Where do you get 120, its 99 bucks
Image
We are both correct. $99 is the annual price. $9.99 is the monthly price ($9.99 x 12 months is $120). Either way its a lot of money for a consumer.
Where do you get 120, its 99 bucks
Image
We are both correct. $99 is the annual price. $9.99 is the monthly price ($9.99 x 12 months is $120). Either way its a lot of money for a consumer.
Microsoft will soon release a cheaper $70/year personal account that covers two devices. This lower-cost version will likely be the most popular with iPad users who buy Office through the iPad app. And the lower price also means less revenue shared with Apple.
We are both correct. $99 is the annual price. $9.99 is the monthly price ($9.99 x 12 months is $120). Either way its a lot of money for a consumer.
But by deliberately choosing the more expensive path you're attempting to make your argument seem more valid. As has been pointed out, $99 is clearly advertised and by shopping around one can get it for $67. That is almost HALF of the price you are using.We are both correct. $99 is the annual price. $9.99 is the monthly price ($9.99 x 12 months is $120). Either way its a lot of money for a consumer.
Agreed but MS Office has always been an expensive suite
It all depends if you get value out of the 99 dollars that you don't get from the cheaper competitors.
There’s already talk of a cheaper option at $70, with less licenses that would be better for home users.
But by deliberately choosing the more expensive path you're attempting to make your argument seem more valid. As has been pointed out, $99 is clearly advertised and by shopping around one can get it for $67. That is almost HALF of the price you are using.
So, is $67 a year "a lot of money for a consumer"? Students, faculty, and staff of colleges can get Office 365 for $79 for a 4 year subscription. (1 computer/1 tablet) Is $19 a year "a lot of money for a consumer" (who qualifies)?
I don't want to sound like a Microsoft salesmen but the intellectual dishonesty surrounding Office 365 is surprising...and unnecessary.
$79 is NOT the discounted price at Amazon, it is $67. Your response hasn't done anything to disabuse the claim of intellectual dishonesty. Because at $67 for the year, that works out to $5.58 per month, within $0.58 of what you said would be near normal 2 year upgrade cycle.So again, I find it difficult that a consumer would find value even at a discounted $79 (Amazon) price. Consumer access to just Word, PPT, and XLS should be $5/mo to at least be near the normal 2 year upgrade cycle. But even then do consumers need to upgrade their word processor every 2 years? Probably not.
Also Sracer, don't accuse me of intellectual dishonesty of using the $9.99/mo price in my initial post if you are going to use the academic only price (something most consumers are not eligible for) in your argument.
If are getting regular upgrades there is likely not a great difference between a subscription and a traditional purchase plan. If you are buying software with no plan of ever upgrading--like those photoshop 7 users -- then yes--its a "ripoff"
There might be no compelling reason to upgrade to every version, but 2008 and 2004 have long reached their end of support date. So there are no security updates either.
----------
It's not only Macs, but also PCs and tablets. Calculating all those devices together many people have at least 3-4. You can also go with iWork, Google Docs, online Office, ...
You do what you want and if you'd like to give Microsoft more cash or use multiple devices illegally with only one licence, go for it. I already stated to you that with 2 or 3 devices it's far cheaper to go with 365 and even if you skip one version it would still be cheaper when using 4 or 5 devices. Using one version forever is also a bad idea because Office for Mac goes end of support after 5 years.
When I buy software I keep it up to date. So what's the difference between paying for yearly upgrades and paying a yearly subscription.
Expensive? Initial pricing of full version Office 2011 Home/Student was $119 and included 3 licenses. The $119 was a one time price which could be amortized over many years if a consumer didn't feel the need to upgrade. So use it for 4 year before upgrading and it works out to $2.47/mo, a far cry from even the lowest available price of $6.58/mo on Amazon.
So again, I find it difficult that a consumer would find value even at a discounted $79 (Amazon) price. Consumer access to just Word, PPT, and XLS should be $5/mo to at least be near the normal 2 year upgrade cycle. But even then do consumers need to upgrade their word processor every 2 years? Probably not.
Also Sracer, don't accuse me of intellectual dishonesty of using the $9.99/mo price in my initial post if you are going to use the academic only price (something most consumers are not eligible for) in your argument.
I know dozens of companies on the Forbes 500 list that are still using legacy apps/hand coded programs in their infrastructure to run their entire business. Some will never be able to update or would be unwilling. These are the same companies that are unlikely to care about switching off Office. And I don't say that as a slight to Office. I am just saying that the corporate world is likely to stay embedded with MS Office and Windows for a very very long time...
The company I work for falls into this category. The biggest issue I have with the current Office for iPad apps is that there is not an easy way to save back into Dropbox. My company blocks OneDrive, but not DropBox.
$79 is NOT the discounted price at Amazon, it is $67. Your response hasn't done anything to disabuse the claim of intellectual dishonesty. Because at $67 for the year, that works out to $5.58 per month, within $0.58 of what you said would be near normal 2 year upgrade cycle.
And I clearly explained who is eligible for the academic pricing. I didn't try to pass it off as the lower price (compared to your attempt to show that $120 was THE going price for a year's subscription)
$79 is NOT the discounted price at Amazon, it is $67. Your response hasn't done anything to disabuse the claim of intellectual dishonesty. Because at $67 for the year, that works out to $5.58 per month, within $0.58 of what you said would be near normal 2 year upgrade cycle.
And I clearly explained who is eligible for the academic pricing. I didn't try to pass it off as the lower price (compared to your attempt to show that $120 was THE going price for a year's subscription)
I understand companies need to make money but $99/year is a bit much .. for me anyway.
If that $99 covers all three apps, has a good 50GB of space then it isn't hideous.
I downloaded the apps out of curiosity but deleted it after 5 minutes. Excel without macros is like a car without the engine.
It's also near the top of the grossing charts which means people are subscribing/paying
arn
But by deliberately choosing the more expensive path you're attempting to make your argument seem more valid. As has been pointed out, $99 is clearly advertised and by shopping around one can get it for $67. That is almost HALF of the price you are using.
So, is $67 a year "a lot of money for a consumer"? Students, faculty, and staff of colleges can get Office 365 for $79 for a 4 year subscription. (1 computer/1 tablet) Is $19 a year "a lot of money for a consumer" (who qualifies)?
I don't want to sound like a Microsoft salesmen but the intellectual dishonesty surrounding Office 365 is surprising...and unnecessary.
Well, on the academic pricing we'll have to disagree. Why even bring it up a price as a point if it has restricted eligibility ?
On the Amazon pricing, I stand corrected. No problem with that at all. But if you go back to my original comment the context is consumer's needing to evaluate the need for a subscription. That's all. Yes, $67/year is more reasonable, but that also is a discounted price, not the regular price, not guaranteed to be available next week. Meanwhile consumers are stuck buying a subscription once they buy in or they lose access to those apps. I'll won't lose access to Office 2011 until Apple changes it's OS or processors again -- hopefully we won't have to go through that mess for a long time now.
Personally I've never upgraded Office every two years -- not sure I've ever had that opportunity given MacBU division constantly misses launch dates. I still don't see the value for consumers vs. buying a $119 copy and using it for 4 years.
It's just not worth the money... No matter what you think of iWork vs. Office, I'll take a free or cheap one-time purchase over $99 a year any day.
So you imply that 100,000 Microsoft employees started downloading Office on their iPads, as soon as the app was out..Yeah...right
If that $99 covers all three apps, has a good 50GB of space then it isn't hideous.
Ewwwwwwwwww! Imagine using an iPad after manually stimulating livestock for artificial insemination? Or even worse, being the one to use it after that?
People just do not get it. Everyone at work gets an Office 360 account, Basically this just killed whatever chance iWorks had in enterprise.
Ok , i want to scream it. I CANNOT WORK ON TABLET OFFICE SUIT. Its pain in the ass. They are only valuable as a readers. You cant work on this device.