Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 12th May 2010 15:41 UTC
Microsoft The Microsoft empire is built upon two pillars: the Windows operating system, and Microsoft Office. Windows 7 made its way unto the scene last year, and now it's time to work on the other pillar. Today, Microsoft officially launched Microsoft Office 2010 and SharePoint 2010. Regular customers will be able to purchase the new versions next month, starting at 119 USD.
Thread beginning with comment 424094
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
lemur2
Member since:
2007-02-17

uhh... Web Office is meant as a companion to office, not a replacement.


That isn't the problem. The problem is Microsoft saying that "Buisness users of Linux" will need a full license for Microsoft Office, and what Microsoft are selling with "a full license for Microsoft Office" is a right for someone to run a full-featured Microsoft Office, and Microsoft do not provide any such a product for "Buisness users of Linux".

So Microsoft are trying to charge for something they are not providing.

This is a potential lawsuit in the making, IMO.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Stratoukos Member since:
2009-02-11

What are you talking about? A license for Microsoft Office gives you the right to run Office and the right to use the Web app. How is it reason for a lawsuit if you don't meet the minimum requirements for one of the things provided with the license? Can I buy a license and then sue them if I don't own a computer? Or are they obligated to provided versions of Office for every OS under the sun?

If you use linux and want to buy a license knowing that you won't be able to use the offline part of office it's your choice.

I agree that they should have a way to license only the web apps, but I can't see a way this is reason for a lawsuit.

PS. the above are true only for business customers that want to serve their own instance off sharepoint. The web apps are free for the public.

Reply Parent Score: 1

lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

What are you talking about? A license for Microsoft Office gives you the right to run Office and the right to use the Web app. How is it reason for a lawsuit if you don't meet the minimum requirements for one of the things provided with the license? Can I buy a license and then sue them if I don't own a computer? Or are they obligated to provided versions of Office for every OS under the sun?

If you use linux and want to buy a license knowing that you won't be able to use the offline part of office it's your choice.

I agree that they should have a way to license only the web apps, but I can't see a way this is reason for a lawsuit.


Microsoft offered coupons for Linux.

Now Microsoft are claiming that those Business Linux users, who have a licensed product they got (albeit indirectly) via Microsoft, and who could potentially use THAT product (Specifically, Suse Linux Enterprise Desktop, aka SLED) to access Microsoft Offfice Online, nevertheless will now need to purchase a full license for Microsoft Office.

This would all be fine except for one thing ... Microsoft Office doesn't run on Linux. Microsoft do not offer a version of Microsoft Office that will actually work for those customers. Hence Microsoft would be requiring their (Linux coupon) customers to buy something additional (a desktop license for Microsoft Office) that won't work (i.e. something that is actually useless to said customers).

Lawsuit time, IMO. It would be no sillier than thousands of other lawsuits that seem to get up.

Edited 2010-05-13 03:05 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

MollyC Member since:
2006-07-04

The terms appear to be that anyone using web Office for business also needs a license of desktop Office, regardless of what OS that user might be using. Your post implied that the terms specifically targeted Linux, when it doesn't. That provision is actually meant to target Windows users, to make sure that those using web apps for business purposes, aren't using them for free. And as a side-effect it covers users of other OSes too, and rightly so. Why should business users of other OSes get easier terms to use web Office than Windows users? It makes no sense that business users on Windows would have to pay but business users on other OSes could use those apps for free.

There's no basis for a law suit at all (it's not like business Linux users were using web Office before, and suddenly had the license change under their feet), though I'm sure you're hoping for such.

Reply Parent Score: 2

lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

The terms appear to be that anyone using web Office for business also needs a license of desktop Office, regardless of what OS that user might be using. Your post implied that the terms specifically targeted Linux, when it doesn't. That provision is actually meant to target Windows users, to make sure that those using web apps for business purposes, aren't using them for free. And as a side-effect it covers users of other OSes too, and rightly so. Why should business users of other OSes get easier terms to use web Office than Windows users? It makes no sense that business users on Windows would have to pay but business users on other OSes could use those apps for free. There's no basis for a law suit at all (it's not like business Linux users were using web Office before, and suddenly had the license change under their feet), though I'm sure you're hoping for such.


This is all solid reasoning except for one thing ... Microsoft gave out coupons for Suse Linux Enterprise Desktop (SLED).

There would be no problem in any of this except for that.

Microsoft are now offering a service (online MS Office) that these Linux coupon customers could use, if they were licesnsed to do so. There would be no problem there if Microsoft were to also offer them a license they could actually use, but Microsoft don't.

There is no version of Microsoft Office that will run on SLED, yet Microsoft's SLED coupon customers are being asked to pay for a license they can't use, in order to use another product (to whit, Microsoft Office online).

I'm pretty sure there would be something actionable here.

Microsoft could cure it pretty simply, IMO, by offering a means to license their SLED coupon customers via, say, a special reduced-price for MS Office online in conjunction with SLED/OpenOffice on those customer's desktop. I'd think that would probably be an acceptable resolution.

Reply Parent Score: 2