____/ Mark Kent on Monday 23 July 2007 12:03 : \____
> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>> ____/ John Locke on Sunday 22 July 2007 19:30 : \____
>>
>>> On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 15:45:46 +0100, Roy Schestowitz
>>> <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Bill Gates is a goblin
>>>>
>>>>| To a goblin, the rightful and true master of any object is the maker, not
>>>>| the purchaser. All goblin made objects are, in goblin eyes, rightfully
>>>>| theirs." "But it was bought --"
>>>>| "-- then they would consider it rented by the one who had paid the
>>>>| money..."
>>>
>>> Microsoft is still making noises about a subscription service.
>>
>> They successfully tested it in some parts of the world, but people are not
>> so foolish. Office for rent (not just renting a licence to use it) with a
>> pay-as-you-go plan will make Linux seem a lot more attractive. Yet, it's the
>> only way Microsoft can compete with Google and OpenOffice.org /without/ just
>> turning a blind eye to piracy. It's Microsoft long-term survival plan. To
>> boost profit, they recently elevated Office support costs by 50% and they
>> also cracked down on piracy, played hardball with 'standards' bodies, and at
>> the same time saw customers leaving. It's not a sustainable plan.
>>
>
> A subscription is only going to work if you have something which is
> unavailable any other way. Subscription models have to have a consumer
> pull, eg:
>
> 1) Lower cost than direct retail
> 2) Access to material, capability not available elsewhere
> 3) Access to expertise or other value add not available
> elsewhere
> 4) Shared risk (eg, better returns policy)
> 5) Early/more timely delivery
>
> ... and so on.
>
> Microsoft Office does not have any singular feature which makes it worth
> paying for, something Microsoft are /brutally/ aware of. This is why
> they're busy perverting ECMA to approve a second standard to do what
> the already agreed-to standard does, in order to force a monopoly on
> their formats.
>
> If Microsoft can manage to get the "monopoly on their formats" approved
> by lots of different government bodies and the like, then they can use
> item 2) above, for a subscription access to Microsoft Office, which will
> be "access to a capability not available elsewhere". Or "Proprietary".
>
> This is also precisely why the Patent trolling has been going on, in order
> to give the ill-informed the impression that Microsoft Office has some of
> "2" above built-in. It hasn't, of course, but it won't stop our Microsoft
> trolls here using phrases like "Microsoft Office format offers higher
> fidelity". A great marketing phrase which has precisely zero meaning.
Funny that you mention it. Read the first sentence *here*:
http://www.microsoft.com/interop/collab/linspire/definitions2.aspx
It made the front page of Digg a few hours ago, ONLY because of that sentence.
Nice shot in the foot there, Microsoft attorneys.
--
~~ Best of wishes
Roy S. Schestowitz | Useless fact: the buttocks is the largest muscle
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU/Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Swap: 1510068k total, 503012k used, 1007056k free, 46004k cached
http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms
|
|
