Microsoft Office 2011 Mac 64 bit upgrade

That was well said .

Thanks for being an unpaid volunteer Jim, and for taking the time to take the heat on this issue.

But in all fairness, your analogy with self-driving cars does not hold in this practical example: we are talking about a re-compilation of Office for 64 bits, not about "guessing what the future will look like and factor it in products ahead of time". 64 bits support is something that is supported by all compilers and available by Microsoft for all its new products. So it is indeed disingenuous for Microsoft to piggy back on Mac OS X transition to 64 bits to effectively terminate a perpetual license to its own product. 

Microsoft will argue that recompiling Office 2011 to 64 bits makes it a new product, that there are API changes in Mac OS that would need to be taken into account, and that it would be "economically unreasonable" to support and offer upgrades to obsolete products. 

The real argument is whether it is reasonable to offer perpetual licenses it knows will not survive the platform they rely on. Yes, you can play on the words and argue that it will be perpetual as long as the platform works, and you're not responsible for the platform, and this is why I call this disingenuous and not utterly in violation of their own licensing terms.

In my non-legal but professional opinion, the argument can be made in court legally that Microsoft's license is misleading and that it has the responsibility to insure the perpetuity of the functionality licensed under its products, under "reasonably economical" terms simply by offering to carry over the license to the new releases of their products free of charge to those who purchased these perpetuity licenses.

After all, there is not enough difference between the old (obsolete) and the new (promoted) products to call them different. They carry the same functionality, the same name, and are marketed as the same.

My 2 cents - Gilles

Hear, hear. Totally agree.

Thanks for being an unpaid volunteer Jim, and for taking the time to take the heat on this issue.

But in all fairness, your analogy with self-driving cars does not hold in this practical example: we are talking about a re-compilation of Office for 64 bits, not about "guessing what the future will look like and factor it in products ahead of time". 64 bits support is something that is supported by all compilers and available by Microsoft for all its new products. So it is indeed disingenuous for Microsoft to piggy back on Mac OS X transition to 64 bits to effectively terminate a perpetual license to its own product. 

Microsoft will argue that recompiling Office 2011 to 64 bits makes it a new product, that there are API changes in Mac OS that would need to be taken into account, and that it would be "economically unreasonable" to support and offer upgrades to obsolete products. 

The real argument is whether it is reasonable to offer perpetual licenses it knows will not survive the platform they rely on. Yes, you can play on the words and argue that it will be perpetual as long as the platform works, and you're not responsible for the platform, and this is why I call this disingenuous and not utterly in violation of their own licensing terms.

In my non-legal but professional opinion, the argument can be made in court legally that Microsoft's license is misleading and that it has the responsibility to insure the perpetuity of the functionality licensed under its products, under "reasonably economical" terms simply by offering to carry over the license to the new releases of their products free of charge to those who purchased these perpetuity licenses.

After all, there is not enough difference between the old (obsolete) and the new (promoted) products to call them different. They carry the same functionality, the same name, and are marketed as the same.

My 2 cents - Gilles

Why should Microsoft pay for your decision to toss away a perfectly good working version of Mac OS for one that doesn't work?

MS don't have to pay, they must pay, because current mac OS ends in 2020. What for a service is that???

I pay a bunch of money in 2012 for "life-time" license. The agreement is broken. I won't have a license in 2020.

This is not fair! 

You/Microsoft ought to think very seriously about this. We're customers and we are the one who build companies by spending our money for their products. What will happen if we stop buying MS products???

Why should Microsoft pay for your decision to toss away a perfectly good working version of Mac OS for one that doesn't work?