28% off TechNet Subscription

[pparks1]

Just to play advocatus diaboli, it is still better for MS to receive a 'one off' payment for a single years sub as opposed to receiving nothing at all and having all the software pirated instead.

Yes...and that's why I specifically said this in my original post:

Clearly, they will sell it like this and take the money...but it's not the intention of the program.

I can understand peoples concerns with my viewpoint...but people are somewhat "weaseling" into a gray area loophole that Microsoft has created (albeit intentionally, I'm sure).

I often get chastised for being a Linux supporter and advocate...but I feel that if many people actually had to pay the retail licensing costs for the Windows software they used....they would likely not be using it as much as they are now. Play by the rules, and follow the intent of the licensing programs. If at the end of the day, you feel you get every cent of value out of your choices...that is great. Windows is just expensive and that's the way it is. I run it at home as well, and paid for my 1 retail copy of Windows 7 that I use. And it amounted to about 15%-20% of the cost of my computer build. My wife's computer came with Vista and she still runs it as we don't see the value in spending $105 to upgrade it to Windows 7.

 

[MadMaxData]

Technet subscriptions are really intended for IT professionals and for testing purposes.

If this was Microsoft's sole intention as you suggest, then there would be stipulations provided for that in the EULA. Surely, Microsoft foresaw home end users subscribing to TechNet. Why is it so hard for you to swallow that Microsoft has thrown a bone to the home user who wants the latest versions of Office, and Windows? Perhaps I'm misunderstanding you, but that's what it seems like.

However, the majority of people here buying Technet are doing so to allow them to run multiple computers in their house, all equipped with whatever Microsoft OS they want and which ever copy of Office they want to use. Not to mention, the ability to run the server based products like Server 2003 and Server 2008.

Correct. But I don't see anything wrong with that. And fortunately for us subscribers, neither does Microsoft.

Many aren't really utilizing Technet for it's intended purpose.

That's only your opinion. Obviously, Microsoft disagrees with that opinion as well.

My wife's computer came with Vista and she still runs it as we don't see the value in spending $105 to upgrade it to Windows 7.

If you have a TechNet subscription, you can upgrade her PC for free. That's the beauty of it. You do have a TechNet subscription don't you? I can only assume that you do, since you stated that TechNet subscribers should have their product keys revoked after only one year. However, if you don't actually have a TechNet subscription, that would explain a lot regaurding your current position on revoking product keys.

Microsoft has recieved thousands of dollars from me personally over the years, and that's not including my customers. I could have just as easily ran, and recommended Linux instead, which is free. In the long run, Microsoft is making out like a bandit. They should throw us techies a bone like they have in the form of TechNet.



Max

 

[Dark Nova Gamer]

This code: "TNUSG1" get's it down to $296.00.

Great, now anyone got $296.65 they could spare?

 

[pparks1]

Technet subscriptions are really intended for IT professionals and for testing purposes.

If this was Microsoft's sole intention as you suggest, then there would be stipulations provided for that in the EULA. Surely, Microsoft foresaw home end users subscribing to TechNet. Why is it so hard for you to swallow that Microsoft has thrown a bone to the home user who wants the latest versions of Office, and Windows? Perhaps I'm misunderstanding you, but that's what it seems like.

I understand that Microsoft has been purposely vague and would rather have the income then the piracy. They allow home users to use Technet and I even called them on the validity of this and they said "Because we don't really know when you go from testing to production use at home, you are not in violation of the EULA so you can use this for home use".

What gets me is why there isn't more price difference between standard retail licenses and the Technet agreement? Considering that you get 10 keys for Windows 7 Home Premium, 10 keys for Professional, 10 keys for Ultimate, 10 keys for Vista,etc, etc.. it does seem that it should cost more than $349 when a single standalone retail copy of any one of those is $249-$300.

I mean if Microsoft wants to give out 40+ licenses for Windows 7 with TechNet for $349...why should a single license at the store cost more than about $20? Or if you called Microsoft and said you wanted to buy a copy of Windows 7 Professional and Office 2010 professional...why would they direct you to the store to buy this straight up, versus sending you over to TechNet to buy a TechNet agreement instead...since it would save you money????

You do have a TechNet subscription don't you? I can only assume that you do, since you stated that TechNet subscribers should have their product keys revoked after only one year. However, if you don't actually have a TechNet subscription, that would explain a lot regaurding your current position on revoking product keys.

At home for personal use I do NOT have a TechNet agreement. I was always under the impression that it was 1). More expensive than what it is and 2) only intended for testing, but not my everyday workstation box (for web surfing, email, applications, etc).

Prior to understanding that I could get a technet subscription and not "really" violate the EULA, I had already purchased outright a copy of Windows 7 for my new build. Since that set me back almost the full price of the TechNet agreement, I didn't want to plunk down an additional $350 for TechNet to get more licenses. If I was a user of Microsoft Office and would have considering purchasing that product, I might have sprung for TechNet...but Open Office meets my needs adequately. Knowing what I know now..I would have never purchased the retail license for Windows 7...but would have instead gotten a TechNet agreement for a few bucks more and had more software at my disposal. And I would renew this from year to year for $249 to continue to have access to anything new or to get more license keys for later installs.

For my testing needs, I do pretty much everything that I need to do AT WORK with my MSDN Operating Systems agreement (It's $700 a year and renewed yearly). That particular program gives me full access to all of the OS's from Microsoft for testing AND Development purposes. But I am not allowed to take copies of this software home and use it on my own personal computers...so I cannot use this to upgrade my wife's machine if I wanted to. Also, my coworkers who also want to test on their own machines or VM's have to have their own MSDN agreement as well....I'm not at liberty to share these licenses with coworkers.