $499 USD, $599 if it included MS Access. That got you a single CD, or 44 floppy disks, to install it from. And it was still under the "1 copy, 1 PC" license -- they just didn't have the online verification available to hlep enforce it. So even without accounting for the lower purchasing power of the dollar from 17 years ago, they were essentially paying for a seven-year subscription. And while you can still find Office 97 on Amazon (now for about $30), you really won't see anyone continuing to use it because it was designed for Windows 98; people are complaining so much about die-hards holding onto their Windows XP computers, that I really can't see anyone advocating holding onto software that predates it.

And as for version replacement... you do remember that they only took two years to go from Office 1 (1990) to Office 3.0 (1992), from Office 4.0 (1993) to Office 95 (1995), from Office 95 to Office 97 (1997), from Office 97 to Office 2000 (1999), from Office 2000 to Office XP (2001), & from Office XP to Office 2003 (2003)? Or that it was only one year between Office 3.0 (1992) & Office 4.0? The longest gap was between Office 2007 & 2003 (4 years), with 3 years between Office 1.0 (1990) & 3.0, between Office 2007 and Office 2010 (2010), & between Office 2010 & Office 2013 (just barely in January 2013). In other words, historically speaking, the chances are good that the next MS Office version will come out in 2016...in other words, 3 years after Office 2013, but only 2 years from now.

Now, you're probably right that someone who just bought Office 2010 a few years back can probably go without an upgrade. However, there are many people that were still using Office 2007 (which is currently only in "extended" support for a couple more years), or worse Office 2003 (which also just lost "extended" support recently). Since they will need to upgrade their versions of Office, their question becomes whether to pay for the stand-alone Office 2013 (again with the "1 copy, 1 PC" limitation), or pay for a "subscription" plan that costs them the same amount over a 2- or 3-year period but lets them load it on more devices...& will probably allow them to automatically upgrade to future versions without hassle.
 

hannibal

Distinguished
I have office 2013 now and I am planning to use it next 6-10 years. So for me normal pay ones, use as long as you will is better. But to those who always want to have the newest version, the subscription model is better.
What I am afraid is that there will be only that later alternative in the future. Why, because it is easier to offer support only to the newest version, than multiple versions. In the long run subscription version will offer more income to the company. That is why MS has been planning the subscription model to the operation system also. So far it has not been put in practice, but it is always an option that may become reality.
 
Why would a business, running all of their processes using Office 2003, "need" to upgrade, even now? Those people who always want to be running the "latest and greatest" might do well to ask themselves why. The constant retraining offers no business advantages. Support considerations come down to do they want to support their products or do they want to support their business? That's a vital question; tech schools and/or body shops can provide massive numbers of personnel who can support the latest products, but only people who give a rodent's backside and have experience in the company will be able to support the business.
 

JD88

Honorable
Feb 25, 2013
1,424
0
11,660


This is kinda my question. I now use Google Docs for everything, but if I didn't I would probably be using the Office 2010 license I got for $20 back in college until the end of time. Certainly not worth $70 a year. Also, for most people the free alternatives are just as good. Heck, even Microsoft has it's free Office web apps that have most of the functionality. The only people buying this are people with very specific needs and people Best Buy salesmen talk into buying it along with $50 a year antivirus.
 

xrodney

Distinguished
Jul 14, 2006
588
0
19,010
Now, you're probably right that someone who just bought Office 2010 a few years back can probably go without an upgrade. However, there are many people that were still using Office 2007 (which is currently only in "extended" support for a couple more years), or worse Office 2003 (which also just lost "extended" support recently). Since they will need to upgrade their versions of Office.
Sorry, but most of normal users can keep office for 10+ years even if its not anymore supported. In this case you are using mostly simple word/excel functions and really does not care about support, potential bugs or security flaws.
I am using office tools only few times per month and I am more then happy with Libre Office "AT HOME".
 

shogunofharlom

Honorable
Oct 19, 2012
98
0
10,660
Why do I need to pay for a word processor every month for the rest of my life? I use 2007 and have 0 need to upgrade. Honestly, I still have a copy of Office 2000, that I give to people who dont want to pay and no one ever complains. Hell, I even have a copy of Office 97 that still works just fine for excel, word, and even powerpoint. This model of leasing software like Adobe CC is really getting out of hand. It is just the company's way of keeping their hands in your pockets .. FOREVER. Why are we now paying for software like we pay rent on an apartment? For this reason I still buy all my games, music, movies I really like & software on a DVD. Having a physical copy of your software license gives the user a certain amount of power. Would you buy a house and not get a deed? Would you buy a car and not get a title? Physical media is the same thing. It is our title which certifies we have rights to use that software. If it is between upgrading to the newest version of word and becoming some kind of slave to Microsoft ... I will jut keep my old version.
 

TwoSpoons100

Distinguished
Mar 19, 2014
36
10
18,535
The big potential nasty in the subscription model is if in the future you cancel your subscription you may no longer be able to access your own documents.
 

Gurg

Distinguished
Mar 13, 2013
515
61
19,070
What a rip off. I'll just keep moving my Office Home and Student 2007 to any new computers. This pricing scheme and the W8 elimination of the start button show the need to break up Microsoft and end their software monopoly,
 
$70 a year doesn't seem too bad, I'm signing up.

That is just to start MS hasn't decided what to charge for renewals yet. Enjoy that sticker shock. Remember this stuff is based on 2013 which is the worst version MS has put out in recent memory. If you want to pay monthly for that junk I got some beach front property in OK I want to sell you! lol!
 
$70 a year doesn't seem too bad, I'm signing up.

That is just to start MS hasn't decided what to charge for renewals yet. Enjoy that sticker shock. Remember this stuff is based on 2013 which is the worst version MS has put out in recent memory. If you want to pay monthly for that junk I got some beach front property in OK I want to sell you! lol!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.