MS backs down on Office 2013 license transfer restrictions


Recommended Posts

Based on customer feedback we have changed the Office 2013 retail license agreement to allow customers to move the software from one computer to another. This means customers can transfer Office 2013 to a different computer if their device fails or they get a new one. Previously, customers could only transfer their Office 2013 software to a new device if their PC failed under warranty.

While the licensing agreement text accompanying Office 2013 software will be updated in future releases, this change is effective immediately and applies to Office Home and Student 2013, Office Home and Business 2013, Office Professional 2013 and the standalone Office 2013 applications. With this change, customers can move the software to another computer once every 90 days. These terms are identical to those found in the Office 2010 software.[/indent]

http://www.zdnet.com...200/?s_cid=e539

It does however put their yearly subscription into question after, all why would you pay for that when you can buy it outright?

Because an office 2013 license is still for a single PC unlike 2010 that could be installed on 3 machines or previous versions that could be installed on 1 desktop and 1 laptop.

Yes you have the advantage of up to 5 PC installs for say a family but over the lifetime of your system will not the outright purchase work out cheaper per unit?

That and if you miss the yearly fee Office stops working has at least me looking for old license conventions.

Because an office 2013 license is still for a single PC unlike 2010 that could be installed on 3 machines or previous versions that could be installed on 1 desktop and 1 laptop.

The license is also the FULL office package, including outlook and publisher, and you get extra online storage. and full access to online office.

and of course the license is for office 365, not for office 365 2013

if you're wish to repeatedly install the newest version of office whenever they available, office 365 is the way to go,

otherwise if you're content with exisiting office,

and do not wish to submit yourself to Microsoft planned obsolescene scheme,

choose Office 20xx.

The license is also the FULL office package, including outlook and publisher, and you get extra online storage. and full access to online office.

and of course the license is for office 365, not for office 365 2013

They could even subsidize a car in the subscription but I still don't see how forcing everybody to pay for all that because they crippled all other licenses can be good, very few people need more than word or excel. Also I don't really think that logging in to all your emails/documents on some random public computer that only God knows how much malware could run is a good idea either.

They could even subsidize a car in the subscription but I still don't see how forcing everybody to pay for all that because they crippled all other licenses can be good, very few people need more than word or excel. Also I don't really think that logging in to all your emails/documents on some random public computer that only God knows how much malware could run is a good idea either.

web based editing isn't going to be affected by malware on the computer though. viruses aren't going to infect the web based editor :)

as they no longer crippled anything, they removed the 3 user license, that's all. but the single user license is now the same as it was.

So given the license changes whats the advantages and disadvantages from each license version that people see?

Depending on the country of residence, the best option is to buy an old 3 user office 2010 copy and upgrade it. if you live in a civilized country with consumer protection, MS is not allowed to "ugprade" you to an inferior product. So in most of europe they will have to offer you a 3 user version of 2013. while I believe in the US you get upgraded to 365.

web based editing isn't going to be affected by malware on the computer though. viruses aren't going to infect the web based editor :)

I wasn't talking about the editor: when you log on office live with your outlook account you have access to all your emails and skydrive documents so I don't think that opening your personal documents on some random public computer most of which still are full of java and other crappy software that could have let in an infinite amount of malware can be a good idea. I also don't understand all this craze of people not bringing their computers with them, the people I see using public computers are almost exclusively technologically illiterates, everybody who actually works on computer brings their smartphone or laptop with them.

as they no longer crippled anything, they removed the 3 user license, that's all. but the single user license is now the same as it was.

The previous retail license was for 3 devices while the new one is only for 1 device so if you have more than one computer (almost everybody does) you need to pay a license for each even if they're all yours. Many other companies have moved to per-user licenses especially now with app stores and people owning several devices while Microsoft instead has actually moved backwards, back to a per-device license straight from the 1980s. Even Apple once you buy OS X, iLife or iWork or buy a macbook/imac that comes with them grants you a license for all your other devices and everybody knows how much they're attached to money.

The previous retail license was for 3 devices while the new one is only for 1 device so if you have more than one computer (almost everybody does) you need to pay a license for each even if they're all yours. Many other companies have moved to per-user licenses especially now with app stores and people owning several devices while Microsoft instead has actually moved backwards, back to a per-device license straight from the 1980s. Even Apple once you buy OS X, iLife or iWork or buy a macbook/imac that comes with them grants you a license for all your other devices and everybody knows how much they're attached to money.

No, previously they sold both 1 liense and 3 license versions, they have not crippled anything, just removed the 3 license version.

your example sort of fails on a few important details though. the MS 5 users license can be used by multiple people on 5 computers at once, by 5 different people. the Apple license you compare it with is per person.

there's nothing backwards about this, just different ways, and for most people the MS version makes more sense, for those that the 365 license don't then the device license makes more sense.

And while they previously had a 3 device license, (it was actually 3 devices 1 person if you read the license correctly) it was very impractical insofar as reinstalling and such goes.

Also the Vista thing was an OEM license and that's how OEM licenses are supposed and always was supposed to work.

Glad they reversed their decision, but they'll attempt it again at some point.

no, they'll simply phase out the regular non 356 versions come the next two versions. well technically they already started a gradual phasing out.

No, previously they sold both 1 liense and 3 license versions, they have not crippled anything, just removed the 3 license version.

Previously they were selling a 1-PC OEM license and a 3-PC Retail license. The current license allows only 1 PC but it's a retail license, not OEM: it's not tied to new hardware. They may have phased out the other licenses but the remaining one has been changed to Retail so I don't see why they shouldn't be considered at the same level.

your example sort of fails on a few important details though. the MS 5 users license can be used by multiple people on 5 computers at once, by 5 different people. the Apple license you compare it with is per person.

It could even allow an infinite number of users but why should I care? It's not like you can do group buying with that. Does that justify everybody else have to pay much more just because Microsoft thinks it's cool to let a 5 years old Timmy that would have very likely just as content with Wordpad have their own Word, Excel or Powerpoint license? It may be better for families but it sucks for many other people.

there's nothing backwards about this, just different ways, and for most people the MS version makes more sense, for those that the 365 license don't then the device license makes more sense.

And while they previously had a 3 device license, (it was actually 3 devices 1 person if you read the license correctly) it was very impractical insofar as reinstalling and such goes.

I think it's pretty backwards when it forces everybody to pay more, before I only needed a license for 3 computers, now I need to either buy 2-3 licenses or pay the equivalent years of Office 365. There may be of course cases where the new licensing could be more convenient but there are tons of people who are going to get screwed with this new pricing scheme, people who just wanted a single office license to use on their personal devices like most people do with commercial software. Also even if the license was impractical (I actually never had problems reactivating it after every computer upgrade) they could have used the same system they use for office 365 on normal office licenses so that wouldn't be a problem.

Also the Vista thing was an OEM license and that's how OEM licenses are supposed and always was supposed to work.

The title of the page was clear: "News: Revision to Windows Vista retail licensing terms". It wasn't the OEM, it was the retail one (additional source: here), if it was just the OEM version I doubt anybody would have really cared.

Previously they were selling a 1-PC OEM license and a 3-PC Retail license. The current license allows only 1 PC but it's a retail license, not OEM: it's not tied to new hardware. They may have phased out the other licenses but the remaining one has been changed to Retail so I don't see why they shouldn't be considered at the same level.

No, the PKC edition was a regular 1 user retail version.

No, the PKC edition was a regular 1 user retail version.

"Each Product Key Card allows one user to activate one Office 2010 suite on one preloaded PC."

"The Office Product Key Card can only be installed on one PC. If you ever need to reinstall Office you can do so on the same PC on which Office was originally installed."

Sounds like OEM (technically upgrade from OEM) to me :wacko:. It's tied to the machine where the OEM version of office was preinstalled so it only works as an OEM license.

It's not OEM since firstly it's not provided with the OEM computer, it's sold retail, and MS and not the OEM partner provides product support.

and technically MS allows you to install it on non pre-loaded computers as well. May somewhat vary by region. but even where they say no, they will let you if you as and they provide the download for anyone so it doesn't need to be pre-loaded.

Definite step backwards. Most people buy office for word, excel and maybe PowerPoint. Which is why in my experience most of my customers bought the "Home and Student" version of Office. In the 2010 version for $130 you could install that on 3 different machines (at the same time). Now with the 2013 version you can only install it on 1.

I don't care if they now let you "transfer the license every 90 days", still a large step backwards.

problem is most people abused the 3 install license as a family license and as a 3 user license, it was never a 3 user license, it was a 1 user 3 computers license.

Most people actually use the office on only one of their computers, if they need it on others the web apps are sufficient. and for a family multi user situation which is what most people illegaly used the 3 license version as, the 5 user license now is a better deal.

Office 365 subscription would be a no brainer if MS actually released a new version of Office every year.

Just out of curiosity. If I were to subscribe to Office 365, and cancel my subscription would my Office installs stop working? I'd like to know both:

1) Do I technically lose licensing when my Office 365 subscription expires?

2) Even if my subscription expires, will my Office installations still work?

I might be more tempted to upgrade when the new Office for Mac comes out. Sucks that now the Home and Student versions are only 1 PC installs. Previous Home and Student versions for Mac and Windows were 3 and 5 installs.

Office 365 subscription would be a no brainer if MS actually released a new version of Office every year.

yeah, MS most likely produce new version of Office every 3 or 4 years instead,

exception: Office 2000 - XP - 2003

1) Do I technically lose licensing when my Office 365 subscription expires?

if you're not renewing it, yes you'll lose the license.

2) Even if my subscription expires, will my Office installations still work?

it goes to read-only mode, no saving or editing possible.

there still unconfirmed rumor on how MS would deal with Office's SkyDrive when Office subscription are expired.

Thanks for the reply. Would there be any issues with Office installations from a single 365 sub to family member computers? I would want to install on my Wife's mac, and the family PC downstairs. Would they be prompted for my password continuously?

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • And the fact that the majority of people from Poland are white European Christians while the people you are complaining about in post after post are not is just a coincidence... Every sentence in your post I am replying to is racist nonsense. None of it is actually based on any facts whatsoever. All immigrants are seeking a better life too. It's literally the only reason they would risk everything and leave their homes, families, and homeland. They are working and contributing to the economy too, as you even admit. They get the same benefits your partner did AND that YOU are eligible for as well. That is one of the key things of the EU and a mark of a civilization. That is the definition of a society where everyone is given a chance, treated equally and fairly, and is judged by the content of their character, not their different skin color or which version of ignorant superstitious nonsense their parents lied about as children. Racists around the world said the same things about the Irish and Jews and Poles (like your partner) and...every other immigrant movement over the centuries. What's your family's heritage, by the way? Were your ancestors lied about with racist fearmongering crapola by self-entitled locals the same way as you are now? If someone like that said the same things about all people from Poland, like your partner, would they be right? Or would you want them to judge your partner based on who they actually were, not where they just happened to come from?
    • Again, this is an irrelevant attempt to attack the messenger. The truth does not require any justification.
    • Removed the blue and underline as you did not post a link. This would also  be considered spamming.
    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      jessse3334 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      506
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      196
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      153
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      65
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!