Bundleware: Microsoft's [still] playing too!
-
Apparently you can now get a free upgrade to Bing and the MSN start page if you aren't paying attention while installing Office!
Yes, those were checked when the page loaded. Yes, I downloaded it twice because I missed that the first time.
WTF, Microsoft, WTF?
-
You do know they've been pulling that shit for years, yes? The MSN Messenger installer, for instance, would ask to set msn.com as your homepage.
-
Yes please, I would like a shitty search engine as my default and please make the slowest loading page in the world my homepage. That would be great.
-
What you need to do is download some free software from a sketchy unofficial source which will include SearchProtect, to prevent MS from changing your search engine and homepage to something else.
-
You do know they've been pulling that shit for years, yes? The MSN Messenger installer, for instance, would ask to set msn.com as your homepage.
Eh, but that's not Office, which is like a de-facto standard or something. No I wouldn't know, cause I never installed MSN Messenger
Updated thread title to be more relevant though
-
What you need to do is download some free software from a sketchy unofficial source which will include SearchProtect, to prevent MS from changing your search engine and homepage to something else.
Haha I wonder if I can fork SearchProtect to save Google as my default search engine....
-
I don't get that. MS decided to get rid of installers and use IE? I mean, it's not a WTF, just weird.
-
I don't get that. MS decided to get rid of installers and use IE? I mean, it's not a WTF, just weird.
No, it's just so you download a pre-configured installer.
-
OK, so depending on which check-boxes you have you download a different installer?
-
Seems that way.
Yeah, it is retarted.
-
Yeah, it is retarted.
Of all the things to call "retarted", downloading an installer based on options checked on a website?
-
When those same options could (and should) be part of the installer? Yes.
-
I could see, possibly, "mildly inconvenient". But retarded? Come on.
-
Hey, a girl can use hyperbole! ;)
-
I could see, possibly, "mildly inconvenient". But retarded? Come on.
The other retarded kids are doing it too...
-
Yes, those were checked when the page loaded. Yes, I downloaded it twice because I missed that the first time.
Maybe the person from Adobe changed companies.
Fuck you Flash, I don't want McAfee. Not now. Not ever.
Edit: Hanzo'd!
-
Well in a way, it makes for a smaller installer to download when you unselect their bundleware options.
On the other hand, these options shouldn't be selected, or even exist, in the first place.
-
When those same options could (and should) be part of the installer? Yes.
It makes it worse when you realize it's a [b]web[/b] installer... So the only possible reason to do this I can think of (so you don't download things you don't need) is invalid.
Well in a way, it makes for a smaller installer to download when you unselect their bundleware options.
On the other hand, these options shouldn't be selected, or even exist, in the first place.
Web installer :|
So the download size shouldn't be changed at all...Maybe the person from Adobe changed companies.
Fuck you Flash, I don't want McAfee. Not now. Not ever.
Edit: Hanzo'd!
McAfee isn't even the worst, at least it's a moderately legitimate program. Ask toolbar needs to burn in the most painful possible way concievable.
-
This is Office 365 - everything is on the web !
-
Apparently you can now get a free upgrade to Bing and the MSN start page if you aren't paying attention while installing Office!
Why would I waste my money on a subscription to Office 365? IIRC from the last time I upgraded my personal copy of office, two years of subscription costs of office are about equal to the licensing cost for, say, Office 2013, which I can then use until I decide I want to upgrade to the next version. I generally upgrade Office every 5 to 6 years. That's a lot of money I'm saving by not using 365.
I guess some people just enjoy throwing money at M$.
-
Why would I waste my money on a subscription to Office 365? IIRC from the last time I upgraded my personal copy of office, two years of subscription costs of office are about equal to the licensing cost for, say, Office 2013, which I can then use until I decide I want to upgrade to the next version. I generally upgrade Office every 5 to 6 years. That's a lot of money I'm saving by not using 365.
I guess some people just enjoy throwing money at M$.
Free Microsoft Office 365 for the Classroom | Microsoft Education
Access to Office 365 Education is free for students with a valid school email address. Access powerful tools like Microsoft Word, Excel and PowerPoint for learning and discovery.
If I actually had to pay for it I'd just get standalone office. 5 installs for $0/{$time period} is a pretty good deal though.
-
I guess some people just enjoy throwing money at M$.
Take a look at pricing for Software Assurance. The 3-year cost on that is more than just buying volume licenses every time they come out with a new software version. It is a product/service that makes absolutely no sense, just like Office 365.
-
Why would I waste my money on a subscription to Office 365?
Five instances (I'm using three at the moment), and an Imperial fucktonne of OneDrive space to store comic scans and stuff for WTDWTF; I'm happy to throw money at that
-
The 3-year cost on that is more than just buying volume licenses every time they come out with a new software version. It is a product/service that makes absolutely no sense, just like Office 365.
Depends on the product. I actually evaluate the pricing for some of our software purchases, and for many of them, you are correct. Others are borderline, and a few can save you money if you actually take advantage of them. But the things is, I bet that most companies don't take advantage of them.
One example I can think of where SA is semi-regularly advantageous is Visual Studio. If you bought VS 2012 in Q1 of 2013, upgraded to VS 2013 when it became available, and have plans to upgrade to VS 2015 once it is release (in Q2 or Q3 of this year), you will have gotten your money's worth. In fact, based on the pricing I got quoted last time we purchased VS, even just upgrading to VS 2013 would save you money with SA over purchasing a new set of licenses.
Edit: I do not recommend SA for server OS licenses. We are in the process of purchasing some upgraded OS licsenses for some CMs and the SA costs are outrageous.
-
Five instances (I'm using three at the moment), and an Imperial fucktonne of OneDrive space to store comic scans and stuff for WTDWTF; I'm happy to throw money at that
The license I last purchased (Office 2010) includes 3 devices, and I have all the cloud storage I really need through Google Drive. Look, ma, I'm saving money!
-
You also get 1 TB of online storage.
-
Yes, but you can book software assurance as a subscription with a known, fixedish cost and payment schedule.
Beancounters like it because they fear unexpected expense. IT likes it because they don't need to go through the Beancounters before they can upgrade.
90 percent of my time in updating a thing is in getting estimates, following up on estimates, requesting funding, following up on funding. Getting denied. Retrying. Etc.
Eventually I get to use the new fucking feature. A few years later.
-
Who honestly needs 1TB of online storage? Do you really need all of your files accessible 24/7? I would bet not.
In my case, I do not need to be able to gain immediately access to 99% of my files. The rest can go on my Google drive.
I just took a look at Office 365 and OneDrive, and it seems that prices have dropped significantly since the last time I looked. Still, I'm sticking with what I already have for the reasons I've already outlined.
-
One example I can think of where SA is semi-regularly advantageous is Visual Studio.
Never priced SA for Visual Studio, I do know that SA for Windows and Office carry a pretty hefty premium.
If you bought VS 2012 in Q1 of 2013, upgraded to VS 2013 when it became available
If you buy one version right before the new version comes out, you will end up ahead on all of them I think. But long-term SA usually carries a premium. I will take your word on VS though.
Edit: I do not recommend SA for server OS licenses. We are in the process of purchasing some upgraded OS licsenses for some CMs and the SA costs are outrageous.
Not to mention that few people ever upgrade the OS on a server once it is deployed. In my experience they are always deprecated and taken out of service instead of getting an OS upgrade. I prefer to just spend once on those and get it over with.
Yes, but you can book software assurance as a subscription with a known, fixedish cost and payment schedule.
Beancounters like it because they fear unexpected expense. IT likes it because they don't need to go through the Beancounters before they can upgrade.
90 percent of my time in updating a thing is in getting estimates, following up on estimates, requesting funding, following up on funding. Getting denied. Retrying. Etc.
Eventually I get to use the new fucking feature. A few years later.
This is something that can easily be budgeted for even without SA. Just set aside $X/year for software upgrades. Your company is Doing It Wrong. ;)
-
If you buy one version right before the new version comes out, you will end up ahead on all of them I think. But long-term SA usually carries a premium. I will take your word on VS though.
The scenario I described has you buying VS 2012 7-9 months before VS 2013 came out. That's not exactly "right before". ;)
-
Not to mention that few people ever upgrade the OS on a server once it is deployed. In my experience they are always deprecated and taken out of service instead of getting an OS upgrade. I prefer to just spend once on those and get it over with.
For a physical server, I've never seen the OS upgraded either. But I was talking about virtual servers. Did I forget to mention that?
-
Touchə.
-
Did I forget to mention that?
Maybe, maybe not. Still recovering from the ear/sinus infection. Blame it on my congestion.
-
Who honestly needs 1TB of online storage? Do you really need all of your files accessible 24/7? I would bet not.
It's nice for me since I have a lot of educational movie files which I thus don't need to lug around on a USB stick. And if I encode those files in MP4, I can even play them directly in the browser,
-
It's nice for me since I have a lot of educational movie files which I thus don't need to lug around on a USB stick. And if I encode those files in MP4, I can even play them directly in the browser,
Then in your case, it is useful. I tip my hat to you, sir.
-
I use mine for comic scans, an image collection just for here, my fan-fiction drafts, and liveries and other things for all the online racing I do. And podcasts.
-
I use mine for comic scans, an image collection just for here, my fan-fiction drafts, and liveries and other things for all the online racing I do. And podcasts.
So you keep it online for reasons?
-
Yes
-
It's nice for me since I have a lot of
<fuck you not empty>educational movie filesporn
-
I use mine for comic scans
Why do you need a terabyte of online storage just to store a font? It's not even a very good font in the first place...
-
-
http://www.microsoft.com/EN-US/showcase/details.aspx?uuid=99810097-bfa0-480e-989f-fa70bfbf4331
##dying of business speak
I still have zero idea what the Software Assurance "benefits" are after watching that video.
-
I still have zero idea what the Software Assurance "benefits" are after watching that video.
We have clients that purchase software assurance and I don't even know what benefit they receive from it, with the exception of the downgrade policy. Oh, and your CALs automatically get upgraded with each new release.
CALs always seemed like a racket to me though. "Here is your server software that cost $700+. Now you need to buy more stuff so it can serve things. Oh, you want employees to access those files by personal devices? That functionality is built-in, but you need a license to do it legally. RDP is built-in, but you need a license for more than one session."
Essentially that first $700 just covers booting the machine up...
-
Say what you will about Linux, but I've never had it charge me money to log in to my computer.
-
Say what you will about Linux, but I've never had it charge me money to log in to my computer.
I never speak ill of Linux. I use it on lots of projects. You have to love the simplified licensing. My Client Access Licenses are limited by the power of the machine, not how deep my pockets are. ;-)
-
Say what you will about Linux, but I've never had it charge me money to log in to my computer.
It charges you in wasted time and frustration.
I'd rather pay in money.
-
I've probably had the same amount or more wasted time and frustration on Windows than on Linux.
-
Only because the time and frustration from your awful ISP outweighs the amount possible from any OS.
-
I still have zero idea what the Software Assurance "benefits" are after watching that video.
If a new version comes out before your SA expires, you can upgrade free.
-
RDP is built-in, but you need a license for more than one session."
I thought it was two sessions.
