Microsoft's Office for iPad Team Discusses Ballmer's Role in Launch, Mac Synergy, and More

[samcraig]

I believe my logic is quite sound actually. Please don't assume that arguing against software subscriptions equates people with demanding free updates and added features. This logic is considerably more off than what you assume I am saying.

The analogy I used works just fine if you don't immediately dismiss my position and assume I feel that devs are just sitting back, raking in the millions. I was simply trying to add context to another persons comment regarding the comparison between software and hard goods. Nowhere did I imply a dev doesn't work hard to earn their money. But when you have an end result that can be infinitely duplicated, you can no longer directly compare its costs to a finite tangible good. There are a number of other factors that contribute to the cost of a piece of software, but none of this has anything to do with my position on the topic.

Again, I cannot stress this enough, please stop falsely assuming that those that do not wish to pay never ending monthly fees to use software are undervaluing the work that goes into the creation of it. Please stop assuming that those that wish to OWN their software are only willing to pay pennies on the dollar for it. These are accusations that unfairly degrade my position, when all I wish to do is advocated for a fair marketplace for all of us. It seems as though people are forgetting that for 30 years, software development has turned garage based companies into multinational billion dollar corporations, all without requiring monthly fees. Why is it that now we must assume that subscription services are the only way they can continue to stay economically viable?

I don't disagree with your second paragraph. I just think many here are devaluing the cost for Office as a Suite. Especially since there are plenty of ways to get cheaper subscriptions...

I'm not in love with the subscription model. And at home, I wouldn't subscribe until my current version is on it's very last legs. Which could be several years. But eventually, when I do have to subscribe, and if my needs warrant it (as opposed to using a less expensive/free option) then I will have already determined that the price is of value. Or I simply wouldn't do it.

If one really needs Office, the value justification for 9.99 a month or less is easily made.

As for your last comment. SaaS is where the world is going. The "cloud" is the current/next big thing. Technology moves forward. You can't really compare the model from the past 30 years to the next 30 years.

 

[Razeus]

You can't liken .jpg files to .doc files.

Word Documents are so easy to open because of the range of apps which open them, whichever platform you're on. People built apps that were compatible with Office because of the dominance of Office.

Try opening a .psd document without Photoshop.

I have and I do. Even Google Docs can view them. Heck, even Paint.net opens PSD files! There's no issue opening PSD files without Photoshop.

 

[iMacFarlane]

But nowadays - even though I'm still eligible for academic pricing, there's little reason to buy MS Office for my own use - there are many quality alternatives. I've got Office at my job, but that wasn't my money being spent.

I payed full ticket for Office 95 (along with Windows 95 and an additional 4MB of RAM). I think the total sticker was about $900 for all of it (yup, $320 for 4MB of RAM).

Upgrades were a hard pill to swallow, so I didn't, all the way up until 2003, that I got for free as part of a database freelancing operation I got into.

Enough of that, though. I totally agree with you about the quality of the alternatives out there. Personally, I really like the look and feel of LibreOffice. Do you have a free suite that you like more than others?

 

[Michael Goff]

yes, that was indeed part of my original question, which led to my elaboration of it, which led me to more of a general string of statements, or thesis, as opposed to a singular question. to bring it all back home, the original topic is centered on the iPad version, which as you have kindly mentioned, is subscription only. i never said that i feel i am entitled to a 10 year lifespan on software that can run on multiple generations of hardware. but if i so chose, i could bust out a relic and likely create 95% of the content as can be output from current editions of Office, with what i can only imagine is a negligible difference in speed, and all for $0 a month. although it is likely that in 10 years, my current iPad will be lying in a junkyard somewhere, it is 100% guaranteed that i couldn't use Word for iPad to type something up without spending whatever the current rental fee is.

you can say, "if you don't like it, don't use it" but if you don't think this is going to be an increasingly popular trend in software policy, you're kidding yourself. i argue against its practice because i know i am not the only one who gets no value from it, and i truly wish more people would take a step back and realize that they are falling into marketing traps by large corporations who are doing a wonderful job of optimizing their accounting and pleasing their shareholders. until then, the people who are subscribing to SAAS simply because they don't know any better are only making things worse for the future of personal computing. is SAAS bad for everyone? not at all. many corporations DO benefit from this business model. people who use ALL the software in a suite on a regular basis also benefit. but individual users such as myself will only lose out in the end, when all professional software becomes rental only.

Except Office 365 is a great value for people who do upgrade. 100$ a year for 5 licenses means 300$ for every version for 5 copies. If you were to buy each copy individually, it'd cost quite a bit more. Then you have the OneDrive storage and Skype minutes.

Or you could get it for around 70$ from Amazon per year for those five computers. That's definitely a good deal for even individual users. That means you can have it on the desktop at home, the laptop you might take to work on, and the iPad that you can easily use in bed.

I know SaaS is the future, and I'm okay with that.

 

[adamneer]

Except Office 365 is a great value for people who do upgrade. 100$ a year for 5 licenses means 300$ for every version for 5 copies. If you were to buy each copy individually, it'd cost quite a bit more. Then you have the OneDrive storage and Skype minutes.

Or you could get it for around 70$ from Amazon per year for those five computers. That's definitely a good deal for even individual users. That means you can have it on the desktop at home, the laptop you might take to work on, and the iPad that you can easily use in bed.

I know SaaS is the future, and I'm okay with that.

thanks for that valuable bit of information that absolutely no other person has mentioned throughout the entirety of this thread! 5 licenses?! well i'm sold now! i can install it on all 2 of my computers! not that i couldn't do that with a single license, as the majority of standard 1 seat licenses allow for multiple installations as long as it is not used concurrently. hell, even adobe throws in that second installation for free and adobe is by no means a charity. I'm tired of arguing with you. you're position seems to be "i like it, so the fact that you don't is inconsequential."

 

[skaertus]

You people keep that fruitless discussion whether an Office 365 subscription is worth the price or not.

I am interested, though, in the details about the next Office for Mac. It seems that Office for Mac will get a revamp soon, and that it will have elements of the Office for iPad. I would expect it to get a much-needed interface redesign, and to look like the brand-new OneNote for Mac. However, it gives no clue on when it will be released. I would expect it to be released rather soon, as this is supposed to be Office 2014 and we are already in April. However, if the Microsoft team said they are still working on Office 2014, I guess it will take a few months to be released? September perhaps?

 

[Michael Goff]

thanks for that valuable bit of information that absolutely no other person has mentioned throughout the entirety of this thread! 5 licenses?! well i'm sold now! i can install it on all 2 of my computers! not that i couldn't do that with a single license, as the majority of standard 1 seat licenses allow for multiple installations as long as it is not used concurrently. hell, even adobe throws in that second installation for free and adobe is by no means a charity. I'm tired of arguing with you. you're position seems to be "i like it, so the fact that you don't is inconsequential."

No, I seem to be of the position that it's a good value for most people. You seem to be saying that I should try to convince you to buy it. Then every time I say something that it offers, you say that it's not important.

Why not just say you're going to ignore every good point about it and call it a day? Also, capitalization is a good thing. You should try it at some point.

 

[thekeyring]

I have and I do. Even Google Docs can view them. Heck, even Paint.net opens PSD files! There's no issue opening PSD files without Photoshop.

FTR, Pixelmator does an excellent job with PSDs. I’m not sure where the compatibility busts, but I’ve gotten complex PSDs from our UI guy, and was easily able to deal with the layers, groups, etc.

One of the better $15 I ever spent

I stand corrected.

 

[unplugme71]

Previous? Let me guess, you saved them $18k and they saved $100k by outsourcing your job to HCL in India...

Yes, previous. I left for a larger corporation.

And no, I actually hired an in-house replacement.

 

[Gasu E.]

that coffee argument is getting so old. completely denying context in purchasing value is a weak argument to begin with. perhaps the act of entering a physical establishment twice a month to interact with other people and enjoy a unique taste, unavailable elsewhere, is seen as a good way to spend $10. the differentiating factor is that Starbucks does not require you to return next month and every month thereafter to spend $10. another difference is that coffee is a physical entity and not something that can be replicated infinitely from the initial materials and investment. if you could brew a single pot of coffee and serve the entire world's demands with just that one pot, occasionally checking on the creamer and stirring straws to make sure people are still satisfied, then perhaps we could compare software expenditures to coffee. but i don't think we're quite there yet.

You're missing the fact that it didn't cost Starbucks $100M to brew that first pot of coffee.

 

[stecx012]

Hi, can anyone help me with this issue here,I am trying the use the new app on my ipad taptalk and are having issue being able to enter some clubs to talk to other people in my area about interest eg jetski club in Australia . It won't let me sign in ??

Cheers chris

 

[petvas]

Hi, can anyone help me with this issue here,I am trying the use the new app on my ipad taptalk and are having issue being able to enter some clubs to talk to other people in my area about interest eg jetski club in Australia . It won't let me sign in ??

Cheers chris

What does this have anything to do with Office????

 

[smoledman]

So far the negative reviews about Office for iPad on the App Store revolve around 2 issues:

- the $99/year subscription(gouging, horrid, those damn greedy bastards)
- lack of Dropbox integration

Well, maybe Office is becoming irrelevant and that $99 price tag will prove to be the death knell...

Still I find it interesting that hardly anyone is complaining about the USUAL Microsoft problems(crashing, laggy UI, poor UX). This is a huge improvement!

----------

You're missing the fact that it didn't cost Starbucks $100M to brew that first pot of coffee.

Yeah. I have to laugh when people compare complex software to a cup of coffee. People who have never worked as a software engineer have NO IDEA what is involved to bring them teh shiny precious.