Microsoft Office 2003 Student & Teachers Edition...

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Aaron Zarlos, Jun 12, 2004.

  1. Aaron Zarlos

    Aaron Zarlos Guest

    Seeing as I qualify for this version, can anyone tell me what the difference
    is between the standard version and the students & teachers version? I also
    note there is a Office Professional Academic version which includes Access
    and Publisher in addition to the standard Office programs.

    What I want to know before I buy is if the student & teacher version is the
    same as the standard version, or are the parts of Word, Excel, etc that
    aren't installed? Also, can students buy the Academic version of the Office
    Professional, or is this only for schools, universities, etc?

    Any answers, comment, etc appreciated.

    Aaron
    Aaron Zarlos, Jun 12, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Aaron Zarlos

    a Guest

    In article <>, says...
    > Seeing as I qualify for this version, can anyone tell me what the difference
    > is between the standard version and the students & teachers version? I also
    > note there is a Office Professional Academic version which includes Access
    > and Publisher in addition to the standard Office programs.
    >
    > What I want to know before I buy is if the student & teacher version is the
    > same as the standard version, or are the parts of Word, Excel, etc that
    > aren't installed? Also, can students buy the Academic version of the Office
    > Professional, or is this only for schools, universities, etc?
    >
    > Any answers, comment, etc appreciated.
    >
    > Aaron
    >
    >
    >

    read about it here:

    http://www.microsoft.com/nz/education/forstudents/backtoschool.aspx
    a, Jun 12, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Aaron Zarlos

    Adam Warner Guest

    Hi Aaron Zarlos,

    > Seeing as I qualify for this version, can anyone tell me what the
    > difference is between the standard version and the students & teachers
    > version?


    You are not permitted to earn an income using the software. Even serfs are
    permitted to use their tools for work. Consider this if you want to be
    able, for example, to earn some income over the school holidays using the
    software.

    <http://www.microsoft.com/nz/education/forstudents/backtoschool.aspx>
    "Office Student and Teacher Edition 2003 is also for non-commercial,
    educational use only."

    <http://www.microsoft.com/nz/office/students/prodinfo/doyouqualify.aspx>
    "You're restricted to using this product for non-commercial
    (non-revenue-generating) use."

    Start learning to use software that is not going to affect your potential
    to earn revenue. If you can't afford the version that will permit you to
    earn a dollar then perhaps it's a wake up call to consider something else.

    Regards,
    Adam
    Adam Warner, Jun 12, 2004
    #3
  4. In article <>, says...
    > Seeing as I qualify for this version, can anyone tell me what the difference
    > is between the standard version and the students & teachers version? I also
    > note there is a Office Professional Academic version which includes Access
    > and Publisher in addition to the standard Office programs.
    >
    > What I want to know before I buy is if the student & teacher version is the
    > same as the standard version, or are the parts of Word, Excel, etc that
    > aren't installed? Also, can students buy the Academic version of the Office
    > Professional, or is this only for schools, universities, etc?


    Academic is generally available for students. There are restrictions on
    the use of the academic licenses IIRC.
    Patrick Dunford, Jun 12, 2004
    #4
  5. Aaron Zarlos

    Patrick Bold Guest

    "Adam Warner" <> wrote in message
    news:p...
    > Hi Aaron Zarlos,
    >
    > > Seeing as I qualify for this version, can anyone tell me what the
    > > difference is between the standard version and the students &

    teachers
    > > version?

    >
    > You are not permitted to earn an income using the software. Even serfs

    are
    > permitted to use their tools for work. Consider this if you want to be
    > able, for example, to earn some income over the school holidays using

    the
    > software.
    >
    >

    Funny thing -- the only people more obsessed with Microsoft licensing
    restrictions than Microsoft are Linux fanatics. Please try to get it
    right, at least. Yes, the student-teacher versions are restricted to
    non-commercial, non-revenue-generating uses. But to suggest that no one
    can earn a living with these tools is dead wrong. Teachers and other
    educational staff can do so, as the license specifies. As for students,
    I'm not sure what sort of summer job you have in find that would be
    problematic. Microsoft's very purpose in offering a low-cost version of
    its Office products to students is to get them "hooked", and so in
    practice there has always been a fairly loose understanding of what is
    permissible. You couldn't publish a book in Word, but you could
    certainly prepare the final draft; you couldn't run your boss's
    inventory system directly off your Excel spreadsheet, but there's
    nothing to stop you from tinkering with the design of the spreadsheet
    itself at home; and so on.

    > Start learning to use software that is not going to affect your

    potential
    > to earn revenue. If you can't afford the version that will permit you

    to
    > earn a dollar then perhaps it's a wake up call to consider something

    else.
    >


    Whatever one's opinion of Microsoft and its products might be, it is
    precisely because knowledge of how to utilize Microsoft's tools can
    "affect your potential to earn revenue" that people want to get their
    hands on them. Come the day Linux (or something else) emerges as a
    serious desktop rival, then this will undoubtedly change. Many
    individuals such as yourself have already bet on that outcome, but I see
    no point in haranguing those whose perception of things in different
    right now. Time will tell who's right.
    Patrick Bold, Jun 12, 2004
    #5
  6. Aaron Zarlos

    Petrushka Guest

    Aaron Zarlos wrote:
    > Seeing as I qualify for this version, can anyone tell me what the difference
    > is between the standard version and the students & teachers version? I also
    > note there is a Office Professional Academic version which includes Access
    > and Publisher in addition to the standard Office programs.
    >
    > What I want to know before I buy is if the student & teacher version is the
    > same as the standard version, or are the parts of Word, Excel, etc that
    > aren't installed? Also, can students buy the Academic version of the Office
    > Professional, or is this only for schools, universities, etc?
    >
    > Any answers, comment, etc appreciated.


    For the sake of getting a fullness of comments, can you tell us what you
    intend to use - i.e. do you want it just for Word, or will you be using
    Outlook, PowerPoint, ...

    >
    > Aaron
    >
    >



    --
    Petrushka | Wellington, NZ
    de_meun at yahoo dot com
    Petrushka, Jun 12, 2004
    #6
  7. "Aaron Zarlos" <> wrote in message news:<>...
    > Seeing as I qualify for this version, can anyone tell me what the difference
    > is between the standard version and the students & teachers version? I also
    > note there is a Office Professional Academic version which includes Access
    > and Publisher in addition to the standard Office programs.
    >
    > What I want to know before I buy is if the student & teacher version is the
    > same as the standard version, or are the parts of Word, Excel, etc that
    > aren't installed? Also, can students buy the Academic version of the Office
    > Professional, or is this only for schools, universities, etc?


    Well at least one thing the S&T edition has over all the others, is
    that you are allowed to install it on up to 3 computers in your house
    Nathan Mercer, Jun 13, 2004
    #7
  8. Aaron Zarlos

    Adam Warner Guest

    Hi Patrick Bold,

    > "Adam Warner" <> wrote in message
    > news:p...
    >> Hi Aaron Zarlos,
    >>
    >> > Seeing as I qualify for this version, can anyone tell me what the
    >> > difference is between the standard version and the students &

    > teachers
    >> > version?

    >>
    >> You are not permitted to earn an income using the software. Even serfs

    > are
    >> permitted to use their tools for work. Consider this if you want to be
    >> able, for example, to earn some income over the school holidays using

    > the
    >> software.


    Please
    learn how to
    quote
    correctly.

    > Funny thing -- the only people more obsessed with Microsoft licensing
    > restrictions than Microsoft are Linux fanatics. Please try to get it
    > right, at least. Yes, the student-teacher versions are restricted to
    > non-commercial, non-revenue-generating uses. But to suggest that no one
    > can earn a living with these tools is dead wrong.


    Although I understand Microsoft's field of use restrictions are legally
    controversial what part of the phrase "non-revenue-generating uses" is
    ambiguous? If a student uses the software to earn income over the school
    holidays how can that use not be revenue generating?

    Apologists like you are sad. You run around making excuses for corporation
    policies that are clearly intended to prohibit the use a product in a
    revenue generating situation. My pen can be used in a commercial setting.
    I don't have to buy an identical set of clothes at six times the price
    from my ordinary clothes because my ordinary clothes aren't licensed for
    use in a commercial setting. I can use my car to drive to work in addition
    to driving to see my grandmother. Yet my computer becomes a device that
    can not be used productivity if I accept these plainly worded restrictions.

    > Teachers and other educational staff can do so, as the license
    > specifies.


    While I commented upon a student earning income in the school holidays
    please quote from this licence as it conflicts with the claims I quoted
    from Microsoft's own website.

    > As for students, I'm not sure what sort of summer job you have in find
    > that would be problematic. Microsoft's very purpose in offering a
    > low-cost version of its Office products to students is to get them
    > "hooked", and so in practice there has always been a fairly loose
    > understanding of what is permissible.


    The fact that Microsoft will look the other way to get students hooked on
    the product does not justify the written policy.

    > You couldn't publish a book in Word, but you could certainly prepare the
    > final draft; you couldn't run your boss's inventory system directly off
    > your Excel spreadsheet, but there's nothing to stop you from tinkering
    > with the design of the spreadsheet itself at home; and so on.


    [I suspect Microsoft would consider these commercial use]

    Generally these are restrictions upon student participation in our
    economy. You are OK with students being encouraged to accept these field
    of use restrictions (with the weaker form of the defence being that the
    restrictions are fairly loosely enforced so they don't matter).

    >> Start learning to use software that is not going to affect your

    > potential
    >> to earn revenue. If you can't afford the version that will permit you

    > to
    >> earn a dollar then perhaps it's a wake up call to consider something

    > else.
    >>
    >>

    > Whatever one's opinion of Microsoft and its products might be, it is
    > precisely because knowledge of how to utilize Microsoft's tools can
    > "affect your potential to earn revenue" that people want to get their
    > hands on them. Come the day Linux (or something else) emerges as a
    > serious desktop rival, then this will undoubtedly change. Many
    > individuals such as yourself have already bet on that outcome, but I see
    > no point in haranguing those whose perception of things in different
    > right now. Time will tell who's right.


    I harangued no one. It is you who is the fanatic apologising for
    Microsoft's plainly worded statements. Educationalists shouldn't encourage
    students to purchase vocational tools that they may not use to generate
    revenue while learning.

    Why do you keep droning on about Linux? What has this got to do with a
    serious desktop rival? Here's an example of enlightened education policy:
    <http://www.cxotoday.com/cxo/jsp/index.jsp?section=News&subsection=Business&subsection_code=1&file=template1.jsp&storyid=1033>

    With such a policy students will be able to interoperate with each
    school's office software without being encouraged to give up their ability
    to generate revenue and participate in the economy using compatible
    software.

    Regards,
    Adam
    Adam Warner, Jun 13, 2004
    #8
  9. Aaron Zarlos

    Divine Guest

    On Sat, 12 Jun 2004 19:21:28 -0700, Nathan Mercer wrote:

    > Well at least one thing the S&T edition has over all the others, is
    > that you are allowed to install it on up to 3 computers in your house



    Wow! Three whole computers!

    All the *nix based software that I have - including the Operating Systems
    - can be installed on as MANY computers as I want to put them on - WITHOUT
    RESTRICTION.

    Three computers - pah!


    Divine

    --
    The Queen's Mother: "Well I don't know what all you queens are doing,
    but this old Queen wants a drink."
    Divine, Jun 13, 2004
    #9
  10. In article <pan.2004.06.13.03.59.10.858478@TRACKER>,
    says...
    > On Sat, 12 Jun 2004 19:21:28 -0700, Nathan Mercer wrote:
    >
    > > Well at least one thing the S&T edition has over all the others, is
    > > that you are allowed to install it on up to 3 computers in your house

    >
    >
    > Wow! Three whole computers!
    >
    > All the *nix based software that I have - including the Operating Systems
    > - can be installed on as MANY computers as I want to put them on - WITHOUT
    > RESTRICTION.


    Yeah, and I bet there's some Unix software that has more restrictive
    licensing conditions.

    Anyway licenses are available to put MS software on unlimited numbers of
    PCS
    Patrick Dunford, Jun 13, 2004
    #10
  11. Aaron Zarlos

    Patrick Bold Guest

    "Adam Warner" <> wrote in message
    news:p...
    > Hi Patrick Bold,
    >
    >
    > Although I understand Microsoft's field of use restrictions are

    legally
    > controversial what part of the phrase "non-revenue-generating uses" is
    > ambiguous? If a student uses the software to earn income over the

    school
    > holidays how can that use not be revenue generating?


    First of all, let's agree that there is a difference between generating
    revenue -- i.e., running a business -- and earning income. Students who
    take jobs over the summer as researchers, for example, might very well
    need the use of a high-quality package like Microsoft Office to carry
    out their assignments and "earn income" in the process, but there would
    be no revenue generated in the process, no commercial enterpise
    involved, and no license violation whatsoever. Similar income-earning
    work might be found in government and other institutions where vaulable
    experience can be obtained in designing spreadsheets, drafting policy
    documents, or making presentations. Here owning a copy of the
    student-teacher version of Microsoft Office could be understood, not as
    a substitute for fully licensed products the employer would be expected
    to provide, but as an essential support tools for the learning process.
    You might of course prefer that Microsoft gave away its software for
    free, but that's a whole other discussion.

    >
    > Apologists like you are sad. You run around making excuses for

    corporation
    > policies that are clearly intended to prohibit the use a product in a
    > revenue generating situation.


    Nah, I just hate all the scaremongering. Fact is, anyone who wants a
    copy of the standard or professional version of Microsoft Office can
    flog it for free off the internet at any time and use it for any purpose
    they see fit. You know that, I know that, Microsoft knows that. What
    seems odd to me then is that open-source advocates should dwell on such
    a narrowly conceived "advantage" attached to their products -- relative
    cheapness. At the margins of affordability, where this really matters,
    it's a fiction, because free is free. If there were a really, really
    good open-source office bundle out there with all the power and
    functionality of MS Office, we wouldn't be having this conversation,
    because businesses the world over would be snapping it up and students
    would be eager to develop their skills in using it. Until then.....

    > My pen can be used in a commercial setting.
    > I don't have to buy an identical set of clothes at six times the price
    > from my ordinary clothes because my ordinary clothes aren't licensed

    for
    > use in a commercial setting. I can use my car to drive to work in

    addition
    > to driving to see my grandmother. Yet my computer becomes a device

    that
    > can not be used productivity if I accept these plainly worded

    restrictions.

    You might want to try that again in plain English. Analogies are
    definitely not your strong suit. As best I can make out, you feel
    constrained in how you utilize your computer by the wording of
    Microsoft's licenses. What can I say?
    >
    > > Teachers and other educational staff can do so, as the license
    > > specifies.

    >
    > While I commented upon a student earning income in the school holidays
    > please quote from this licence as it conflicts with the claims I

    quoted
    > from Microsoft's own website.


    Sorry, you lost me there. Microsoft prohibits commercial,
    revenue-generating uses of the student-teacher software, but it clearly
    doesn't prohibit someone earning an income from other non-commercial,
    non-revenue-generating uses. We've been over this.

    >
    > > As for students, I'm not sure what sort of summer job you have in

    find
    > > that would be problematic. Microsoft's very purpose in offering a
    > > low-cost version of its Office products to students is to get them
    > > "hooked", and so in practice there has always been a fairly loose
    > > understanding of what is permissible.

    >
    > The fact that Microsoft will look the other way to get students hooked

    on
    > the product does not justify the written policy.


    Well, true enough. But then business is business -- it's all about
    manipulating behavior and exerting (or dodging, as the case may be)
    market power. Show me the business model for any open source-oriented
    firm and I'm sure we can turn up similarly annoying features embedded in
    it service contracts.

    >
    > > You couldn't publish a book in Word, but you could certainly prepare

    the
    > > final draft; you couldn't run your boss's inventory system directly

    off
    > > your Excel spreadsheet, but there's nothing to stop you from

    tinkering
    > > with the design of the spreadsheet itself at home; and so on.

    >
    > [I suspect Microsoft would consider these commercial use]


    And I suspect it wouldn't matter. There is simply no credible power of
    enforcement.

    >
    > Generally these are restrictions upon student participation in our
    > economy. You are OK with students being encouraged to accept these

    field
    > of use restrictions (with the weaker form of the defence being that

    the
    > restrictions are fairly loosely enforced so they don't matter).


    Students, like everyone else, have their participation in the econonmy
    restricted by the amount of money at their disposal. Lots of things
    contribute to that -- the cost of software being just one. Please don't
    tell me that you think open-source software is the economic and social
    cure-all of our time!
    >
    > >> Start learning to use software that is not going to affect your

    > > potential
    > >> to earn revenue. If you can't afford the version that will permit

    you
    > > to
    > >> earn a dollar then perhaps it's a wake up call to consider

    something
    > > else.
    > >>


    Like????

    > >>

    > > Whatever one's opinion of Microsoft and its products might be, it is
    > > precisely because knowledge of how to utilize Microsoft's tools can
    > > "affect your potential to earn revenue" that people want to get

    their
    > > hands on them. Come the day Linux (or something else) emerges as a
    > > serious desktop rival, then this will undoubtedly change. Many
    > > individuals such as yourself have already bet on that outcome, but I

    see
    > > no point in haranguing those whose perception of things in different
    > > right now. Time will tell who's right.

    >
    > I harangued no one. It is you who is the fanatic apologising for
    > Microsoft's plainly worded statements. Educationalists shouldn't

    encourage
    > students to purchase vocational tools that they may not use to

    generate
    > revenue while learning.


    What's with this compulsion of yours to have everyone "generate revenue
    while learning"?

    >
    > Why do you keep droning on about Linux? What has this got to do with a
    > serious desktop rival? Here's an example of enlightened education

    policy:
    >

    <http://www.cxotoday.com/cxo/jsp/index.jsp?section=News&subsection=Busin
    ess&subsection_code=1&file=template1.jsp&storyid=1033>
    >



    Saving $25/student on software costs may be a sound budgetary practice.
    But
    how do you get from there to "enlightened education policy"? If Canada
    shifts from two-ply toilet paper to single-ply next year, I suspect
    they'll save even more. Does that count as part of the enlightenment,
    too?

    > With such a policy students will be able to interoperate with each
    > school's office software without being encouraged to give up their

    ability
    > to generate revenue and participate in the economy using compatible
    > software.
    >


    Has it ever occurred to you that your vision of churning out little
    entrepreneurial clones might actually be as charming as you seem to
    think?
    Patrick Bold, Jun 13, 2004
    #11
  12. Aaron Zarlos

    Adam Warner Guest

    Patrick Bold wrote in part:

    > First of all, let's agree that there is a difference between generating
    > revenue -- i.e., running a business -- and earning income.


    I loosely used the term income instead of profit because even non-profit
    activities generate revenue in order to cover expenses.

    Your response was not persuasive. I lost interest at ``Fact is, anyone who
    wants a copy of the standard or professional version of Microsoft Office
    can flog it for free off the internet at any time and use it for any
    purpose they see fit. You know that, I know that, Microsoft knows that.
    What seems odd to me then is that open-source advocates should dwell on
    such a narrowly conceived "advantage" attached to their products --
    relative cheapness. At the margins of affordability, where this really
    matters, it's a fiction, because free is free.''

    Copyright permits the control of copying. Downloading Microsoft Office off
    the Internet without permission is illegal, unlicensed copying. You raised
    an illegal fact scenario to bolster your argument.

    My main focus has been upon the legal restrictions Microsoft claims to
    impose upon students after legal purchase of the product. It cannot be
    characterised as "cheapness". And you should not use an illegal fact
    scenario to support your position.

    It is nonsense that Microsoft Office is free "where this really matters".
    You dishonestly use an illegal fact scenario to support the position.
    Adam Warner, Jun 14, 2004
    #12
  13. Aaron Zarlos

    Hamish Brown Guest

    "Adam Warner" <> wrote in message
    news:p...
    > Patrick Bold wrote in part:
    >
    > > First of all, let's agree that there is a difference between

    generating
    > > revenue -- i.e., running a business -- and earning income.

    >
    > I loosely used the term income instead of profit because even

    non-profit
    > activities generate revenue in order to cover expenses.


    Point is, you made a sweeping claim that no one one could use the
    software to earn an income when that is plainly false. I trust we're
    clear now.

    > Your response was not persuasive. I lost interest at ``Fact is, anyone

    who
    > wants a copy of the standard or professional version of Microsoft

    Office
    > can flog it for free off the internet at any time and use it for any
    > purpose they see fit. You know that, I know that, Microsoft knows

    that...."


    > Copyright permits the control of copying. Downloading Microsoft

    Office off
    > the Internet without permission is illegal, unlicensed copying. You

    raised
    > an illegal fact scenario to bolster your argument.


    I raised a fact concerning the proliferation of illegal, unlicensed
    copying to argue that your scaremongering tactics were just plain silly.
    Someone posts a message asking if there are any limitations to the
    student-teacher version of Microsoft Office compared to the standard and
    professional versions, and you proceed to launch an hysterical diatribe
    implying that the Microsoft police will be hot on the tail of anyone who
    dares to use the software outside the classroom. Such a scenario is not
    only misinformed on legal grounds but also hopelessly out of touch with
    the realities of copyright control that Microsoft faces.

    >
    > My main focus has been upon the legal restrictions Microsoft claims to
    > impose upon students after legal purchase of the product. It cannot be
    > characterised as "cheapness". And you should not use an illegal fact
    > scenario to support your position.


    Your mnain focus has been on distorting the legal restrictions imposed
    by Microsoft as a means of persuading people to switch to open-source
    software. In the future, try a better argument. Either you can make a
    case for the advantages of open-source on its merits or you can't.
    Hamish Brown, Jun 14, 2004
    #13
  14. Aaron Zarlos

    Adam Warner Guest

    Goodness "Hamish Brown" you're not only dishonest but downright stupid.
    Here's a trolling tip: When responding to own dribble do so as the same
    person.
    Adam Warner, Jun 14, 2004
    #14
  15. Aaron Zarlos

    Patrick Bold Guest

    "Adam Warner" <> wrote in message
    news:p...
    > Goodness "Hamish Brown" you're not only dishonest but downright

    stupid.
    > Here's a trolling tip: When responding to own dribble do so as the

    same
    > person.


    Wonderful of you to be so pedantic "Adam Warner". Learn to make
    intelligent arguments that you can defend and you won't have to
    embarrass yourself acting like a thug.
    Patrick Bold, Jun 14, 2004
    #15
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Zap Eagle
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    5,333
    Zap Eagle
    Mar 20, 2005
  2. Geoff Pearson

    Office 2003 Student edition - how to register?

    Geoff Pearson, Aug 27, 2005, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    437
    George H.
    Aug 27, 2005
  3. Kurtis

    Office 2003 Student and Teacher Edition

    Kurtis, Mar 10, 2007, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    14
    Views:
    585
  4. =?Utf-8?B?b2xkc2FsdA==?=

    Office 2003 Student and Teachers Editon

    =?Utf-8?B?b2xkc2FsdA==?=, May 29, 2005, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    14
    Views:
    660
    Andre Da Costa
    May 31, 2005
  5. Angel Eyes

    Microsoft Office Excell 2003 & Microsoft Office Word 2003

    Angel Eyes, May 19, 2008, in forum: Microsoft Certification
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    887
    lynwood
    Jun 30, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page