| One of my biggest, most important
| |
| | discount scale dependingupon how many you
|
| responsibilities in my day job is
| |
| | purchase.
|
| ensuringthat we have purchased all of the
| |
| | Now, with the impending release of
|
| software licenses that we require. It'smy
| |
| | Windows XP and the release of Office
|
| job to ensure that we are 100% legal at
| |
| | XP,it has, believe it or not, got even
|
| all times - which fulfills one ofour
| |
| | more confusing.
|
| corporate goals to be a completely
| |
| | Take a deep breath and see if you can
|
| ethical company.
| |
| | follow this. We purchased some 500copies
|
| Most companies make it very simply for me
| |
| | of Office 95, which we upgraded to Office
|
| and my staff. If I want to license
| |
| | 97, then upgraded to Office
|
| Norton Antivirus, all I need to do is
| |
| | 2000. We looked carefully at Office XP
|
| count the number of machines on whichthe
| |
| | and quickly decided we did not wantto
|
| product is to be installed, write up a
| |
| | install it on any of our systems. We are
|
| purchase order and call thesalesperson to
| |
| | happy with Office 2000.
|
| order the product. It works the same with
| |
| | However, we might want to upgrade to the
|
| Conversion Plus,
| |
| | version of Office following that,or even
|
| Adobe Photoshop, Paint Shop Pro, WinZIP
| |
| | the one after that (Microsoft seems to be
|
| and any of the other hundreds ofproducts
| |
| | releasing a new versionevery couple of
|
| that we require to keep our company in
| |
| | years). In the past, we would simply pay
|
| business.
| |
| | an upgrade fee togo from wherever we were
|
| You would think that Microsoft would want
| |
| | to the new version.
|
| to make it easy for people like meto give
| |
| | No more. Now, we have to purchase what is
|
| them money. I know that if I were in
| |
| | basically upgrade insurance by
|
| their shoes that's what I woulddo.
| |
| | aparticular deadline (it was September
|
| I should stop for a minute and explain
| |
| | but this seems to have been moved to
|
| that I love many Microsoft products.
| |
| | February). We also have to pay to upgrade
|
| Windows 2000 (server and professional)
| |
| | everything to Office XP at thesame time.
|
| are very solid, well-thought-outoperating
| |
| | If we do not do this, we will wind up
|
| systems, and the Office 2000 suite is
| |
| | paying over 200% more if wedecide to
|
| easily the best in theindustry. Internet
| |
| | upgrade at some point in the future.
|
| Explorer is far superior to Netscape and
| |
| | Okay, so Microsoft is forcing us to pay
|
| has been forseveral years now, and Visio
| |
| | now for a product which we may ormay not
|
| 2000 is one of the most versatile
| |
| | want in the future. Personally, I believe
|
| flowchartingtools available anywhere.
| |
| | they know that Office XPis not a product
|
| Unfortunately, purchasing and licensing
| |
| | which most people want - in fact, I don't
|
| Microsoft products is nowhere nearas
| |
| | know of anysystem manager anywhere who is
|
| pleasurable as using their office suite.
| |
| | even considering upgrading to the
|
| My god, they make it sodifficult to
| |
| | newversion. Why not? The user interface
|
| purchase licenses that I've often
| |
| | is significantly different
|
| considered (especiallyrecently) switching
| |
| | (requiringretraining), the performance is
|
| the entire company to Unix and
| |
| | poor (requires more hardware to operate)
|
| WordPerfect just tosimplify my life.
| |
| | andthe benefits TO THE USER are
|
| Okay, let's take the Office suite of
| |
| | completely nonexistent.
|
| products. In a sane world, you would
| |
| | It gets worse. We have decided to go
|
| dothis one of three ways:
| |
| | ahead and get the upgrade insurance
|
| - You could just buy everything (Word,
| |
| | andupgrade our product on paper. However,
|
| Excel, Access, PowerPoint and so on)
| |
| | we definitely do not want to install
|
| - You could purchase the "base" kit, then
| |
| | Office XP on any machine at any time.
|
| purchase additional licenses forthe
| |
| | Thus, we simply want to make thepurchase
|
| pieces that you needed. For example,
| |
| | to retain our rights to upgrades in the
|
| spend $75 on the base, then add $40for
| |
| | future.
|
| Word, and perhaps $10 for PowerPoint, and
| |
| | We are allowed to install the older
|
| then don't purchase Access.
| |
| | versions as much as we want under
|
| This could all be done with a licensing
| |
| | theterms of the license agreements as
|
| key.
| |
| | long as we purchase enough licenses ofthe
|
| - Just purchase each piece separately.
| |
| | new version to cover it all. So we went
|
| Naturally, Microsoft didn't choose any of
| |
| | to purchase Office XP
|
| these methods. What you haveinstead is a
| |
| | Professional, then found ourselves in an
|
| number of "suites", each a different mix
| |
| | interesting position.
|
| of products. Forexample, if you just need
| |
| | We originally bought the Professional
|
| Word and Excel, you could purchase Office
| |
| | edition because we wanted Publisher.
|
| Standard. If, on the other hand, you also
| |
| | Unfortunately, Microsoft has decided to
|
| need Access, then you need topurchase
| |
| | remove Publisher from Office XP
|
| Office Premium. To make matters even
| |
| | Professional (in fact, they have also
|
| worse, depending upon how manyof each
| |
| | removed Frontpage - no huge
|
| product you want to purchase you can use
| |
| | lossconsidering that Frontpage XP is not
|
| different discount scales.
| |
| | an improvement over 2000).
|
| It's enough to make one pull his hair out
| |
| | This introduced lots of confusion into
|
| in frustration. But wait, it getseven
| |
| | the picture. After much study andhours of
|
| worse with the operating systems. You
| |
| | phone discussions with Microsoft, we
|
| want Windows 2000 server, thenyou need to
| |
| | determined that we couldinstall Office
|
| purchase a license for the server, a
| |
| | Professional 2000 with Publisher for each
|
| license for eachworkstation (Windows 2000
| |
| | of the Office
|
| Professional) and a Client Access License
| |
| | Professional XP licenses that we
|
| (CAL)for each workstation that needs to
| |
| | purchased. If, however, we did upgrade to
|
| access a server. And, of course,depending
| |
| | Office Professional XP, then we would
|
| upon how many of each you buy you get a
| |
| | need to purchase one additional
|
| different discount scale.
| |
| | Publisher license per machine.
|
| Oh, we're not finished yet. You also have
| |
| | It would be so much easier if we could
|
| the choice of ordering Backoffice,which
| |
| | just purchase 500 licenses for Word,
|
| contains many of the server products sold
| |
| | 500 for Excel and 500 for Publisher. We
|
| by Microsoft. It may (or maynot) be
| |
| | would be happy to purchase amaintenance
|
| cheaper to get one Backoffice license
| |
| | agreement for the whole mix. We don't
|
| than, say, an Exchangelicense, a SQL
| |
| | need Access or PowerPoint,yet due to the
|
| license and a Windows 2000 server
| |
| | way Microsoft has it all structured we
|
| license. Then you've got toremember if
| |
| | have to purchaselicenses for them. Sigh.
|
| you purchase Backoffice or the separate
| |
| | Now I have to go figure out how to
|
| products for your serverin order to
| |
| | upgrade and license my Windows NT and
|
| purchase either Backoffice CALs or the
| |
| | Windows 2000 machines. It's enough to
|
| individual CALs for eachproduct. And, of
| |
| | make me look into the mirror to see if
|
| course, each product has it's own
| |
| | I have any more gray hairs.
|
