A Spoon Full of Sugar Helps the Despotism Go Down

[Enlightend]

There was a very troubling letter in the Reader's Forum of the June issue of Computer Shopper(pg. 14). It describes how software is not purchased, rather it involves purchasing the right to use it under the conditions the owners set forth(which some of you already know). It continues by relating how, about a year ago, Microsoft suggested Windows XP and Office XP(and future versions) would be subscription-based. They write: "Imagine purchasing a new computer with Windows/Office XP installed and 12 months later finding it won't boot unless you "renew" your OS subscription with a credit card?" The letter says that a heated battle ensued, and there was such a backlash that Microsoft delayed its implementation. It finishes by saying: "But make no mistake: The foundation has been laid, and Microsoft's ultimate goal is to move to this paradigm. As consumers, our only recourse is to move to other platforms and suites."

Very well put. Linux anyone? It's also intriguing that Win98 costs the same price as XP.

[jecahn]

Yeah this is rather disturbing. Although, I understand (from a business standpoint) why, when purchasing software, you are only purchasing the "right" to utilize this software. Also, I'd like to think that if MS instituted a "subscription service" for their products there would be a migration to something like Linux or BeOS (does that even still exist?!?) However, the thing that you have to keep in mind is that there has been a shift in computer owner demographic in the past 5-10 years. Remember the days when, in order to use your computer, you had to know DOS? In order to fix problems, you'd need to have at least an elementary knowledge of what was going on to resolve your problems? In short, you had to be "computer savvy." Well, that's not the case anymore. People buy computers as appliances, now. People don't understand what "Windows" is or what is does or that there might be an alternative. Just like they don't know that AOL is not the "internet."

On the other side of the coin, by suggesting the institution of a "subscription-only" service Microsoft is further re-affirming what we already know about them: that their S.O.P. is to release "half-done" software and correct the problems as they arise or after the software has already been in the marketplace. Because I'm sure they wouldn't market it as, "Why? Because we're Microsoft and we said so. And if you knew any better, you'd switch to Linux. But, most people don't so suck it up!" Instead they'd tell you that, "We really strive to have the most up to date, easiest to use, bug-free software in the world. So, you're not subscribing to get the same software every 12 months, you're signing on to get the LATEST version of the software because we, at Microsoft, care sooo much.

I also don't imagine that the agencies that are dedicated to keeping an eye on Microsoft would ever let this idea come to fruition.

As for XP, I'm still using 98 and I'm not sufficiently impressed with XP yet to make the swap.

[Nashville Ed]

Subscription or leased software is not new. Some industry specific titles have been issued via subscription for years.

I know an operating system is different but the model is already in place.

[Nick Driver]

I wholeheartedly support the Linux and free software movement. I wished there was some robust and mature DAW software available for it, and device drivers to support my audio interface hardware. Someday it will get there, but it ain't there yet today.

I also support commercial software. If you make software that I need and that is robust and reliable and does all that its advertisement claims, then I've got no problems paying a fair price for right-to-use it. The cold hard truth however is that too much commercial software is buggy, slipshod slapped together and hurriedly shoved out the door before it is done, yet is promoted as though it is highly capable, polished product (their advertisements are bold-faced lies), and they constantly want more and more and more and more money to continually replace what should have been done right in the first place. I have a problem with paying repeatedly for someone to learn how to make a software product when they lead me to believe it was a finished and complete product when I first paid for it.

[Enlightend]

I also don't have a problem paying a fair price for solid software, but subscription-based just seems like exploitation. How would we feel if we purchased a new hardware tone-generator, for example, and had to pay Roland a fee each year to use it? I'm just talking about right-to-use, not updates. And just replace that with any other item, like a book, an air-conditioner....

[LacunaEnd]

This is kinda off subject but, I know that the Console video game world is going to go that route as well - youll buy hardware - and the software will all be net based...
I myself dont want it - weather it be an OS or a videogame...but on the other hand - I know it isnt really up to me - it all depends on how the masses respond to it.
Personally - I hope it gets shoved back in microsoft's face...but at the same time - if it is well recieved there will be a large group of people switching to linux - and should that happen, no doubt some iconic company will come along and develope quality software/drivers for it.
--@