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

News
By
Published

Here's another way to subscribe to Office 365.

Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware
Kevin Parrish
Kevin Parrish
Contributor

Kevin Parrish has over a decade of experience as a writer, editor, and product tester. His work focused on computer hardware, networking equipment, smartphones, tablets, gaming consoles, and other internet-connected devices. His work has appeared in Tom's Hardware, Tom's Guide, Maximum PC, Digital Trends, Android Authority, How-To Geek, Lifewire, and others.

21 Comments Comment from the forums
  • Onus
    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.
    Reply
  • Kunari
    I am not interested in any product that keeps me paying, and paying, and paying, ad nauseum.

    I'm with you there Onus! I refuse to sign up for a software subscription
    Reply
  • spdragoo
    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".
    Reply
  • spdragoo
    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.
    Reply
  • Kunari
    .... 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.
    Reply
  • Onus
    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.
    Reply
  • agentbb007
    $70 a year doesn't seem too bad, I'm signing up.
    Reply
  • spdragoo
    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.
    Reply
  • hannibal
    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.
    Reply
  • Zepid
    Pretty cool news. Might subscribe.
    Reply