Coffeehouse Thread

76 posts

Monopoly Microsoft was more customer friendly than today's "friendly" Microsoft

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    wastingtime​withforums

    It's funny. Now that MS got some serious competition, what do they do? Raise prices! Across the board: Servers, Office, consumer hardware - Windows Notebooks are now more expensive than they were a year ago (mostly due the mandatory touch hardware because of W8).
     
    I've never seen a company raising prices of all their products in a competitive situation like this. They are behaving under siege WORSE than they did in the monopoly times.
     
    Monopoly (90s) MS was vicious with the competition, but it was a fair deal for the customers (Mac back then crashed as much as Windows 9x did btw, and Netscape 4.0 wasn't exactly a marvel of engineering), while this "nu Microsoft" hipsterama is all about setting the customers themselves up (the W8 forced-metro drama, forced Office subscription and forced MS account-nag everywhere)
     
    Anyway, I sure as hell won't ever rent Office. Libre Office is, unfortunately, still a pile of freetard dung, but I would rather use that than signing up for Microsoft's extortion scheme. They are not luring by increasing value, but by making the traditional Office licensing a hassle - non transferable licensing (with the retail version! If your motherboard gets damaged, you need to pay the full price for Office again), one PC only licensing (Office 2010 and prior allowed one install on the desktop PC, and one install on your laptop. That's gone with Office 2013), massive price hike (Home and Student 2010 was installable on 3 PCs for 125$, you need to pay three times as much with 2013).

    They know fully well that no one would sign-up for Office 365 if the old licensing was still in place, especially the license transfer.
     
    The other wanna-be Office replacements have still not attained full compatibility with the MS Office file format, so if you have complex MS Office documents, you still need the software. A software that got a massive price hike. It's funny - now that they ARE harming the customers with a true monopoly situation (instead of other corps) there is no DOJ and no EU to the rescue. I guess that's because there is no bribe money by the competitors involved this time.

    I for one won't upgrade beyond Windows 7 and Office 2010 until they are completely out of life support. And I had absolutely no problems with MS and their products until they went into self-destruct mode in 2011.

  • User profile image
    GoddersUK

    @wastingtimewithforums:Generic Forum Image

    edit: ps. evild, how u delete ure post? Perplexed

  • User profile image
    wastingtime​withforums

    @GoddersUK:

    Now I am curious.

  • User profile image
    Heywood_J

    , wastingtime​withforums wrote

    Anyway, I sure as hell won't ever rent Office. Libre Office is, unfortunately, still a pile of freetard dung, but I would rather use that than signing up for Microsoft's extortion scheme. They are not luring by increasing value, but by making the traditional Office licensing a hassle - non transferable licensing (with the retail version! If your motherboard gets damaged, you need to pay the full price for Office again), one PC only licensing (Office 2010 and prior allowed one install on the desktop PC, and one install on your laptop. That's gone with Office 2013), massive price hike (Home and Student 2010 was installable on 3 PCs for 125$, you need to pay three times as much with 2013).
    Over the years, I have always rushed out to get the latest and greatest of everything.  But that's becoming impossible.  More and more I'm finding that each new version of a program is worse than the previous. That's why I still use Office 2003.
    • It works well
    • It does what I need - I used Office 2010 briefly and it provided me with no additional benefit.
    • When I scrap my old computer and buy a new one I can easily install it on the new computer with no hassles
    • Saves me money -- If the Windows 365 pricing scheme had been in place back then I would have paid $1000 so far
    • Support?  What support?  I've been using Microsoft products since DOS 3.0 and have never a need for "support".
    • And best of all, it doesn't have the ridiculous UI that was introduced with Office 2007 and as far as I am concerned, rendered it unusable.
     
  • User profile image
    elmer

    A bit OTT perhaps, but nevertheless, with its latest revisions, MS has pushed out Windows and Office products that the company I work for, has certainly decided that they don't want, and will be staying with W7 & Office2010 until MS can come up with a more compelling argument.

  • User profile image
    Bass

    I recommend Google Docs. Maybe it doesn't have the same features as LibreOffice, but it's just so much lighter. And the collaborative features are really handy for group projects at school. If you have a moderate understanding of LaTeX, it even works in heavy math/CS courses too.

    At work I don't use word processors or Office software like.. ever? So I can't comment.

  • User profile image
    Lizard​Rumsfeld

    Yeah, I have a hard time believing the 365 subscription will really take off for home users.

    IME, home users buy Office to have be able to work with documents from the office or school - there's little "passion" for Office amongst consumers, it's just something you'll likely need -  eventually.

    That doesn't translate into "Ooo!  The new version's out!" excitement, so for many people, $99 a year isa massive price increase, as most people I know - consumers and corporate users - are perpetually 1-2 (most likely 2) versions behind.  They find the improvements made in the current 2-3 year upgrade cycle are dubious enough to hold out for an upgrade, so I don't see how promising a continual cycle of yearly improvements will really be viable.  Hell, most might see automatic upgrade as a negative, if they don't like the changes...well, tough.

    Sure, in some scenario's it is a decent deal - you have 5 PC's and need cloud storage, in such a situation it makes sense, and that scenario will become far more prevalent if they release an Android/iOS version which will count as one of those 5 devices.  But compared to previous deals (which they of course nix when 365 comes out) - especially if you just needed Word/Excel and were fine with the starter editions (which is also axed - jesus!) - you're definitely paying more.

    I agree with the OP, it's weird - MS has more competition than ever before in an environment where software and hardware prices are cheaper than they're even been, and it seems their response is to double-down and act as if their position is more unassailable than ever. 

    I mean cripes, the biggest problem with Ultrabooks is their price - so just as they're starting to get into ~$700 territory, Win8 comes out and now MS is complaining that its supposedly lackluster launch is their fault, as they didn't build enough compelling new devices for it.  The OEM's shoot back that by following MS's design recommendations, they would price themselves out of the market, and I believe they're right. 

    Really doesn't look good when the brand your own company creates to push the idealized version of what a Windows8 tabtop should be receives such strong criticism.  My feeling is that it's inevitable - you build your hardware foundation on an OS that tries to straddle two worlds, and you get exactly what you'd expect - a device that tries to straddle two worlds and isn't particularly best of class in either of them. 

    If MS thinks Surface is going to spur OEM's to create $1,000 hybrid laptops in their image...uh, yeah - good luck with that.

  • User profile image
    Charles

    li[data-author='wastingtimewithforums']
    {
            display: none;
    }

  • User profile image
    DCMonkey

    , Charles wrote

    li[data-author='wastingtimewithforums']
    {
            display: none;
    }

    If you have that then why are you in this thread?

  • User profile image
    Charles

    @DCMonkey: Sadly, there's no way to hide threads in the thread view page.

    Also, in case anybody wanted it, there it is.

    C

  • User profile image
    MasterPi

    @Charles: Can you add the data-author attribute to tr elements on the thread page? Then you'd be able to hide the threads.

    I don't have to worry about ignoring threads by certain trolls...they tend to write so much, so...tl;dr basically.

  • User profile image
    DeathBy​VisualStudio

    , elmer wrote

    A bit OTT perhaps, but nevertheless, with its latest revisions, MS has pushed out Windows and Office products that the company I work for, has certainly decided that they don't want, and will be staying with W7 & Office2010 until MS can come up with a more compelling argument.

    Yeah a bit OTT but he has some valid points. I suspect your company isn't alone on this round of upgrades. I would love to have been a fly on the wall when this pricing scheme was discussed internally.

    It also seems, as some have suggested previously, that Microsoft loves to plug its ears when it hears bad news; much like a few here are wanting to do with the OP. That's really a tragedy for Microsoft because like anyone unless you can admit your mistakes you won't be correcting them any time soon. I'm sure with the politics and bureaucracy of a big company like Microsoft it only makes matters worse.

    If we all believed in unicorns and fairies the world would be a better place.
    Last modified
  • User profile image
    Charles

    @MasterPie: Nope. That attr is not placed on threads.

    C

  • User profile image
    kettch

    , DeathBy​VisualStudio wrote

    *snip*

    Yeah a bit OTT but he has some valid points. I suspect your company isn't alone on this round of upgrades.

    I haven't been in this industry for centuries, like some, but I've at least been around since Windows 3.x. Since then, with every release there's been a pretty big chunk of businesses who say that they're going to sit out this release. They all have reasons, sometimes they just don't want or need to, sometimes they blame Microsoft, sometimes they blame the software that they need to run. The story is always the same. What's also the same is this need to justify the decision. What's new in the last few years is the increasing tendency towards histrionic displays.

    Maybe it's just that the internet is allowing people to scream their opinions that much louder in the hope that they can make themselves feel better by knowing others have the same views.

  • User profile image
    Craig_​Matthews

    , kettch wrote

    *snip*

    I haven't been in this industry for centuries, like some, but I've at least been around since Windows 3.x. Since then, with every release there's been a pretty big chunk of businesses who say that they're going to sit out this release. They all have reasons, sometimes they just don't want or need to, sometimes they blame Microsoft, sometimes they blame the software that they need to run. The story is always the same. What's also the same is this need to justify the decision. What's new in the last few years is the increasing tendency towards histrionic displays.

    Maybe it's just that the internet is allowing people to scream their opinions that much louder in the hope that they can make themselves feel better by knowing others have the same views.

    Is there something invalid about a business staying on a particular version of an operating system or office suite because the software they already spent millions of dollars for or the business processes they've already spent millions of dollars implementing is only supported/only works with that version?

    Hell, for that matter -- do you see something wrong with businesses not spending money to replace something that already works?

  • User profile image
    elmer

    @kettch:I don't know that we feel the need to 'justify' it, but yes, clearly we have our reasons, and have made what we believe to be a commercial decision. I would hope that the majority of business does the same thing - compares the cost of upgrading with any commercial benefits it offers them - and then makes a choice on that basis. We ran trials using a cross-section of our usage, task workers, admin, tech and management staff, and failed to find any compelling business case to at least offset the costs of upgrading. I'm in no way suggesting that our case is emblematic of all business, but I am comfortable that we made our decision for the right reasons.

  • User profile image
    wkempf

    , wastingtime​withforums wrote

    It's funny. Now that MS got some serious competition, what do they do? Raise prices! Across the board: Servers, Office, consumer hardware - Windows Notebooks are now more expensive than they were a year ago (mostly due the mandatory touch hardware because of W8).
     
     
    FUD and lies, mostly. Poor trolling.
     
    Servers: I don't agree with pricing varying based on cores/cpus in general, but in the server space that's just the way pricing works. Microsoft is not the only company to charge per core instead of per cpu. Does this mean an increase in price? Yes. Does it really matter all that much? Probably not.
     
    Office: Overall the "rental" model will be more expensive in some scenarios, and less expensive in others. Regardless, the benefits to the "rental" model that may appeal to some, regardless of whether or not it costs them more. However, this argument is pretty much a lie in any event, because the "rental" model isn't you're only option, and the price of Office hasn't gone up.
     
    Consumer hardware: The only hardware that Microsoft has control over is their own, and their prices haven't gone up. OEM prices haven't really gone up either. You claim they have due to touch hardware... but that's disingenuous. There are as many devices available without touch today as there were previously, and the prices of those devices have not gone up. Expecting to get one of the devices that does include this hardware at the same price as hardware that doesn't is more than unreasonable, it borders on being an indication of a mental defect.
     
    I see no indication in any of this that Microsoft is less consumer friendly.
  • User profile image
    evildictait​or

    @wkempf:

    It's also pretty disingenuous since Windows8 - Microsoft biggest launch in 2012 - is a tiny fraction of the price of similar operating systems in previous releases of Windows, hence entirely demolishing the argument that "Microsoft is raising prices across the board".

Comments closed

Comments have been closed since this content was published more than 30 days ago, but if you'd like to continue the conversation, please create a new thread in our Forums, or Contact Us and let us know.