<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" > <channel><title>Comments on: Microsoft Office 365 Home Premium &amp; A Free Alternative</title> <atom:link href="http://www.worldstart.com/microsoft-office-365-home-premium-a-free-alternative/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><link>http://www.worldstart.com/microsoft-office-365-home-premium-a-free-alternative/</link> <description>Everyone, no matter how good you are, needs computer help every now and then. That&#039;s where Worldstart comes in.</description> <lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 May 2013 17:28:50 +0000</lastBuildDate> <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency> <generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator> <item><title>By: Robert</title><link>http://www.worldstart.com/microsoft-office-365-home-premium-a-free-alternative/comment-page-1/#comment-183509</link> <dc:creator>Robert</dc:creator> <pubDate>Tue, 05 Feb 2013 15:52:22 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.worldstart.com/?p=37014#comment-183509</guid> <description>with the Open Source applications that have become available in the last few years it is hard to believe that Microsoft is investing its resources in another MS Office version. Open Office as well as other Open Source applications like LibreOffice do just as good a job for the consumer. Where and who came up with Microsoft&#039;s new licenseing structure? Are we as consumers really supposed to accept these terms? I for one cannot believe that if I purchase a full blown copyof MS Office it is only legal to install it on 1 computer for the life of that computer. This strategy makes no sense for an informed consumer! Does Microsoft expect to sell MS Office to a customer and then if the computer dies in a short amount of time and has to be replaced spend another $399.99 for another copy since the licenseis only for 1 computer until it is no longer in use. One would have to be insane to purchase software with these terms when the Open Source applications are available for no cost and can be installed on whatever computer the consumer cares to install it on.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>with the Open Source applications that have become available in the last few years it is hard to believe that Microsoft is investing its resources in another MS Office version. Open Office as well as other Open Source applications like LibreOffice do just as good a job for the consumer. Where and who came up with Microsoft&#8217;s new licenseing structure? Are we as consumers really supposed to accept these terms? I for one cannot believe that if I purchase a full blown copyof MS Office it is only legal to install it on 1 computer for the life of that computer. This strategy makes no sense for an informed consumer! Does Microsoft expect to sell MS Office to a customer and then if the computer dies in a short amount of time and has to be replaced spend another $399.99 for another copy since the licenseis only for 1 computer until it is no longer in use. One would have to be insane to purchase software with these terms when the Open Source applications are available for no cost and can be installed on whatever computer the consumer cares to install it on.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> </channel> </rss>
<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk: basic
Page Caching using disk: basic
Database Caching 5/8 queries in 0.002 seconds using apc
Object Caching 269/272 objects using apc

Served from: www.worldstart.com @ 2013-05-20 15:02:16 -->