Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Microsoft Software

Microsoft 'Open Value Subscription' is None of the Above 202

Posted by ScuttleMonkey
from the one-step-forward-three-steps-back dept.
daveofdoom writes "This week Microsoft launched an SMB program that contains the words 'open', 'value' and 'subscription', none of which are common to Microsoft products, culture, or marketing. Digging in a bit I found myself confused not only by what the program portends to be but why it would be called 'Open Value Subscription' unless they were hoping to leverage buzzwords and concepts related to open source and SaaS (software as a service). It's such lame and dishonest branding the marketing group should be ashamed."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft 'Open Value Subscription' is None of the Above

Comments Filter:
  • Sure (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ElMiguel (117685) on Monday January 07, 2008 @02:47PM (#21944646)

    It's such lame and dishonest branding the marketing group should be ashamed.

    I'm sure they will be ashamed all the way to the bank. Let's face it, Microsoft marketing does these things because they work, as proven by Microsoft's success.

    • True. For the sake of the consumers, let's hope that such tactics work only in the short term (or is that too unrealistic?).
    • Define "Open" (Score:5, Interesting)

      by winkydink (650484) * <sv.dude@gmail.com> on Monday January 07, 2008 @02:56PM (#21944782) Homepage Journal
      So, if it's not used like "Open Source", then it's a hijacking of the term? Come on. That's a pretty big stretch.

      My understanding is that this program allows SMB's to become license-compliant while limiting their initial capital outlay, i.e., more pay as you go than all up front.

      I really fail to understand why this CNet blogger has a bug up his butt over this.
      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Joe U (443617)

        I really fail to understand why this CNet blogger has a bug up his butt over this.
        This isn't even an article. It's a joke, and a pretty sad one at that.
      • by WED Fan (911325) <akahige@@@trashmail...net> on Monday January 07, 2008 @03:33PM (#21945332) Homepage Journal

        So, if it's not used like "Open Source", then it's a hijacking of the term?

        Microsoft's use of the word 'Open' for something that is not 'open source', even though they weren't refering to 'open source' is against the intent of the word 'open' and the Prophet Richard M. Stallman, hallowed by His name, peace be unto his greasey smelly armpits, has declared any use of the word 'open' must refer to 'open source' (making the word 'source' redundant) and therefor must also come under GPL 3, a.k.a. the Holy Words of the Prophet, may God smite the toes of the unbelievers.

        RMS, the Lord is with the mites that inhabit his beard, is pursuing:

        • Any retailer who puts the sign 'Open' in their front window.
        • Any product that includes instructions about how 'open' said product.
        • Hunters and licensing agencies for 'Open' season.
        • Corporations who have benefit 'open' enrollement.

        Remember, if Microsoft uses the word 'Open', we must automatically, and by the word of the Prophet, a thousand blessings on his klingons, assume they are refering to 'open source' and their own twisted interpretation.

        We must also make a point to find some way to daily point out how everything Microsoft and Bill Gates does is evil, and post it to /.

        • by klubar (591384)
          The author should get wound up about the American Express Open Network. Not only are they not providing Open Source software, the network isn't even Ethernet compatible. Clearly another misuse of Open and Network in one sentence. In other news, one can no longer open a door or open a jar as these terms could be misconstrued as open source.

          Get a clue... the word open was around before "open source".

          For some companies, a lease-like arrangement might make sense; it allows the firm to spread out the cost o
        • Microsoft's use of the word 'Open' for something that is not 'open source', even though they weren't refering to 'open source' is against the intent of the word 'open' and the Prophet Richard M. Stallman, hallowed by His name, peace be unto his greasey smelly armpits, has declared any use of the word 'open' must refer to 'open source' (making the word 'source' redundant) and therefor must also come under GPL 3, a.k.a. the Holy Words of the Prophet, may God smite the toes of the unbelievers.

          Stallman is th

        • by JonathanR (852748)
          So before you get your meat pie [wikipedia.org] when you're at the Australian Open [wikipedia.org], make sure you ask for the sauce [wikipedia.org].
        • by pete6677 (681676)
          The more I learn about Stallman, the more of a kook I realize he is. Maybe he could be Dennis Kucinich's running mate.
      • by Divebus (860563) on Monday January 07, 2008 @03:45PM (#21945496)
        Open... as in goatse.
      • by Hatta (162192)
        What does this have to do with Super Mario Brothers? Oh wait, microsoft right, what does this have to do with Server Message Block?
      • I really fail to understand why this CNet blogger has a bug up his butt over this.

        Because this is a CNet blogger, trying to jump on the Open Sauce bandwagon and get a kudo at the same time.

      • I agree. This is not "open as in source", this is "open as in goatse [slashdot.org]" as are so many things microsoft does.

        It's also not value as in "good monetary" but value as in "family values the likes of which compel me to fucking kill anyone who diverges from my ideal" and subscription as in "subsribe to my philosophy or feel the chair!"

        This cnet hack is making a mountain out of a molehill.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Penguinisto (415985)
      Agreed...

      It's not much different from the litany of automakers proclaiming long and loud about how they're suddenly committed to the Environment, yet behind the scenes will whine and complain (and lobby their asses off) when the the US gov't says it's going to bump gas mileage standards by some embarrassingly small increment at some future point in time.

      It's all about the facade until you sign the receipt and call the product yours. Then you get to find that vast gulf between the sweet whispers of marke

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by liquidpele (663430)
      So.... if I submit a story claiming Bill Gates eats babies, it'll probably hit the front page huh?
      Not only is this overly anti-microsoft, but it's not even a huge deal. They can call it "super-duper open wide like your mom did last night services" if they want as far as I care. What a non-story. Slashdot, you can do better!!
      • How did this thing get past the Firehose? Has someone set up a botnet to vote things up?
        (I am sure that must be possible but I can't see the point)
    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Foofoobar (318279)

      Microsoft marketing does these things because they work

      They work far less often than they used to and more often have a negative backlash now. For a company that is fighting it's negative image, things like this only serve to enforce that image and make them look like monopolists.

      Consumers (especially in SMB) are not that dumb and they are seeing added expense in this day and age as something their wallets cannot endure. The more you tack on an expense, the more the wonder why they shouldn't get this

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by Yalius (1024919)
        "Fighting its negative image"?

        That's funny, since Fortune Magazine apparently has MS rated as the 12th most admired company nationwide.

        http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/mostadmired/2007/top20/index.html [cnn.com]
        • by Foofoobar (318279)
          Admired amongst who? The CTO's who make the decisions to not buy Vista? The developers who still complain and bitch on their forums about compatibility? The OEM's that fought to get XP back? The users that don't buy Zune or Vista?

          I'd be curious to know who they polled to come up with number 12 and how they even got that far up on the list. Probably only that far on money alone.

        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          by Anonymous Coward

          For the 20 most admired companies overall, FORTUNE's survey asked businesspeople to vote for the companies that they admired most
          Yeah a bunch of greedy, money-grubbing cocksuckers admire another bunch of greedy, money-grubbing cocksuckers. Big surprise there. You'll notice walmart is on the list too.
        • "That's funny, since Fortune Magazine apparently has MS rated as the 12th most admired company nationwide."

          I'm sure that classifying Hillary Clinton as one of the most admired women in the world might also be true, in spite of the fact that she is loathed by so many. This is called "Polarizing" and has nothing to do with the merits of either viewpoint.

          This is the problem with XOR logic that so prevails our culture. I'm sorry, but MS is both well admired and well loathed. Because it is one (loathed / admired
    • Oh please. We all know Microsoft's marketing department has no shame.
      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Grundlefleck (1110925)

        Oh please. We all know Microsoft's marketing department has no shame.

        Being an expert on marketing (I've seen some adverts and watched a Bill Hicks DVD) I'd say that marketers are the new lawyers.
    • Alright, but name me one marketing company or division that wouldn't do exactly the same thing if they thought that it would make them money and it wasn't strictly speaking illegal? All marketers are shameless about buzzwords when it comes to making money, whether they are true or not is irrelevant to them.
  • by Animats (122034) on Monday January 07, 2008 @02:50PM (#21944686) Homepage

    That's so lame. If they actually leased the software, there'd be a potential tax advantage for the buyer. But no...

    • by plague3106 (71849) on Monday January 07, 2008 @03:01PM (#21944866)
      Use of property for a fixed amount of time is not a lease? The program described just that. At the end of the lease you can 1) sign up for a new term 2) buy out the lease to own the software or 3) end it all.

      Please, give me your definition of lease, and then explain to me if RentACenter offers some kind of tax advantage.
      • Microsoft's terms are more like when you "lease" a car. You have to pay THEM up front and finance the amount thru somebody else, so you don't get the proper type of credit for true "rental" tax terms. It ends up being "financed" and payed back to the bank. Not as generous as a true lease or subscription because you loose whatever tax benefit of monthly payments to the "bank" as interest.
      • by cdrguru (88047)
        A lease is better tax-wise than purchase because the purchase will often have to be declared as a depreciated capital expense whereas the lease is a write-off as an operating expense. The depreciation is going to be over five years. This can make a huge difference the minute you cross the threshold for capital expenses, which I think is $25,000 these days.
    • by noz (253073)

      there'd be a potential tax advantage for the buyer
      That could be strategically absorbed by Microsoft over the next few years.
  • Marketers... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by saihung (19097) on Monday January 07, 2008 @02:50PM (#21944694)
    ...wouldn't be ashamed labeling sulfuric acid "delicious baby formula." You're barking up the wrong tree with that one.
  • and by ashamed.... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Surt (22457) on Monday January 07, 2008 @02:51PM (#21944708) Homepage Journal
    I mean, proud.

    Seriously, what is a marketing department for, if not to bamboozle people into buying your product who otherwise would not do so?
    • By the way if anyone here is in advertising or marketing... kill yourself.

      No, no, no it's just a little thought. I'm just trying to plant seeds. Maybe one day, they'll take root - I don't know. You try, you do what you can. Kill yourself.

      Seriously though, if you are, do.

      Aaah, no really, there's no rationalisation for what you do and you are Satan's little helpers. Okay - kill yourself - seriously. You are the ruiner of all things good, seriously. No this is not a joke, you're going, "there's going to be a joke coming," there's no fucking joke coming. You are Satan's spawn filling the world with bile and garbage. You are fucked and you are fucking us. Kill yourself. It's the only way to save your fucking soul, kill yourself.

      Planting seeds. I know all the marketing people are going, "he's doing a joke..." there's no joke here whatsoever. Suck a tail-pipe, fucking hang yourself, borrow a gun from a Yank friend - I don't care how you do it. Rid the world of your evil fucking makinations. Machi... Whatever, you know what I mean.

      I know what all the marketing people are thinking right now too, "Oh, you know what Bill's doing, he's going for that anti-marketing dollar. That's a good market, he's very smart."

      Oh man, I am not doing that. You fucking evil scumbags!

      "Ooh, you know what Bill's doing now, he's going for the righteous indignation dollar. That's a big dollar. A lot of people are feeling that indignation. We've done research - huge market. He's doing a good thing."

      Godammit, I'm not doing that, you scum-bags! Quit putting a godamm dollar sign on every fucking thing on this planet!

      "Ooh, the anger dollar. Huge. Huge in times of recession. Giant market, Bill's very bright to do that."

      God, I'm just caught in a fucking web.

      "Ooh the trapped dollar, big dollar, huge dollar. Good market - look at our research. We see that many people feel trapped. If we play to that and then separate them into the trapped dollar..."

      How do you live like that? And I bet you sleep like fucking babies at night, don't you?

      "What didya do today honey?"

      "Oh, we made ah, we made ah arsenic a childhood food now, goodnight." [snores] "Yeah we just said you know is your baby really too loud? You know?" [snores] "Yeah, you know the mums will love it." [snores]

      Sleep like fucking children, don't ya, this is your world isn't it?
    • by WaZiX (766733)
      Marketing is a societal process that is needed to discern consumers' wants; focusing on a product/service to those wants, and to mould the consumers towards the products/services. Marketing is fundamental to any businesses growth. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marketing [wikipedia.org] )

      Marketing *should* be about trying to find out what consumers want in order for the company to meet their needs. You know, the whole "customer driven business" thing... Of course now it's more about making the customer *believe* you're
      • by plague3106 (71849)
        Of course now it's more about making the customer *believe* you're listening to his needs, rather to actually listen to them...

        Sadly, most companies seem to be doing that today.
      • by Surt (22457)
        The whole problem with marketing is in the first sentence. Ideally, one would mold product to consumers, rather than the other way around.
    • Seriously, what is a marketing department for, if not to bamboozle people into buying your product who otherwise would not do so?
      To make the market aware of a new product, and let them decide for themselves?
  • by WaltBusterkeys (1156557) on Monday January 07, 2008 @02:52PM (#21944726)
    I saw a commercial for beer on TV that featured a hunk in a hot tub surrounded by beautiful women. I tried drinking their product and I found myself fat, alone, and depressed at home watching reruns. The marketing department should be ashamed! Their product doesn't actually cause the things the marketing department suggests it does!
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by sharkey (16670)
      You're doing it wrong. YOU are supposed to provide large amounts of beer to the beautiful women; so that THEY think your fat, lonely and depressed self looks like the hunk on TV.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 07, 2008 @02:54PM (#21944754)
    Windows Genuine Advantage! Because the advantage it brings is genuine and is most definitely not anything like false advertising.
    • by SharpFang (651121)
      Nope. It puts you at advantage if you have genuine windows.
      Same as mafia protects your health from damage for a fee.
    • and Software Assurance! People are like paying for more for software now because they are assured they that can get a cheaper upgrade in 3 years. Well, sorta, maybe.
  • by Real World Stuff (561780) <real_world_stuff&hotmail,com> on Monday January 07, 2008 @02:55PM (#21944756) Journal
    that this was to be tied somehow to F/OSS-like models.

    From what I read on the MSDN site, there is no reference to any type of development, but more of a partner services sale structure.
    It appears Dave Rosenberg is forcing a nefarious connection to support a column he wrote back in the summer of 2006.

    • Right. One of Microsoft's volume licensing plans is called "open licensing". I think "open" theoretically is referring to the ability to add any number of licenses at any time... or something like that. Not sure, never much thought about it before.

      But whatever this use of the word "open" is, it isn't new to Microsoft.

  • by Joe U (443617) on Monday January 07, 2008 @02:55PM (#21944762) Homepage Journal
    Honestly, learn to read. Just because they use the word Open in the title doesn't mean it's OSS.

    It doesn't pretend to be open source, it doesn't mention open source anywhere in the press release. It's a licensing model for resellers.
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Bigjeff5 (1143585)
      It's what is known as a "Buzzword".

      Just putting Open in the title associates it with such good things as OSS, open business practices, etc.

      It makes you think that they are being honest and, well, 'Open'. Or that it is Open to all.

      Open is a very hot word right now. Value has always been a hot word, and in some specific situations Subscription can be a hot word. Open is the big buzzword in here, and it is there to associate their product with things like Open Source products, which are very hot right now.

      I
      • by TheRaven64 (641858) on Monday January 07, 2008 @03:12PM (#21945034) Journal
        Open isn't exactly new as a buzzword in the computing world. In 1991, DIGITAL implemented the (open) POSIX specification on VMS and branded it as OpenVMS. Back then, 'open source' wasn't a term that anyone had heard of. The GNU people had been doing Free Software for a good years, but the term 'open source' did not become popular until around 1998, and gained acceptance in part because open standards were already a buzzword.
    • I think it is "open" in that you can install the most recent version of the software when it comes out, or a previous version

      "value" as in cheaper than a normal purchase, and much better than buying the current version and having another one come out next year that you regret not waiting for

      "subscription" doesn't need explanation.

      This might be broading the customers that can opt in for the program, but we've had something pretty similar for years in my industry (healthcare). I think they changed the n

  • by silverhalide (584408) on Monday January 07, 2008 @02:58PM (#21944820)
    Consider this case. Say you're a company that needs to invest in 200 copies of a high-end piece of software that costs $5000 a seat. You're now looking down the mouth of a $1,000,000 bill that needs to be paid off in 30 days. This can be upsetting to your accounting folks. Now consider the lease option. Microsoft basically lets you finance your software licenses at a cost of something on the order of $10,000 a month, which is much more palatable for your accountants to manage throughout the year. Best part is, if you hire an additional 50 workers, you can just bump up the lease instead of paying out another increment of $250k.

    Also, sometimes leasing things works out more favorably than owning in accounting.

    This type of licensing makes no sense for personal use or small quantities of licenses, but on a large scale, there are potential benefits for customers over paying the full price up front.
    • Consider this case. Say you're a company that needs to invest in 200 copies of a high-end piece of software that costs $5000 a seat. You're now looking down the mouth of a $1,000,000 bill that needs to be paid off in 30 days

      Wouldn't a company of the size and type to need such expensive software be spending that much in a couple week's payroll? I am serious here.

      People griped about the cost of Adobe's new software too, but I think the target market would call that as being paid by a long weekend's project a
      • by Otter (3800)
        Wouldn't a company of the size and type to need such expensive software be spending that much in a couple week's payroll? I am serious here.

        Perhaps, but a couple of weeks' payroll isn't a trivial amount!!! What seems odd, though, is that Microsoft doesn't really have much expensive software. This program seems more appropriate to a CAD vendor than to Excel and PowerPoint.

        At any rate, the column is witless. I'm accustomed to teenagers who genuinely can't imagine that everyone doesn't use and pay for compute

    • Not to mention that in 3 years time (or however long the lease is), when the new version roles out, the old version of the software quite conceivably could be worthless. (think turbo tax 2007). If you're going to HAVE to buy new software every 5 years anyways, why not just lease it? Owning it buys you nothing, and actually loses you money (you can always invest that $1million and make interest).
  • So what? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by AlXtreme (223728) on Monday January 07, 2008 @03:01PM (#21944858) Homepage Journal

    It's such lame and dishonest branding the marketing group should be ashamed.

    If every lame and dishonest practice of marketing groups were to be published on /. we'd be under an avalanche.

    This isn't news for nerds. This isn't stuff that matters. Total nitwits are paid to come up with this crap, imho it doesn't deserve any additional coverage.
  • by ahoehn (301327) <andrew.hoe@hn> on Monday January 07, 2008 @03:02PM (#21944870) Homepage

    It's such lame and dishonest branding the marketing group should be ashamed.
    As someone who writes advertisements for a living, let me assure that it will take far more than being accused of lameness and dishonesty to shame a marketing group.

    Actually, lameness and dishonesty are generally marks of distinction in the advertising world. In fact, just the other day my creative director was telling me, "What is this crap?! It's neither lame nor dishonest!"

    Seriously though, you can't expect anything beyond the most vague truthiness from marketing. Even the FTC's guidelines [ftc.gov] for truth in advertising are brilliantly open for interpretation.

    While I'm all for a good Microsoft Bashing Session, just about every marketing department everywhere could be pinned for this type of "deceptive" practice.
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by bcattwoo (737354)

      Seriously though, you can't expect anything beyond the most vague truthiness from marketing. Even the FTC's guidelines [ftc.gov] for truth in advertising are brilliantly open for interpretation.

      There you go trying to insinuate that the FTC has anything to do with OSS.
  • "It's such lame and dishonest branding the marketing group should be ashamed."

    That makes me laugh. I agree, of course. There are a LOT of technical companies with marketing companies that are out of touch with the reality of their business, and don't even seem to want to be in touch.

    If you want to be a little scared, you can watch horror films. But if you want to be really, really deeply frightened, hang around some Microsoft marketing efforts. There are people who have turned themselves into drones.
  • Nintendo launched an SMB program leveraging the buzzwords "platform," "galaxy", and "adventure." And "b00zar."

    Sorry that's just the first thing that came to mind when I saw "SMB" and I *still* haven't bothered to find out what it actually stands for in the context of TFA.
    • ...came to mind when I saw "SMB" and I *still* haven't bothered to find out what it actually stands for in the context of TFA.
      SMB = Small/Medium Business.
  • Well (Score:5, Funny)

    by Greyfox (87712) on Monday January 07, 2008 @03:03PM (#21944886) Homepage Journal
    The first suggestion was "Anal-rape ball-and-chain vendor-lockin" but that just didn't have the same ring. The focus groups suggested only about a quarter of the current customer base would buy into the project with that name.
  • by JudasBlue (409332) on Monday January 07, 2008 @03:04PM (#21944918)
    Microsoft has referred to their MSDN stuff as a subscription, or at least used to. I dunno, I weened myself off the redmond teat a long time ago and no longer have to deal with their crappy products.

    And now that I think about it, Value is a pretty normal thing to put in the name of something. So that leaves us with Open, and if you read what the thing actually is, a slightly flexible account without exact license numbers on it, that actually makes some sense.

    In other words, this is a pretty normal product name, a guy going off in a post for no reason to abuse Microsoft when there are plenty of GOOD reasons to abuse Microsoft, and an editor who really, really can't tell what is news.
    • by Nebu (566313)

      Microsoft has referred to their MSDN stuff as a subscription, or at least used to. I dunno, I weened myself off the redmond teat a long time ago and no longer have to deal with their crappy products.

      And now that I think about it, Value is a pretty normal thing to put in the name of something. So that leaves us with Open, and if you read what the thing actually is, a slightly flexible account without exact license numbers on it, that actually makes some sense.

      In other words, this is a pretty normal prod

  • by nguy (1207026)
    This is "open" in the sense of "it is an open question how much value, if any, you get out of the subscription".
  • They can't (Score:3, Funny)

    by DynaSoar (714234) on Monday January 07, 2008 @03:09PM (#21944976) Journal
    > "It's such lame and dishonest branding the marketing group should be ashamed."

    The two subspecies that are parasitic on businesses, marketoids and attournasaurus, are able to function in large part because they *don't* feel shame. Their conscience has been eaten away by malignant greedanoma. The same could be said of many politicians, but politics and business are symbiotic with each other. They gang up to prey on the vast herds of sheeple that, contrary to nature's way, continually run *towards* the predators, and attract their attention by throwing money at them for any reason the predators invent.

    Welcome to Earth. Loonie bin to the universe.
    • Welcome to Earth. Loonie bin to the universe.

      "on second thought, lets not go there. it is a silly place."

      (apologies to 'MP & holy grail')
  • by ocbwilg (259828) on Monday January 07, 2008 @03:14PM (#21945060)
    I'm guessing that the submitter is a Linux guy looking to make some anti-Microsoft noise on a slow news day. Why?

    Digging in a bit I found myself confused not only by what the program portends to be but why it would be called it 'Open Value Subscription' unless they were hoping to leverage buzzwords and concepts related to open source and SaaS (software as a service).

    It's not an attempt to trade on buzzwords and concepts related to Open Source and SaaS. Microsoft has used the term "Open" for years in their licensing programs (at least a decade that I'm aware of).

    For years there have been three main categories of volume licenses. They are "Open" (for small businesses who only buy a handful of licenses at a time), "Select" (for large businesses with higher purchasing requirements) and "Enterprise" (for the largest organizations). As you move up the tiers the per-license cost gets lower and the associated benefits increase. For example, if you have an Open license you are expected to buy a license before deploying software. With the higher level agreements you are required to perform a regular "true-up" where you audit the number of licenses in use, compare that count to the number of licenses you own, and then buy enough to cover the gap. At the highest level you are only required to true-up annually. As you can imagine, this makes it a lot more difficult for the BSA to come in and claim that you're using unlicensed software.

    The "Value" part of the name refers to features that are included with the volume license plans, and the actual "Value" increases as you move up the tiers. "Value" benefits can include a set number of Microsoft Consulting hours per year, a number of "free" support incidents, and a number of units of training on Microsoft products. Some even include vouchers for Microsoft certification exams.

    The "Subscription" part of the name refers to the fact that you are paying an annual licensing fee. This used to be simply called Software Assurance, but nobody was buying it. Instead they started bundling more benefits and called it what it is, an annual subscription.

    So there's no mystery there, and certainly nobody trying to trade on the good names of "Open Source" and "SaaS."

    I just love how people who know nothing about Microsoft other than "I'm supposed to hate them" are always jumping to the most nefarious conclusions based on the most flimsy and innocuous of evidence.
    • I just love how people who know nothing about Microsoft other than "I'm supposed to hate them" are always jumping to the most nefarious conclusions based on the most flimsy and innocuous of evidence.

      As you can imagine, this makes it a lot more difficult for the BSA to come in and claim that you're using unlicensed software.

      Now why would somebody just quote two lines of your post and not comment on it at all?

  • While nobody reasonable party derives happiness from confusion, I would like Microsoft to understand that it (Microsoft) is entitled to its own opinions but not it's own "facts." Just wanted to make that absolutely clear.
  • by idontgno (624372)

    Marketing? Dishonest?

    I'm shocked, shocked.

    Sigh.

    "Open" is the "turbo" of the 2000s. Marketing latches onto "hot" memes like walleyes hitting jigs in spring. They can't help it. It's instinctive.

    Objective (or subjective) truthfulness or applicability is irrelevant. If you can hand-wave and retrofit a coherent explanation onto the appropriation of a piece of mindshare, all the better. But that's optional.

    I guess the real story here is that a /. submitter is insufficiently jaded for the real world. And the edit

  • by blueZ3 (744446)
    You said "marketing group" and "ashamed" - those almost never go together. Everyone knows that marketing has no shame.
  • SMB (Score:2, Funny)

    by ijakings (982830)
    Am I the only person who read this and thought Microsoft had launched a Suck My Balls program.
  • Like submitting one's own blog post as a Slashdot story?
    • by Vexorian (959249)
      I guess the real word is "lame". Not as much as the guy submitting his own blog but it goes for the firehose "hosers" ...
  • doesn't it depend (Score:3, Informative)

    by superwiz (655733) on Monday January 07, 2008 @04:51PM (#21946422) Journal
    on what the definition of "il" il?
  • when you are conscienceless.
  • Lame Summary. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by BlizzardandBlaze (1207664) on Monday January 07, 2008 @08:05PM (#21948446)
    This whole article is summarizing Microsoft Launching it's Open Value Subscription in the US and in Canada.

    According to some of my own research, in which I went to the following websites:

    http://blogs.msdn.com/mssmallbiz/archive/2008/01/01/6933535.aspx [msdn.com]
    http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/programs/open/openvalue.mspx [microsoft.com] (note, this site is confusing.)
    http://www.sellsoft.ie/microsoft_osl.html [sellsoft.ie] (much better description, but third party site)

    I found out that the whole Open Value Subscription program is essentially a third option for those seeking to purchase site licenses for Microsoft Software. This option would allow you to run Microsoft software for a three year period, after which you have three options:

    1) Discontinue use of the software
    2) Renew the subscription for three more years
    3) Purchase the license outright (a.k.a. buy the right to run the software on a permanent basis on your computers.)

    At first glance, this looks all fine to me. However, the only thing I'm worried about is what conditions might come with the license... will Microsoft attempt to force organizations to upgrade in order to renew their subscriptions? (This would be a great way to force businesses to switch to Office 2007/Vista...)
  • So how many goobles does a subscription cost me ?

Say "twenty-three-skiddoo" to logout.

Working...