Peter,
I know firsthand that Microsoft sells their software for virtually nothing in the University of Texas system, which is why all University of Texas bookstores sell MS software to students super cheap: $20 for current version of Windows, $7 for Office ($15 for Mac Office last time I checked), etc. That, to me, seems much more reasonable and realistic than, say, Apple selling FCP to students for $250 or more or OS X for $79.
Now which of the above do you think students are going to be more likely to pirate? I doubt any students are going to waste their time copying and burning MS Office when it would cost them $7.
I did ask the Microsoft software rep at the university about this and she said what I thought she would say: MS would rather sell their software at a tiny or nonexistent profit margin (I'm sure they must also receive some tax incentives for programs such as this) to students when the alternatives are 1) rampant piracy, or, much worse, 2) students begin to use something other than MS products.
Yes, this is the dirty little secret no one has yet mentioned here. MS, Adobe, Apple, et al. would rather you be using an illicit copy of their software than a legit copy of someone else's software (but don't expect that to be announced on their shareholders' reports or websites any time soon), particularly with regards to university students who, as a whole, tend to have little spending money as students but will (potentially) have lots of disposable income after graduation. From MS's point of view (to name one example), app loyalty will be determined during their formative educational years. Believe me, they'd much rather you use a pirated copy of Windows than, god forbid, free Linux. Because once one has graduated and is making all that lovely money, your legitimate purchase is likely to be what you know and are familiar with. I don't know how correct that line of thinking really is (like the rest of their demographic reasoning), but this IS the way they think of it.
Certain software developers may be posting such simplistic arguments about piracy taking food out of their families' mouths, so why aren't you using the same logic with MS's loss leader education pricing? I'm sure an honest marketing person will tell you that piracy does indeed have some benefits to their business plan - wider distribution of the product in question, a wider, knowledgable user base, creation of app loyalty, potential future purchasers, etc.
Interestingly, the Micrsoft rep said that MS took a perverse pride in their wares being the most pirated in all of the world, bragging to me that the Chinese prefer illicit copies of Windows over open source Linux. And I'm sure it fills Adobe's hearts with pride to see Photoshop all over Carracho instead of MacGIMP. But that's the mysterious world of big business for you - what they fear most is being ignored completely.
I know firsthand that Microsoft sells their software for virtually nothing in the University of Texas system, which is why all University of Texas bookstores sell MS software to students super cheap: $20 for current version of Windows, $7 for Office ($15 for Mac Office last time I checked), etc. That, to me, seems much more reasonable and realistic than, say, Apple selling FCP to students for $250 or more or OS X for $79.
Now which of the above do you think students are going to be more likely to pirate? I doubt any students are going to waste their time copying and burning MS Office when it would cost them $7.
I did ask the Microsoft software rep at the university about this and she said what I thought she would say: MS would rather sell their software at a tiny or nonexistent profit margin (I'm sure they must also receive some tax incentives for programs such as this) to students when the alternatives are 1) rampant piracy, or, much worse, 2) students begin to use something other than MS products.
Yes, this is the dirty little secret no one has yet mentioned here. MS, Adobe, Apple, et al. would rather you be using an illicit copy of their software than a legit copy of someone else's software (but don't expect that to be announced on their shareholders' reports or websites any time soon), particularly with regards to university students who, as a whole, tend to have little spending money as students but will (potentially) have lots of disposable income after graduation. From MS's point of view (to name one example), app loyalty will be determined during their formative educational years. Believe me, they'd much rather you use a pirated copy of Windows than, god forbid, free Linux. Because once one has graduated and is making all that lovely money, your legitimate purchase is likely to be what you know and are familiar with. I don't know how correct that line of thinking really is (like the rest of their demographic reasoning), but this IS the way they think of it.
Certain software developers may be posting such simplistic arguments about piracy taking food out of their families' mouths, so why aren't you using the same logic with MS's loss leader education pricing? I'm sure an honest marketing person will tell you that piracy does indeed have some benefits to their business plan - wider distribution of the product in question, a wider, knowledgable user base, creation of app loyalty, potential future purchasers, etc.
Interestingly, the Micrsoft rep said that MS took a perverse pride in their wares being the most pirated in all of the world, bragging to me that the Chinese prefer illicit copies of Windows over open source Linux. And I'm sure it fills Adobe's hearts with pride to see Photoshop all over Carracho instead of MacGIMP. But that's the mysterious world of big business for you - what they fear most is being ignored completely.
