«

Hello thingy,

> These are
> public documents, if a member of the public wants to open them and he
> or she cannot buy word because MS has thrown its toys out and gone
> home...

if these 'public documents' are so damn important why are they not in txt
format, or mabye rtf. surely that cannot be microsofts fault.

> they [public] should not be forced to buy word in the
> first place.

umm... 'word viewer'

that is if a goverment is so damn incompetent to not have documents in a
text format in the first place

> because of the subscription model MS is pushing you
> end up not owning the software you subscribe to it for a number of
> years

wtf, 'end up not owning the software' do you live in a hole somewhere ?

the only thing you OWN is a right to use the software - where do you get
this bullshit of 'owning' the software ?

as for subscriptions, if its cheaper than buying outright where is the problem
?


----------------
Steven H

Steven Higgan wrote:
> Hello thingy,
>
>> What happens if you lose your hd and your cd of MS office is
>> corrupt/damaged? (mine is). I cannot reload Office 97 if I wanted
>> to....so I use oOo to look back at old docs....
>
>
> ffs there not that unreasnoble
>
> if your cd is broken ring ms and arrange a replacement (i did for a
> office 97 disc). if its an oem install go to your supplier and moan at
> them.
>
And if the OEM is out of business?

Philip

Steven H wrote:
>> These are
>> public documents, if a member of the public wants to open them and he
>> or she cannot buy word because MS has thrown its toys out and gone
>> home...
> if these 'public documents' are so damn important why are they not in txt
> format, or mabye rtf. surely that cannot be microsofts fault.

You are exactly right. Important public documents and government records
should *not* be stored in a proprietary file format.



Peter

Steven Higgan wrote:
> Hello thingy,
>
>> What happens if you lose your hd and your cd of MS office is
>> corrupt/damaged? (mine is). I cannot reload Office 97 if I wanted
>> to....so I use oOo to look back at old docs....
>
>
> ffs there not that unreasnoble

Yes they are.

> if your cd is broken ring ms and arrange a replacement (i did for a
> office 97 disc). if its an oem install go to your supplier and moan at
> them.
>
> ----------------
> the madGeek
>
>

The Office 97 was UK bought, I brought it with me when I moved here.
Last time I asked about an upgrade i was told because it was a UK
version I was not eligable. In fact I was not even allowed to use my
British version in NZ they insisted I bought a NZ licence to continue to
use my UK cd.

fat chance....

regards

Thing

Steven H wrote:
> Hello thingy,
>
>> These are
>> public documents, if a member of the public wants to open them and he
>> or she cannot buy word because MS has thrown its toys out and gone
>> home...
>
>
> if these 'public documents' are so damn important why are they not in
> txt format, or mabye rtf. surely that cannot be microsofts fault.

This is the huge argument that is sweeping the world right now. Open
document format is the preferred method by organisations that do not
want lock in.

>> they [public] should not be forced to buy word in the
>> first place.
>
>
> umm... 'word viewer'

Works in Linux? no.
>
> that is if a goverment is so damn incompetent to not have documents in a
> text format in the first place

I huge argument in the USA at the moment is about a US state wanting to
save in open document and MS is trying to stop them.
>
>> because of the subscription model MS is pushing you
>> end up not owning the software you subscribe to it for a number of
>> years
>
>
> wtf, 'end up not owning the software' do you live in a hole somewhere ?

You clearly do if you are not aware of the goings on in the US over ODF.

> the only thing you OWN is a right to use the software - where do you get
> this bullshit of 'owning' the software ?

interesting difference, if I buy a car, it is legally mine, if I buy
software it is not mine, cannot you see the anomaly?
>
> as for subscriptions, if its cheaper than buying outright where is the
> problem ?

If MS refuses to sell you a new subscription, or you decide you dont
want the latest office version because the old one is good enough,
because it is a subscription you loose the right to use it at all.

> ----------------
> Steven H

regards

Thing

thingy wrote:
> Rob J wrote:
>
>> In article <8blb33->,
>> y says...
>>
>>> Following on from Korea's anti-trust case.
>>>
>>> MS may throw its toys out of the cot........
>>>
>>> "If the KFTC enters an order requiring Microsoft to
>>> remove code or redesign Windows uniquely for the
>>> Korean market, it might be necessary to withdraw
>>> Windows from the Korean market or delay offering new
>>> versions in Korea," Microsoft said in a U.S.
>>> regulatory filing on Thursday."
>>>
>>> So, if Microsoft withdrew Windows from the Korean
>>> market, could Korean citizens in the future access
>>> their goverment documents saved already in Microsoft
>>> formats? Extrapolate, please, to Massachusetts.
>>
>> Troll, they would keep using whatever they already used
>> to create them.
>
> I find it amazing that you so blindly try and justify
> MS's business excesses, fortunately you are in a tniy
> minority it seems. Lots of Governments have simialr
> issues and I am sure will be busy ensuring they dont get
> shot in the foot.
>
The implication in the original post was that if MS withdrew
from the Korean market that all the existing documents would
immediately be unreadable. This is patently not true.

Pointing this out is not "blindly justifying MS's business
excesses".....

Cheers,

Cliff

--

Barzoomian the Martian - http://barzoomian.blogspot.com

steve wrote:
> Enkidu wrote:
>
>> "Withdraw from market" means "don't sell any *more*".
>> The existing versions will still be around and will
>> still be able to view documents already created in that
>> format.
>
>
> In IT terms, that's a highly undesirable
> situation.....however you care to frame it.
>
I wasn't debating that. Just pointing out that existing
legally installed software would not become illegal
overnight and would still be able to read existing saved
documents.

Cheers,

Cliff

--

Barzoomian the Martian - http://barzoomian.blogspot.com

On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 11:50:01 +1300, Enkidu wrote:

> thingy wrote:
>> Rob J wrote:
>>
>>> In article <8blb33->,
>>> y says...
>>>
>>>> Following on from Korea's anti-trust case.
>>>>
>>>> MS may throw its toys out of the cot........
>>>>
>>>> "If the KFTC enters an order requiring Microsoft to
>>>> remove code or redesign Windows uniquely for the
>>>> Korean market, it might be necessary to withdraw
>>>> Windows from the Korean market or delay offering new
>>>> versions in Korea," Microsoft said in a U.S.
>>>> regulatory filing on Thursday."
>>>>
>>>> So, if Microsoft withdrew Windows from the Korean
>>>> market, could Korean citizens in the future access
>>>> their goverment documents saved already in Microsoft
>>>> formats? Extrapolate, please, to Massachusetts.
>>>
>>> Troll, they would keep using whatever they already used
>>> to create them.
>>
>> I find it amazing that you so blindly try and justify
>> MS's business excesses, fortunately you are in a tniy
>> minority it seems. Lots of Governments have simialr
>> issues and I am sure will be busy ensuring they dont get
>> shot in the foot.
>>
> The implication in the original post was that if MS withdrew
> from the Korean market that all the existing documents would
> immediately be unreadable. This is patently not true.
>
> Pointing this out is not "blindly justifying MS's business
> excesses".....
>
> Cheers,
>
> Cliff

Wouldnt that depend on the licenses of their current document reading
software.
ie. IF the license means they cant use that software unless renewed at the
end of the FY (for example), then, as MS has withdrawn from their market,
they cant renew their License, and are from then on either
a) Illegaly using the only software available to open those documents or
b) Looking for an alternative piece of software to open proprietory
formats (coming close to license/patent/copyright infringement)or
c) Unable to open those documents

Also, I vaguely recall Microsoft previously not releaseing all aspects of
their API's, so Microsoft products would have 'the edge' in the
marketplace



--
Hardware, n.: The parts of a computer system that can be kicked

The best way to get the right answer on usenet is to post the wrong one.

Enkidu wrote:
> thingy wrote:
>
>> Rob J wrote:
>>
>>> In article <8blb33->,
>>> y says...
>>>
>>>> Following on from Korea's anti-trust case.
>>>>
>>>> MS may throw its toys out of the cot........
>>>>
>>>> "If the KFTC enters an order requiring Microsoft to
>>>> remove code or redesign Windows uniquely for the
>>>> Korean market, it might be necessary to withdraw
>>>> Windows from the Korean market or delay offering new
>>>> versions in Korea," Microsoft said in a U.S.
>>>> regulatory filing on Thursday."
>>>>
>>>> So, if Microsoft withdrew Windows from the Korean
>>>> market, could Korean citizens in the future access
>>>> their goverment documents saved already in Microsoft
>>>> formats? Extrapolate, please, to Massachusetts.
>>>
>>>
>>> Troll, they would keep using whatever they already used
>>> to create them.
>>
>>
>> I find it amazing that you so blindly try and justify
>> MS's business excesses, fortunately you are in a tniy
>> minority it seems. Lots of Governments have simialr
>> issues and I am sure will be busy ensuring they dont get
>> shot in the foot.
>>
> The implication in the original post was that if MS withdrew
> from the Korean market that all the existing documents would
> immediately be unreadable. This is patently not true.
>
> Pointing this out is not "blindly justifying MS's business
> excesses".....
>
> Cheers,
>
> Cliff
>

http://slashdot.org/articles/05/10/2...tid=187&tid=98

"...........vendors from BEA to Microsoft are eager to take up the blunt
cudgel of subscription licensing, which merely asserts that, if you
don't pay up again at the end of the year, your software stops working.
The best way to deploy the mechanism of subscription licensing, of
course, is as a hosted service, because it gives the software vendor the
ability to instantly turn off the software-on-tap if the renewal is not
forthcoming........."

from,

http://blogs.zdnet.com/SAAS/index.php?p=53

"....The first step was discovering that consumers can be persuaded to
adopt a new playback medium every few years or so, necessitating the
repurchase of their entire back catalog on the new format. As David
Berlind has been explaining in several recent blog posts, the latest
wheeze is the use of digital restrictions management (DRM) technology to
erect artificial barriers between different format generations (or even
contemporaneous implementations by different vendors).........."

"..........Perhaps the most notorious example of this approach is
Microsoft Software Assurance, which promised free upgrades within the
term of the program, and then largely failed to deliver them. But then,
that's par for the course with a vendor that says
'software-as-a-service' but means
'software-as-a-privilege-you-should-be-darned-grateful-for.'
Now that no once-bitten-twice-shy customer is going to touch Software
Assurance with a bargepole again, Microsoft (to pick just one example
out of many established software vendors facing dwindling licence and
maintenance revenues) ......."

regards

Thing

thingy wrote:
> Enkidu wrote:
>
>> thingy wrote:
>>
>>> Rob J wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article <8blb33->,
>>>> y says...
>>>>
>>>>> Following on from Korea's anti-trust case.
>>>>>
>>>>> MS may throw its toys out of the cot........
>>>>>
>>>>> "If the KFTC enters an order requiring Microsoft to
>>>>> remove code or redesign Windows uniquely for the
>>>>> Korean market, it might be necessary to withdraw
>>>>> Windows from the Korean market or delay offering new
>>>>> versions in Korea," Microsoft said in a U.S.
>>>>> regulatory filing on Thursday."
>>>>>
>>>>> So, if Microsoft withdrew Windows from the Korean
>>>>> market, could Korean citizens in the future access
>>>>> their goverment documents saved already in Microsoft
>>>>> formats? Extrapolate, please, to Massachusetts.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Troll, they would keep using whatever they already used
>>>> to create them.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I find it amazing that you so blindly try and justify
>>> MS's business excesses, fortunately you are in a tniy
>>> minority it seems. Lots of Governments have simialr
>>> issues and I am sure will be busy ensuring they dont get
>>> shot in the foot.
>>>
>> The implication in the original post was that if MS withdrew
>> from the Korean market that all the existing documents would
>> immediately be unreadable. This is patently not true.
>>
>> Pointing this out is not "blindly justifying MS's business
>> excesses".....
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Cliff
>>
>
> http://slashdot.org/articles/05/10/2...tid=187&tid=98
>
> "...........vendors from BEA to Microsoft are eager to take up the blunt
> cudgel of subscription licensing, which merely asserts that, if you
> don't pay up again at the end of the year, your software stops working.
> The best way to deploy the mechanism of subscription licensing, of
> course, is as a hosted service, because it gives the software vendor the
> ability to instantly turn off the software-on-tap if the renewal is not
> forthcoming........."
>
> from,
>
> http://blogs.zdnet.com/SAAS/index.php?p=53
>
Yes, but Microsoft software does not work that way. It may
become 'illegal', but it doesn't stop working.

Cheers,

Cliff

--

Barzoomian the Martian - http://barzoomian.blogspot.com