MS Office 2003 does not offer features promised in its advertisem.

[Thorenn]

In March I upgraded from Office 2000 to Office 2003, only because I read a
Microsoft Office advertisement in many magazines, which claimed that unlike
Office 2000, the Office 2003 version would give me access to certain
features, and I quote the ad "the latest version of of Microsoft Office
includes Information Rights Management technologies. Now you can put limits
on the printing, copying, or forwarding of sensitive e-mail and documents".
After this advertisement persuaded me to buy Office 2003, I have now been
told by Microsoft support staff that the Microsfort Office Basic Edition
2003, does not offer this feature. This was not mentioned in the magazine
advertisement and I would therefore regard this advertisement as containing
claims that are false and misleading and would be grounds for a lawsuit. I
demand to know why Microsoft chose to mislead consumers like me in this
regard and I demand that Microsoft offers a patch that Microsoft Office 2003
customers like me can download so that we can get the features that Microsoft
claims that Office 2003 has.

 

[Brian Tillman]

In March I upgraded from Office 2000 to Office 2003, only because I
read a Microsoft Office advertisement in many magazines, which
claimed that unlike Office 2000, the Office 2003 version would give
me access to certain features, and I quote the ad "the latest version
of of Microsoft Office includes Information Rights Management
technologies.

Don't multipost.

 

[Karl Burrows]

If you bought Office 2003 Basic Edition, then you purchased an OEM version
which is in violation of the End User License Agreement anyway, so why are
you complaining?.

In March I upgraded from Office 2000 to Office 2003, only because I read a
Microsoft Office advertisement in many magazines, which claimed that unlike
Office 2000, the Office 2003 version would give me access to certain
features, and I quote the ad "the latest version of of Microsoft Office
includes Information Rights Management technologies. Now you can put limits
on the printing, copying, or forwarding of sensitive e-mail and documents".
After this advertisement persuaded me to buy Office 2003, I have now been
told by Microsoft support staff that the Microsfort Office Basic Edition
2003, does not offer this feature. This was not mentioned in the magazine
advertisement and I would therefore regard this advertisement as containing
claims that are false and misleading and would be grounds for a lawsuit. I
demand to know why Microsoft chose to mislead consumers like me in this
regard and I demand that Microsoft offers a patch that Microsoft Office 2003
customers like me can download so that we can get the features that
Microsoft
claims that Office 2003 has.

 

[Thorenn]

Your reply is typical of an employee of an monopoly company that think that
because you'll have no competition (because you'll destroy any company that
threatens to compete with you), you all can play GOD and what every you say,
goes! Has Microsoft not learnt from the very public spanking they got from
the courts not only in North America, but also in Europe, in the past? What
difference does it make if I bought an OEM version, I still paid extra for
the option of getting the Microsoft Office 2003. If I did not choose the
option of upgrading to Office 2003, I would have save a lot of money. I just
learnt that IRM is only available in Office 2003 Professional. If this is the
case, then Microsoft should mentioned very cleary in its advertisements that
IRM is pro only. Any person reading the magazine advertisement headlined "The
OOPS I just hit "Reply All" era is over" would naturally assume that the IRM
feature is available in all versions of Microsoft Office 2003. This
advertisement is therefore false and misleading in the extreme and therefore
grounds for litigation. I upgraded to Office 2003 based on what the Microsoft
advert said. i was perfectly happy with Office 2000, but upgraded only
because I wanted the IRM feature. I therefore wasted my money based on a
false promise made in a Microsoft advertisement. I demand that Microsoft keep
its
promise to offer IRM to all consumers that buy Office 2003 irrespective of
which version it is, because the advertisement does not state that it is
available only on certain versions of Office 2003. A downloadable patch for
those who have already bought Office 2003 basic edition to provide them with
IRM would rectify this situation and deliver on the promise that Microsoft
continues to make in its advertisements

Also, if buying Office 2003 Basic Edition is in violation of the End User
Agreement, why does Microsoft allow companies like HP and Dell to sell it to
their customers in the first place?? ????????

 

[IanRoy]

Link? I went to the HP site, didn't see any offer to sell Office 2003 Basic
Edition other than with a new computer.

It seems to me, if you had a case, you would be litigating it rather than
complaining to other users. You might not want to do that if you are running
an OEM version on other that the computer it was sold with.

Microsoft is farely clear on its website about what features come with what
versions of Office:
http://www.microsoft.com/office/editions/howtobuy/compare.mspx
Following the links, I find this one
:http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/office/office2003/operate/of03irm.mspx
"IRM is an extension of Windows Rights Management (RM) into Microsoft®
Office 2003 applications. IRM in Office 2003 requires RMS on Windows Server
2003, either within the organization or via a Microsoft service."

I haven't seen the ad to which you refer, so I don't know whether it lets
you know that or contains a suggestion to investigate further.

 

[Thorenn]

You need to pay extra if you want Office 2003 Basic Edition to accompany the
new computer. If the Microsoft ad did not mislead me, I would have not opted
to pay extra for Office 2003 Basic Edition as I am quite happy with Office
2000. The only reason I decided to pay extra and get Office 2003 basic
edition bundled with the PC was to get the IRM feature, which Office 2000
does not have and which, the Microsoft ad claims, is included in Office 2003
Edition.

 

[Peter D]

FWIW:

My advice #1? Depending where you are, you should contact the
local/state/national consumer protection people. All levels of governemt
beyond municipal usually have some sort of office and laws. If the ad was
worded as you say it was, then you probably have reasonable grounds for a
complaint. Sufficent complaints will cause sufficient resources to be
directed to the problem if it was misleading, and that often results in you
receiving some sort of compensation.

My advice #2? Stop attacking people here. Noone of them work for MS. Mainly
volunteers. True the initial reponse was a bit high-handed, but it's Usenet,
not the local Church Ladies Tea Circle. Grow thicker skin or go somewhere
else.

HTH

 

[Thorenn]

I would have litigated it but I have got an apology from a supervisor from
Microsoft Customer Service, an admission that the ad is misleading and as
assurance that the matter will be escalated to senior management to rectify
the situation. I find it hard to agree with you that it is alright to mislead
consumers in advertisements provided you clarify it on your website. The ad
states, and I quote "The latest version of Microsoft Office includes
Information Rights Management technologies. Now you can put limits on the
printing copying or forwarding of sensitive e-mail and documents". The ad
contains no suggestion whatsoever, to investigate futher, thereby very cleary
implying that all versions of Office 2003 offer IRM.

 

[Brian Tillman]

My advice #1? Depending where you are, you should contact the
local/state/national consumer protection people. All levels of
governemt beyond municipal usually have some sort of office and laws.
If the ad was worded as you say it was, then you probably have
reasonable grounds for a complaint. Sufficent complaints will cause
sufficient resources to be directed to the problem if it was
misleading, and that often results in you receiving some sort of
compensation.

If you ever do wind up getting compensation, it will probably be simply a
refund of the money you paid for the product.