Hacker News Reader

'Can I transfer the software to another computer or user? You may not transfer the software to another computer or user. You may transfer the software directly to a third party only as installed on the licensed computer, with the Certificate of Authenticity label and this agreement. Before the transfer, that party must agree that this agreement applies to the transfer and use of the software. You may not retain any copies.'

From the Microsoft Software License Agreement for Microsoft Office 2013:

http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/products/microsoft-softwar...

Just tell them it is the same computer, just with an upgraded CPU, RAM, mobo, case, screws, cables, ...

Or install office in a VM you can shuffle around at will forever. Perhaps even a Thinapp.

You could even keep your virtualized office on Dropbox and use it on all ten of your personal computers (but not concurrently of course).

I never really understood this line of thinking. Rather than trying to "hack" the license terms, you should just buy a new license when you buy a new computer, since that's what you agreed to.

If you're willing to violate the license, why not just pirate the thing in the first place?

It's things like this that drive those pirating numbers up!

VM's and the like may be fine for us tech/power users, but for most normal users who just pop the DVD in and install, then to be greeted with a "sorry, buy another copy" this is going to be very annoying!

Lots of products/services are annoying. I usually address the problem by simply not using them.

I agree, but some things you just cannot get away with NOT using. Too many people are used to using MS Office. As good (or bad) as the open source alternatives are, too many of my friends/relatives are used to the interface. It's a huge re-training exercise to get them to use something else unfortunately.

I still use Office 2007, because there is nothing in 2010 and doubt 2013 that I will use outside of a business environment.

So what? I fly commercial airlines even though they are terrible because sometimes I have no alternatives. I still pay for my ticket instead of sneaking on board.

Microsoft gets to extract a high price for Office because its popular and the product has a strong network effect. That's one of the advantages of having an immensely popular product. Either use it or don't--don't try to justify pirating it.

I didn't justify pirating it, I said it would drive numbers up, there's a difference.

And your comparison is flawed. When you buy an airline ticket you know you are buying a single use ticket. If you want a travel comparison then it is like buying a car and saying you can only use it in a single state.

Microsoft gets to extract a high price for Office because its popular and the product has a strong network effect. That's one of the advantages of having an immensely popular product.

Sure, a high price is one thing but charging people twice for different devices or charging again for changing your machine is going a little too far. The _price_ is not the issue, it's the pricing model.

Either use it or don't

Like I said, it's not as black and white as that. With this pricing model I won't use Office 2013.

Even as a power user, should I pay for a license to software just to be be subjected to the decreased performance and annoyances of basic file sharing of a VM? No thanks.

Yes, totally agree.

Because pirated copy will annoy you with how it's not genuine, while real copy you use on more computers then you are allowed to (or that you reinstalled or something) will shut up and work?

I guess. I don't use Microsoft software when I can get away with it.

IMHO, paying for a license and then willfully violating its terms to get more than you paid for doesn't really seem morally or legally superior to just stealing it in the first place. I mean, you could also fraudulently claim to be a school teacher to get a cheaper Office license...

Regardless, you're setting your startup up for an embarrassing and expensive situation if a potential investor or acquirer decides to audit your licenses as part of their due diligence...

Libre Office.

Drop MS Office. Free. Your. Docs.

I don't believe any of what I suggested would be a violation of the license, unless there is language in the license forbidding virtualization, or giving a solution to the ship of Theseus problem.

The VM example is interesting. At what point does a VM qualify as a different computer? For example if I shutdown my VM and then "upgrade" it by allocating more RAM or changing some of the emulated hardware does that mean I lose my office license?

What happens if you keep the same hardware but install a different version of Windows?

The same questions apply to a real computer. When MS introduced activation on Windows XP, they spelled out what hardware changes would require a reactivation. Which was just an inconvenience, it didn't terminate your license to use Windows.

Microsoft should tell us what hardware changes they're looking for, if any. Maybe it is only tied to an installation ID of Windows.

I think that in the VM, the guest OS sees the same CPU as the host OS, so if the license is tied to that CPU, no luck.

Or install LibreOffice.

> I don't see what the fuzz is about for now.

People are pissed because many of us have two devices. In addition, it's almost impossible for many of us (like me) to avoid Office. Finally, this is the sort of thing many people were concerned about in the '90s, when Microsoft achieved hegemony in office suites, and in the 2000s, when Product Activation became ubiquitous.

I get your point, just how is this news? Office 2010 OEM license states exactly the same limitations in regards to parallel use on multiple machines.

Office 2010 OEM license states exactly the same limitations

I don't know, but I do know that Office 2011 for OS X allows installs on at least two machines. Because I've done it.

OEM license != software

The fact that you've successfully installed Office 2011 for OS X on at least two machines only means that the installer doesn't actively prevent this. It does not mean that the license agreement for the software says that this is ok.

And, notably, it's also a lot cheaper than the retail version which allows multiple installs.

Because Google Docs is better than it was in 2010, has more market share than it had in 2010, and is free for individuals. It's fascinating to watch a market leader gradually being chipped away because it is unable/unwilling to cannibalize itself.

That's pretty much what "OEM license" means. The whole point of the retail license was that it wasn't tied to hardware; what's news is that this is no longer offered.

Yes, the loss of the ability to install on a second portable device used by the same person who has the desktop license is a huge step backwards. They should cut the price in half to make up for this. As if that will happen.

Can I just add:

1. Microsoft office technical support is a whopping great big dinosaur sized turdzilla. If you have any activation problems, you usually get "tough shitted". I've been on the end of this. Fortunately I'm a member of a" Gold Partner" (paid goon) and could kick the crap out of them from that side of things. Partner reps have a little more spine than office support people.

2. This does not cover warranty replacement PCs so if you have a hardware failure, it doesn't count.