R
Ralph Smorra
For years, I have bought computers with OEM licenses of Windows and Office,
one at a time, as we hire new employees. This is how many small business buy
their computers and software.
Why is it then, that Microsoft won't allow growing businesses like mine to
ever convert their licenses to OpenLicense, nor to get Software Assurance?
Whatever apparently legitimate reasons are put forth, the bottom line is
this practice causes people to never move to OpenLicense, and therefore never
pay Microsoft for SA.
Besides the immediate money lost, this also drives your customers to Linux
and OpenOffice, and to Google Apps and other web based providers.
Restricting the conversion from OEM to OpenLicense to 90 days also
encourages companies to copy software illegally.
If they can't reinstall their OEM version on a replacement or self-built
computer, and Microsoft gives them no credit for that, they will find an
illegal copy that they can install.
If they want to install office automatically on new computers, a bootleg
enterprise addtion will work, but not their many legit OEM/retail licenses.
Those OEM licenses are technically illegal anyway, once they buy a new
computer, even if they bought the OEM license separately from their previous
computer. Many OEM licenses are bought this way, with misceleous 'hardware'
by tigerdirect.com, zipzoomfly.com, etc.
Small to medium business want to give you their money to upgrade them to
OpenLicense and Software, but you won't take it unless they pay full price
for software they already have.
Even if I bought Vista Business and Office 2007 whenever we hire a new
employee, that would give me no trade in value towards an equivalent number
of OpenLicenses. And the dozens of Office XP/2003, and Windows XP OEM
licenses I have? They're worthless too, according to MS.
Microsoft should be doing everything possible encourance people to upgrade
their OEM licenses when ever they want.
Instead, they are driving their customers to OpenSouce rather than
OpenLicense, and to Software As A Service rather of Software Assurance.
----------------
This post is a suggestion for Microsoft, and Microsoft responds to the
suggestions with the most votes. To vote for this suggestion, click the "I
Agree" button in the message pane. If you do not see the button, follow this
link to open the suggestion in the Microsoft Web-based Newsreader and then
click "I Agree" in the message pane.
http://www.microsoft.com/office/com...-0d2e1cb2f051&dg=microsoft.public.office.misc
one at a time, as we hire new employees. This is how many small business buy
their computers and software.
Why is it then, that Microsoft won't allow growing businesses like mine to
ever convert their licenses to OpenLicense, nor to get Software Assurance?
Whatever apparently legitimate reasons are put forth, the bottom line is
this practice causes people to never move to OpenLicense, and therefore never
pay Microsoft for SA.
Besides the immediate money lost, this also drives your customers to Linux
and OpenOffice, and to Google Apps and other web based providers.
Restricting the conversion from OEM to OpenLicense to 90 days also
encourages companies to copy software illegally.
If they can't reinstall their OEM version on a replacement or self-built
computer, and Microsoft gives them no credit for that, they will find an
illegal copy that they can install.
If they want to install office automatically on new computers, a bootleg
enterprise addtion will work, but not their many legit OEM/retail licenses.
Those OEM licenses are technically illegal anyway, once they buy a new
computer, even if they bought the OEM license separately from their previous
computer. Many OEM licenses are bought this way, with misceleous 'hardware'
by tigerdirect.com, zipzoomfly.com, etc.
Small to medium business want to give you their money to upgrade them to
OpenLicense and Software, but you won't take it unless they pay full price
for software they already have.
Even if I bought Vista Business and Office 2007 whenever we hire a new
employee, that would give me no trade in value towards an equivalent number
of OpenLicenses. And the dozens of Office XP/2003, and Windows XP OEM
licenses I have? They're worthless too, according to MS.
Microsoft should be doing everything possible encourance people to upgrade
their OEM licenses when ever they want.
Instead, they are driving their customers to OpenSouce rather than
OpenLicense, and to Software As A Service rather of Software Assurance.
----------------
This post is a suggestion for Microsoft, and Microsoft responds to the
suggestions with the most votes. To vote for this suggestion, click the "I
Agree" button in the message pane. If you do not see the button, follow this
link to open the suggestion in the Microsoft Web-based Newsreader and then
click "I Agree" in the message pane.
http://www.microsoft.com/office/com...-0d2e1cb2f051&dg=microsoft.public.office.misc