On Fri, 12 Apr 2002 16:52:36 Ashley wrote:
The modules would be paid for on subscription or per use. Want to spell check your word document, that will be 50p please. Want to export your slide show from powerpoint for presentation, please insert your copyright protection information here (viewer can not see it with paying you a fee)
This is an interesting topic.
The non-free software model is one in which a company retains copyright and licenses the software to the users who pay for the privilege. There is nothing to say that licensing has to be for all time and I remember when I first joined BT that they were using some CAD software that was rented, i.e. you only had a license to run it as long as you continued to pay.
Now add to this the model of the pay-as-you-go mobile phone where a user subscribes to a service and pays for a certain amount of that service up front. When the service payed for has been exhausted the user must pay again to continue to use the service.
So even without the internet a model where people pay per use or per month to license software has been available - floppies with new license keys can be sent through the post or purchased from "top up points".
So why would M$ try to adopt this new model now rather than at any previous time? There may be a number of reasons including:
* The internet makes license adminstration cheaper.
* Perhaps the market of people techically minded enough to buy a PC with the known complexities and problems is exhausted and people are looking for something simpler at home.
* It provides additional lock-in opportunities.
The last of those is the most interesting. A typical business application of a PC requires an office suite that is capable of reading MS Office documents, a web browser and e-mail and very little else. With free software to do all of that business can buy a large number of PCs and equip them with software without paying a penny to microsoft! This way of working is becoming increasinly realistic now. How is microsoft going to get its cut of these companies money? Perhaps through network based applications.
So, how does that differ for home users? The first job the home user has if he wished to avoid paying microsoft for software is to buy his PC without licenses already included in the deal. This isn't hard but I suspect that it isn't easy enough that it will become common in the near future so on that front M$'s income is perhaps more secure.
Any thoughts?