Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 31st Jul 2007 23:53 UTC, submitted by rx182
Microsoft "Microsoft's next version of its small-business/home productivity suite, due imminently, will be free and ad-funded. Microsoft Works 9.0 - which will be the new product's name, if Microsoft opts to stick with its current nomenclature - might also debut at some point as Microsoft-hosted low-end productivity service, as many have been speculating. A hosted version of Works would give Microsoft a head-to-head competitor with Google Docs & Spreadsheets and other consumer- and small-business focused services, analysts have said."
Order by: Score:
...
by Hiev on Wed 1st Aug 2007 00:22 UTC
Hiev
Member since:
2005-09-27

Nice, but to bad MS Works is a PoS.

Reply Score: 1

Kind of an oxymoron isn't it?
by WorknMan on Wed 1st Aug 2007 00:28 UTC
WorknMan
Member since:
2005-11-13

How can something be free (as in beer) and ad-funded at the same time? If I have to put up with ads in order to use the product, it is no longer free.

Anyway, I'm not sure MS Works has what it takes to go head-to-head with OpenOffice, even if it was completely free.

Edited 2007-08-01 00:29

Reply Score: 7

RE: Kind of an oxymoron isn't it?
by stestagg on Wed 1st Aug 2007 00:42 UTC in reply to "Kind of an oxymoron isn't it?"
stestagg Member since:
2006-06-03

I'm not sure that your logic is right. If something is free, it means that you don't have to pay to get it. The fact that it also comes with adverts does not change this.

Reply Score: 9

pepa Member since:
2005-07-08

That's only free as in beer then. Never heard of the distinction between adware and freeware??

Edited 2007-08-01 03:19

Reply Score: 5

flanque Member since:
2005-12-15

But this isn't being provided as "freeware". In the general sense, people regard free-to-air television as free, even though they sit through the paid advertisements.

To the end user, this is free regardless of whom and how it is funded by advertising.

Reply Score: 3

raynevandunem Member since:
2006-11-24

An FOSS application can also be released as adware as well, and still stay within both "beer" and "(American) freedom" definitions.

I mean technically, Firefox is kinda like that: its free, but the devs get paid by Google for having them in the FF search bar (by default, nonetheless); the search bar leads to the search page, with has text ads on the side.

So, pretty much, Firefox is just severely-downplayed adware, as is Safari and Opera (also Google search by default, and they get paid, too).

Reply Score: 1

l3v1 Member since:
2005-07-06

I mean technically, Firefox is kinda like that


I don't think I want to know what you're smokin'. Including the possibility to use a third party app/tool that, when used, also displays ads, is far from an app/tool that, when used, displays apps.

Anyway, as others above also stated, it doesn't really matter how Works works ;) I mean, being in IT and all, I do not know even one person, who uses Works. Even when it comes with a laptop or something, everyone just uninstalls it. It's just an annoyance. Adware or not, doesn't matter.

What it's being adware will be good for MS, is that they will have a chance to test the ad-based model before taking it further to Office and Windows. I personally think that if they don't include the option to buy a version without the ad engine (not just disabled, but excluded), it will be doomed to fail.

Reply Score: 2

raynevandunem Member since:
2006-11-24

is far from an app/tool that, when used, displays apps.


That makes no sense.

You use Firefox, you search Google through Firefox. Google makes money from you searching them (through their ADS), Firefox makes money everytime Google, with its ads, is searched through its toolbar.

Unless you're saying that Google is an adware app in itself, which, I think, is more correct than my assertion on Firefox.

Reply Score: 2

KenJackson Member since:
2005-07-18

Anyway, I'm not sure MS Works has what it takes to go head-to-head with OpenOffice, even if it was completely free.

Even if MS Works were superior (don't know--never used it), I'm wondering if the ads will be annoying enough to cause some serious Windows users to think about alternatives.

Reply Score: 1

WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

Even if MS Works were superior (don't know--never used it), I'm wondering if the ads will be annoying enough to cause some serious Windows users to think about alternatives.

Serious Windows users (power users) are already using MS Office.

Reply Score: 2

KenJackson Member since:
2005-07-18

Well gosh, why bother making a product if no one seriously uses it?

Reply Score: 2

RE: Kind of an oxymoron isn't it?
by flanque on Wed 1st Aug 2007 02:47 UTC in reply to "Kind of an oxymoron isn't it?"
flanque Member since:
2005-12-15

I'm confused.. you don't have to click on the ads so I'm not sure how you're paying for anything.

Reply Score: 2

jayson.knight Member since:
2005-07-06

"If I have to put up with ads in order to use the product, it is no longer free."

What do you think is funding Google Docs/Spreadsheet?

Reply Score: 5

l3v1 Member since:
2005-07-06

What do you think is funding Google Docs/Spreadsheet?


It doesn't matter what is "funding" it. What matters [for a user] is whether you as a user are bothered with ads while using it, or not.

Reply Score: 3

PJBonoVox Member since:
2006-08-14

It doesn't matter. It's still free. I suggest someone here obtains a dictionary.

Reply Score: 2

viton Member since:
2005-08-09

>> It doesn't matter. It's still free.
you pay with your attention to banners.
you pay indirectly when you buy these products.
So, obviously, adware is not freeware

Reply Score: 1

UZ64
Member since:
2006-12-05

It's what I learned how to use in school (Works Database), and I actually liked its spreadsheet-style view. I've used similar databases in the past (I think AppleWorks had something similar), but these days I can't find anything like it.

I don't need anything fancy, just something like what Works had, yet there appears to be *nothing* like it... even for Windows. OpenOffice's database (to me) is no good, and neither is Microsoft Office's database.

Then again, I could probably just as easily blame the school system for teaching me **** I can't use in the future (ie. NOW), as it's long been replaced by some other kind of database.

Edited 2007-08-01 00:36

Reply Score: 3

works
by poundsmack on Wed 1st Aug 2007 00:45 UTC
poundsmack
Member since:
2005-07-13

i guess it seems i am hte only one that liked Works from the sound of it. it was fast, responsive, and had the featuers i needed. at the time when 8.0 was out OO was to bloated and slow and MS office cost to much. it was between works and AbiWord. MS works and MS money were ok by me.

Reply Score: 2

Works and Office
by Almafeta on Wed 1st Aug 2007 01:08 UTC
Almafeta
Member since:
2007-02-22

What's always been confusing to me is why Microsoft would publish both Works and Office, when it seems they both seem like two ways to do the same thing.

Ah well. Maybe they would have had something by merging the lines. But now, Microsoft Works is going to go the same place all ad-supported software has gone: nowhere.

Reply Score: 7

RE: Works and Office
by graigsmith on Wed 1st Aug 2007 01:17 UTC in reply to "Works and Office"
graigsmith Member since:
2006-04-05

"What's always been confusing to me is why Microsoft would publish both Works and Office, when it seems they both seem like two ways to do the same thing."

so they can spend more money making the same product look like 2 different products so they can hopefully profit more. that way, they have the WHOLE market of word processors covered.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Works and Office
by jayson.knight on Wed 1st Aug 2007 03:59 UTC in reply to "Works and Office"
jayson.knight Member since:
2005-07-06

[OT]

"Score: 6"

I'm seeing lots of mods above 5 now, and all of a sudden I have 50 (!!!) mod votes? I didn't see any announcements about these changes...anyone care to clue me in?

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Works and Office
by Almafeta on Wed 1st Aug 2007 04:44 UTC in reply to "RE: Works and Office"
Almafeta Member since:
2007-02-22

Go to the conversations area on v4 to see the announcement. Basically, they've decided to lift the caps on comment votes. You, apparently, said something that was voted on 50 times.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Works and Office
by jayson.knight on Wed 1st Aug 2007 04:55 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Works and Office"
jayson.knight Member since:
2005-07-06

Fantastic, thanks for the info. Let the mayhem commence!

Now back to your regularly scheduled thread.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Works and Office
by mrminnman on Wed 1st Aug 2007 04:31 UTC in reply to "Works and Office"
mrminnman Member since:
2006-06-27

they both seem like two ways to do the same thing.


microsoft works is very crippled. for example, you can't set the linespacing to 1.25 only 1.5 and 2.0. there are other stupid limitations as well.

adding ads to microsoft works would only annoy me more, so I'll keep using the 2003 version of office.

Reply Score: 1

adware?? lol
by graigsmith on Wed 1st Aug 2007 01:15 UTC
graigsmith
Member since:
2006-04-05

why put up with adware, when you have open office?

Reply Score: 9

RE: adware?? lol
by Soulbender on Wed 1st Aug 2007 03:39 UTC in reply to "adware?? lol"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Works for a lot of Windows apps so apparently quite a few people put up with it.

Edited 2007-08-01 03:40

Reply Score: 2

Just the same
by SlackerJack on Wed 1st Aug 2007 01:29 UTC
SlackerJack
Member since:
2005-11-12

As MSN on Windows, it's free but has adverts. If ad based application are "innovative ways to provide the best productivity tools to our customers" then Microsoft need to look at the word innovative in the proper way.

Ad based apps are horrible, the last thing you want is to be distracted by ads.

Reply Score: 4

What's the problem here?
by raynevandunem on Wed 1st Aug 2007 01:44 UTC
raynevandunem
Member since:
2006-11-24

I don't get why ad-supported software is so maligned, considering that the developers have to find a way for the software to pay for itself. The OpenOffice folks shouldn't talk about it, considering that Sun is the primary bankroller for their very existence (and that Sun sells a repackaged, barely-modified version of OpenOffice for enterprise users). Don't be so hasty to criticize.

It's all about how its done. Opera's adware was placed at the most prominent places, and no one cared for that so they did away with it (now they're bankrolled by Google and Nintendo). AIM's adware was installed as a separate .exe (Viewpoint), something that pissed off a number of users. Yahoo, however, got it right: they placed the ads at the bottom of their IM, which would be less than noticeable and more integrated into the UI (since everyone's reading from the top anyway).

If the ads are placed at the least conspicuous place, and the relationship with the ad media is not made especially outstanding, then Works just might pay for itself.

The only reason why I didn't like Works was because documents made by Works were not compatible with Word (which I found out almost too late at my private school graduation...thankfully, I did well with a last-minute impromptu speech).

Edited 2007-08-01 01:45

Reply Score: 4

It is really an oxymoron
by qroon on Wed 1st Aug 2007 02:17 UTC
qroon
Member since:
2005-10-21

MS Works? *grins*

Reply Score: 7

mesonychoteuthis
Member since:
2007-08-01

The adware model in its simplest manifestation is easily contravened by denying the application the network access it needs to download new ads (any competent firewall has this capability). This might cause problems if, say, the program is a p2p application, but there's no inherent reason that a word processor needs internet access. One can then simply find where the ads are stored and delete them. If the application is programmed not to function without them, it's simple enough to just leave placeholder images there that are the same color as the interface. All this could be accomplished automatically by a very rudimentary utility, so the effort only needs to be invested once.

If Microsoft really plans to make this an important part of its business strategy, they must expect that either the ads will not be sufficiently annoying to motivate such measures or else they have some kind of countermeasure in mind. Could this be another arms race in the making like the one against DRM designers and DRM busters? As long as the computer is in the control of it's users, it seems futile for MS. Microsoft of course realizes this, so they're trying incrementally to divest computer users of control over their own machines. It has often been pondered what Microsoft has to gain by working with "content providers" to incorporate DRM into the core of the operating system, and now we see one of the many advantages of their designs beginning to become apparent. MS Works is not a core business asset, so it would not be at all surprising if they're trying an experimental strategy on it that could conceivably be expanded to other product lines, or even to the OS itself.

Edited 2007-08-01 03:32

Reply Score: 3

raynevandunem Member since:
2006-11-24

I'm sorry, but since when did DRM get into this?

Edited 2007-08-01 05:35

Reply Score: 1

abraxas Member since:
2005-07-07

The adware model in its simplest manifestation is easily contravened by denying the application the network access it needs to download new ads (any competent firewall has this capability). This might cause problems if, say, the program is a p2p application, but there's no inherent reason that a word processor needs internet access. One can then simply find where the ads are stored and delete them. If the application is programmed not to function without them, it's simple enough to just leave placeholder images there that are the same color as the interface. All this could be accomplished automatically by a very rudimentary utility, so the effort only needs to be invested once.

Still, that's a lot of effort when you can just download OpenOffice and have more features without the ads for free.

Reply Score: 2

google_ninja Member since:
2006-02-05

works is very lightweight and OO.o is a huge resource hog. its like comparing koffice with oo.o, it can do 90% of what people want twice as quickly.

Reply Score: 2

The real title is
by Duffman on Wed 1st Aug 2007 06:24 UTC
Duffman
Member since:
2005-11-23

"Microsoft Works To Become Free, Spyware-Funded Product"

Reply Score: 3

what if
by kozo on Wed 1st Aug 2007 11:07 UTC
kozo
Member since:
2006-02-02

I use MS Works but I am not connected to the internet? Does it have static ads?

Reply Score: 1

Budget windows
by Laurence on Wed 1st Aug 2007 11:10 UTC
Laurence
Member since:
2007-03-26

Maybe Microsoft should stick adverts in BSODs and the message boxes that popup when tasks stop responding to subsidise the cost of Windows. ;-)

Reply Score: 3

Cool
by Bit_Rapist on Wed 1st Aug 2007 14:10 UTC
Bit_Rapist
Member since:
2005-11-13

Someone will hack the ads out of the program eventually and you won't have to deal with it anyway. It always happens.

Reply Score: 2

Ms Works, office, OO...
by Ehiza on Thu 2nd Aug 2007 00:47 UTC
Ehiza
Member since:
2007-08-02

There are many options out there, and you must find the best for you. In my opinnion, Office is the standard (even if you donīt like it)But it is slow, and bloated (at least for me). Oo is a good alternative for MS office, but have the same problems, want to be as complete and have all the features posible, and when all you want is to write a letter, or an school work, you donīt need all those things. Works, is a good suite, is cheap, not so resource hungry, and does well most of the things you want. Problems with it... Well, it have a propietary format, so it is not as user friendly as it must be (did somebody tried to give a works document to a friend/teacher/sister...?)

My Two cents? there are so many word processors around, so use what you need. I actually, downloaded the ppt viewer from MS (i donīt do presentations) and use Atlantis as my word processor (light, fast, cheap and have all the features i need)

Reply Score: 2