MS Office 2013 Home/Business - non-transferable (1 PC p.person) - Caveat emptor.

[IainB]

I subscribe to Office Watch (was "WOW" or Woody's Office Watch).
They just sent out an interesting bit of information that you can find on their website:
Are you sure about non-transferable?
(Some pertinent snippets quoted below, sans embedded hyperlinks/images.)

Office 2013 can't be moved from the computer you first install it on - we’re quite sure.

..." How can I use the software?

We do not sell our software or your copy of it – we only license it. Under our license we grant you the right to install and run that one copy on one computer　(the licensed computer) for use by one person at a time, but only if you comply with all the terms of this agreement. Our software license is permanently assigned to the licensed computer. "

or

"Can I transfer the software to another computer or user?　

You may not transfer the software to another computer or user.　"

It’s the same wording for both Retail and OEM copies of Office 2013. OEM copies are sold, usually pre-installed, on new computers...

...Amazon is more careful about disclosing the Office 2013 terms. One of the bullet point ‘Product Features’ is:
"One time purchase for the life of your PC; non-transferrable"...

[tomos]

and as you say in the title, only one install allowed (formerly 2 allowed)

There’s no doubt that retail purchases of Office 2013 are for a SINGLE PC and NOT transferable from that computer after installation. Unlike retail versions of past Microsoft Office which allowed two installations that could be transferred to another computer.

good for the competition I hope:

the competition have some ideas (this mainly about price and number of licenses):
http://softmaker.com/english/blog/?p=435

The single machine license Office 2013 is another desperate attempt on MS's part to squeeze its lemon cash cow (sorry for mixed metaphors) and push people towards its subscription-based cloud model. I can't see how it can possibly be a good thing for them to do. Office apps are already becoming less relevant, competition such as the FREE LibreOffice is getting better all the time, and why would you want to upgrade if you already have Office 2010? To give students a single machine license will just push students (the future generation of office workers!) not to bother with MS Office at all. There are increasingly fewer reasons why they should need MS Office anyway.

another related thread: MS Office Subscriptions Now

[Cloq]

hm.. good thing I have license to use thinapp.. hello thinapp office2013! 

[IainB]

Yes, it seems a very strange marketing strategy - increasingly restrictive and controlling for the Customer. I suspect that only someone with more money than sense would buy the MS Office 2013 Home/Business product knowing the licence constraints. The advice otherwise would seem to be to avoid it altogether - the product is effectively in a product lifecycle cul-de-sac (a dead end). Why would a user want to be trapped in such a business relationship with the behemoth Microsoft?

As for MS Office 365, well, I guess that from Microsoft's $$$ perspective maybe there is potentially "one born every minute".

Increasingly Libre/OpenOffice and others are looking better by comparison, and of course the Google Docs alternative too - though Google's unilateral and without a "by-your-leave" shutting down of many of its other offerings is likely to ensure that no prudent user could seriously commit to Google Docs without swallowing a load of potential risk - e.g., a decision to decommission the service could happen overnight, leaving you high and dry.

[40hz]

Increasingly OpenOffice is looking better by comparison,

You'd be much better off with LibreOffice - and wise to avoid OpenOffice.

They've just released Version 4 btw.

[techidave]

I didn't think that there was much difference between LibreOffice and OpenOffice... just two different companies doing it.

[Carol Haynes]

LibreOffice is being developed with regular new releases ... plus it is totally open source.

OpenOffice is barely developed these days, rarely seeing new releases (even to fix bugs) and is Sun get their way the open source commitment will go down the crapper ... it is one of the main reasons LibreOffice spun off.

[40hz]

Libre and Open share the same original roots.

But with version 3.5, major differences in the codebase came into play. As was reported earlier in The Register speaking to one of TDF's founders:

“We inherited a 15 years old code base, where features were not implemented and bugs were not solved in order to avoid creating problems, and this - with time - was the origin of a large technical debt,” says Caolán McNamara, a senior Red Hat developer who is one of TDF's founders and directors.

“We had two options: a conservative strategy, which would immediately please all users, leaving the code basically unchanged, and our more aggressive feature development and code renovation path, which has created some stability problems in the short term but is rapidly leading to a completely new and substantially improved free office suite: LibreOffice 3.5, the best free office suite ever.”

Libre has since had major code rewrites and is now effectively its own thing. It's also not a company. It's run by the non-profit Document Foundation. It's a true F/OSS project licensed under the LGPLv3.

In many respects, The Document Foundation and LibreOffice shouldn't exist. As Carol mentions above, Libre reluctantly began its life as a fork of OpenOffice in response to Oracle attempting to assert ownership control over Sun's OpenOffice software following their acquisition of Sun.

LibreOffice is the future. OpenOffice will probably disappear within the next five or so years.

[IainB]

Thanks. To avoid going down the rat-hole, I corrected the post to read:

Increasingly Libre/OpenOffice and others are looking better by comparison, and of course the Google Docs alternative too

[40hz]

To avoid going down the rat-hole,...

Agree.

It's a topic that's been done to death in far too many places by now. For those who don't know whole Document Foundation/LibreOffice story - but are still interested in learning more - please feel free to search Google or head on over to Wikipedia for more.

[dr_andus]

I didn't think that there was much difference between LibreOffice and OpenOffice... just two different companies doing it.

I tried them both recently on a Win7 64-bit system and I kept running into bugs and performance issues in OpenOffice, while LibreOffice worked without a hitch. Just my personal experience...

[TaoPhoenix]

I didn't think that there was much difference between LibreOffice and OpenOffice... just two different companies doing it.

I tried them both recently on a Win7 64-bit system and I kept running into bugs and performance issues in OpenOffice, while LibreOffice worked without a hitch. Just my personal experience...

Last I recall there were various reasons going on, and so LibreOffice is the newer fork of the software suite. I vaguely recall that what's left of Open Office wasn't given good attention and began to stagnate, so the comment above makes perfect sense if LibreOffice took all the "good guys" with them.

This is a nice page describing their ("The Document Foundation") efforts. Note the line about them organizing bug fix hunts. (It's also a nice perspective on the Chrome-FF "version bump mania".These guys are old-school: You save the big numbers for important markers and do point releases when you're just fiddling with stuff.)

http://blog.documentfoundation.org/2012/12/26/tdf-in-2012-a-summary/

[Jibz]

There is also the possibility of using one of the smaller office suites like SoftMaker.

[Carol Haynes]

FWIW LibreOffice has just released version 4 with lots of collaboration tools. They are also systemtaically stripping out the old 'sun' components in the API. Interestingly the new version also opens MS Publisher and Visio documents (which I think is new and welcome).

The the other good thing about LibreOffice is it seems to have removed the need for Java to be installed - which is a big plus in anyone's book.

Re. Ms Office 2013 there is almost nothing worth the money and hassles of upgrading from Office 2007 or 2010. It just has a pig ugly interface to match not-metro (which it doesn't even run under) and throws you at subscription based storage every time you load and save files (OK you can change the defaults but that is how it is set up). It uses SkyDrive - which isn't compatible with the previous cloud solution for Office 2010 - at least not without searching for an update.

It isn't at all clear what MS will do if you buy a copy of Office 2013 and one f the following scenarios happens:

1) Failed motherboard replaced - is it a new computer?
2) On a desktop computer what if you change more than a few components (enough to change the machine ID at MS) - do you face reactivating issues?
3) Laptop stolen, damaged beyond repair or replaced under warranty?

The last point is particularly moot ... if you have a machine replaced under warranty and MS don't allow a reinstall of office do the manufacturers become liable to replace your copy of office?

I suppose MS could argue (but shouldn't) that theft or damage can be covered under insurance claims.

All in all there seems absolutely no reason to use MS Office post the 2010 version. Subscriptions might seem good value but most families only use Word and Excel at most and for one years subs have been able to buy a 3 machine perpetual license up until now (with transfer rights to new machines) - who in their right mind would pay a subscription cost to upgrade.

Doubtless MS will come up with something that breaks Office 2003 and 2007 in Windows 9 and by Windows 10 Office 2010 probably won't install forcing people into their corrupt model.

I have a current MAPs subscription which is due for renewal in March - I am seriosuly thinking of just buying a few copies of Windows Pro and moving to LibreOffice. The only other package I use from the subscription is Windows 2008 SBS - but it might be just the push I need to learn Apache and Samba!!!

[40hz]

All in all there seems absolutely no reason to use MS Office post the 2010 version.

Agree. I've already done a client advisory to that effect.

I think the plan is to make a media purchase less attractive to their customers than going with a software subscription. Something that Microsoft has been attempting to accomplish for years. Now, unfortunately, it looks like they're resorting to 'steering' and stealth in order to make it happen.

I'm hoping for a widespread user revolt although that will also likely be the trigger circumstance for Microsoft to initiate its often threatened and long anticipated legal campaign against Linux and F/OSS.

It's only a matter of time anyway if Win8 continues to stagnate like it seems to be doing.

[kfitting]

Despite not liking the way MS is going with Office, the biggest reason I dont switch is lack of VBA support.  Since my work uses MS Office I have many hours invested in VBA... switching away from MS kills all that effort.  I understand VBA has "no future" (different takes on what this means looking around the web), but IT rules give no other options at work, and I'm not going to "start over" at home.

[f0dder]

Humm, some people on Slashdot say that you can login to your office2013 (not *365!) account and de-auth for the current PC and auth for another - are they wrong?

Is there anything (intelligible) from Microsoft itself, or is all this based on people interpreting EULAs without actually trying the product? Does "non-transferable" really mean you can't move it to another PC, or that you cannot give the license to another person?

I wouldn't put it beyond MS to attempt something like this, especially considering they probably want to move people to their subscription based Office365... but the information on the licensing seems pretty muddy to me.

[Joe Hone]

There are 4 cousins in my family who all started college this year - all were supposed to show up with access to MS Word on their PC or laptop. I encouraged them to install LibreOffice instead and so far none has had a single issue with that platform in an MS Word environment. I really hope for a paradigm shift in which some of these albatrosses collapse and the innovators can have greater market impact, even if their offerings are freeware.

[Carol Haynes]

Its really interesting - I was writing a comment on Amazon.co.uk yesterday in response to a review and the website description very clearly stated that the software was for one computer only and not transferable.

I have just looked and all versions have the information about licensing removed on the product pages.

Maybe MS is sensing the mood and backtracking already.

What nobody has said is how users (home or office) with poor internet speeds are supposed to install this software without a disk? I have loads of customers struggling with 256kb or less broadband speeds and even some still on dial up - are MS going to provide a disk for those people? It isn't so bad installing the basic package just start it at the end of the day and leave it to it but they are using the incremental download the bits you need when you need them approach which is a complete PITA at the best of times but some people are going to be REALLY unhappy users.

Actually if you go to office.microsoft.com and look at any of the Office 2013 packages (assuming you can find them as they are conspicuous by their absence - and only Office 365 show) you will find this statement under the Buy Now button:

For 1 PC, non-transferrable

If you go ahead and click Buy Now on the order page it clearly states:

For installation and use on 1 PC only. License cannot be transferred to another PC.

There is transfer management in Office 365 subscriptions - maybe that is what was being discussed.

[40hz]

Humm, some people on Slashdot say that you can login to your office2013 (not *365!) account and de-auth for the current PC and auth for another - are they wrong?

Is there anything (intelligible) from Microsoft itself, or is all this based on people interpreting EULAs without actually trying the product? Does "non-transferable" really mean you can't move it to another PC, or that you cannot give the license to another person?

I wouldn't put it beyond MS to attempt something like this, especially considering they probably want to move people to their subscription based Office365... but the information on the licensing seems pretty muddy to me.

Having waded through the licensing training for partners, I have no doubts that if Microsoft says non-transferable from original machine, they mean exactly that.

Looks like they've removed the transferability option that used to come with the retail versions. Apparently, the restriction to original machine that used to characterize only the OEM versions that shipped with a new machine now apply to all single copy purchases. Hope they lower the retail package price to the OEM price level if they're serious about this. Because transferability was the only justification for charging a higher price for the retail product.

[Carol Haynes]

On amazon.com:

Product Features
Platform: PC Key Card

• Licensed for one user for install on one PC. Box inculudes one Product Key Card - No Disc
• The latest versions of Word, Excel, PowerPoint, OneNote, and Outlook
• Designed to help you create and organize faster with new, time saving features and a clean, modern look
• Save documents in the cloud on SkyDrive and access them away from home
• One time purchase for the life of your PC; non-transferrable

See http://www.amazon.com/Office-Home-Business-2013-1User/dp/B009SPWJ98

As I noted above they make this very clear on the microsoft office website if you buy online.

Another little 'nasty' that has slipped through is that the student/academic edition has a 4yr license that expires - never used to! And it is done via Office 365. I suppose a 4yr subscription is fair if you wanted Office 365 but the academic DVD version has disappeared and there doesn't appear to be a key-card equivalent.

See: http://www.amazon.com/University-Academic-Student-Validation-Required/dp/B009VL9YGU

[40hz]

@Carol - Wow! Good catch! I didn't even notice that until you called attention to it.

Having been previously accused (due to my remarks about Microsoft's walled garden/app store strategy with Windows Metro) I'm wondering if anybody here still thinks I'm indulging in FUD propagation when it comes to Microsoft?

[attach]

[barney]

I'm wondering if anybody here still thinks I'm indulging in FUD propagation when it comes to Microsoft?

FUD?  Methinks not  .  In this case, FUD=Frequent Usage Discouraged (there are other words, but I'm trying to be genteel about it  ).  MS Office became an albatross around my neck roughly a decade++ ago, so I cut the cord and let it sink.  Better options have been available for longer than that.  MS did a great thing in standardizing software development (?), and they've been trying to overcome that lapse ever since.  I wonder how long it'll be before they start billing by minutes of usage  ?  Office seems to be traveling in that direction.

[xtabber]

Microsoft has backtracked because of the furor aroused, "customer feedback" in MS-speak.

However, they are still trying to force everyone into a subscription model - $99 per year for home users and $150 for business users, with up to 5 "devices" allowed per user.

[Carol Haynes]

LOL - yippee

Actually I bet they haven't back tracked because of the public outcry - I bet it is because LibreOffice and Open Office have seen a surge and their sales are down.

Lots of stupid users out there but it doesn't take a genius to work out that expensive software that dies with your computer is a bad thing! and most people I have spoken to are horrified by the idea of an annual subscription (hell I still see a lot os Office 97, 2000 and XP out there, if you have had 15 years out of the price of your software why would you settle for an annual subscription?).