Microsoft Invents $1.15/Hour Homework Fee For Kids 580
theodp writes "Microsoft's vision of your computing future is on display in its just-published patent application for the Metered Pay-As-You-Go Computing Experience. The plan, as Microsoft explains it, involves charging students $1.15 an hour to do their homework, making an Office bundle available for $1/hour, and billing gamers $1.25 for each hour of fun. In addition to your PC, Microsoft also discloses plans to bring the chargeback scheme to your cellphone and automobile — GPS, satellite radio, backseat video entertainment system. 'Both users and suppliers benefit from this new business model,' concludes Microsoft, while conceding that 'the supplier can develop a revenue stream business that may actually have higher value than the one-time purchase model currently practiced.' But don't worry kids, that's only if you do more than 52 hours of homework a year!"
New model? (Score:5, Interesting)
'Both users and suppliers benefit from this new business model'
Only Microsoft could try to call a business model 'new', when hotels and hookers have used it for centuries.
At least its obvious what they are now
So how do they make sure I actually pay? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:8 cores, 3 Gb, 3 GHz? (Score:5, Interesting)
My kid has been told many times just to copy and paste from Wikipedia, I mean told by his teachers. Its most distressing.
I have brought the issue up at his school in meetings, but it seems that the tickbox teaching that the UK now relies upon is more interested in achieving teaching goals then actually educating the pupils.
Given that his IT class seems to really be 'how to use Microsoft products', I wouldn't be surprised if this service became part of the UK education provision system. Angry and disgusted yes, surprised no.
Lastly, dude, having a sig that would nuke a Linux system if applied isn't exactly friendly. On the other hand, I guess it would conform to the natural selection approach to weeding out morons, so perhaps its ok...
Could this possibly sound more stupid? (Score:2, Interesting)
An economic disincentive for our kids to do homework. That is not what we as a nation or any society on this planet need. Somehow I think we are missing part of the proposal. Of course I haven't looked into it beyond one of the links. I just don't see how anyone is going to find this arrangement appealing! There will be a massive outcry if they try to force this on people and it will die an even more pathetic death than Vista. Well, that is my first reaction and I don't think I care enough to look into any further... Heh.
Unfortunately, you may be right. (Score:3, Interesting)
It requires stupid people to work, as it is not exactly a secret that computer hardware is pretty cheap today. /.ers see it in computer hardware, and a friend of mine who is a professional car mechanic can tell similar stories.
Unfortunately there are enough stupid people in the world. Who doesn't have some acquaintance who bought some cheap crap despite advice that it is not really a good buy?
We
free for kids (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Pretty Remarkable (Score:2, Interesting)
Perhaps they're counting on the economy becoming so bad that entire families are on the street and kids have to do their homework in internet cafes paying with change they beg: "Spare a buck for a homework session, mister?"
Re:only one thing to say (Score:2, Interesting)
I find it perfectly acceptable to offer an option of full purchase and metered use. That way, you can minimize your cost based on use and cheaply use expensive software legitimately (a pull factor to stop pirating Photoshop, which increases Adobe's income and decreases torts).
Re:Yet another excuse not to do homework (Score:3, Interesting)
With that line the teacher can offer you food, which leaves you with no excuse next time. What you want to say is, "We were all out of computer time, and we couldn't buy more until mom gets paid Friday." This one can be used every week (well, until the teacher hands you a Knoppix CD).
Re:pay to park,....... (Score:2, Interesting)
> becomes yours. This rake is $5+tax. It can be yours for that much.
The one-time nature of this traditional arrangement has been eroding for a while now. When I was about eight years old, my dad bought two leaf rakes, a blue one and a green one. They eventually wore out, but by that time I was in college. Meanwhile my grandfather was still using one that he bought when my mom was in gradeschool.
The last leaf rake we bought lasted about two years.
Have you noticed that you can't buy cheap wire shirt hangars that last forever any more? All they sell are the plastic ones that break.
I don't think there's exactly a deliberate conspiracy to do this. I think it's more a result of the market-for-lemons phenomenon combined with a shift in our culture away from placing *value* on durability and permanence, toward caring more about having the latest and greatest and trendiest stuff.
But I do think it's a bad thing.
Patent application != model for future. (Score:5, Interesting)
This whole summary is a troll. Technology businesses file many patents every year that they'll never implement. Patents are like munitions. You stockpile them in case you need to go to war, and to prevent others from attacking you. Balmer's saber rattling about Linux infringing on multiple Microsoft patents is the perfect example of this. (Though it's an example of the more sinister uses of patents).
Re:Alright (Score:3, Interesting)
What's in it for the consumer?
Since when does Microsoft care about that? The real issue is that Microsoft has discovered that they may be able to lock people into Windows and Office, but they can't force people to buy new versions. Their "customers" will just keep on using Windows 2000 and Windows XP, and then Microsoft only gets a cut when someone buys a new computer, if that. And then, even then, they have to cut the price of their software for the OEMs, and so they aren't making the sort of money they like.
So what you continually hear out of Microsoft is how the future of computing will involve subscription models, constant charges for everything you want to do, and ubiquitous DRM. The point is simply to get you to continually pay Microsoft for the work they did in the 1990s.
Re:The Ultimate Steal? (Score:5, Interesting)
Just because someone is in college doesn't mean that they are in the know, and realize that choice even exists. The other thing is that Microsoft cleverly charges considerably less for "student" versions of their software, getting kids hooked early. A buddy of mine picked up a student copy of Office 2007 for $60, where as I think as a company we pay close to $400 per seat for a VLK.
Re:Alright (Score:4, Interesting)
Of course consumers will benefit! Microsoft has just announced the first truly-effective open-source promotion policy in the history of the american computing industry. We should be saluting this, but instead, the microsoft bashers on slashdot are reflexively criticizing them.
"Seriously": Consumers will benefit because they will pay proportional to their actual use, which more efficiently distributes the costs. Thus, those who can afford to pay more will do so, and those who can't won't, which is always good if you are a bizarro-world inverse-marxist ideologue, a.k.a. "free market theorist."
Oh, also, higher profits for microsoft will drive them to innovate.
This is the same reason that coupons are good for the economy - those with enough money don't bother and just pay the higher prices. The time and energy people spend clipping coupons has zero cost - likewise, artificially restricting computer use by introducing significant marginal costs is a zero loss to the economy if you are a corporate tool.
The fact that there are economists who actually believe crap like the above tells you that economics really is the dismal science.
Amazon EC2 and Amazon AWS (Score:3, Interesting)
The historical stupidity of the USPTO not withstanding, I'd guess that this application as written is DOA.
I'm sure there is other prior art out there, but having just read the application, it sounds almost exactly like Amazon EC2. You buy different computing configurations (hardware and software) from a menu of choices and then get charged a metered rate based on your choice. The only difference I see here is that this application has you pay up front and then draw down the time instead of paying as you go. That isn't a novel difference.
Re:Only 52 hours of homework? (Score:2, Interesting)
I did less than 52 hours of homework in the entire four years. I didn't get great grades, mind you, but I did pass. Getting high grades on tests was the key. I pissed a lot of teachers off that way because they all knew that I was intelligent and hated giving me low grades that didn't reflect that.
My view on homework was that I didn't need it to learn the material, so I didn't do it. Homework should be optional and given as a resource to study with. Students need to learn to handle their own education. If a student doesn't use that resource and in turn gets bad grades it's their fault, and only then should it be manditory. The self-efficacy gained from this will be great later in life because they realize that they are in control of their life and learning will continue throughout it. Forcing homework on them will cause them to not know how to educate themselves and they'll end up learning nothing after high school.
Re:The Ultimate Steal? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:only one thing to say (Score:2, Interesting)
Tagged "dystopia" -- no kidding (Score:3, Interesting)
I am among many open-source supporters who think Richard Stallman is generally too far out on the fringe, but I think the opinions illustrated in his sci-fi story "The Right to Read" [gnu.org] are a pretty dead-on assessment of what is going on here. Basically this is what happens when software vendors are confronted with the uncomfortable truth that software is not a tangible good and can't really be sold or rented out for a unit price, no matter how profitable it may be, and they redouble their efforts to force that business model into existence, to hell with the consumers.
If you use Microsoft Office, do yourself a favor and switch to OpenOffice as soon as possible. The sooner you do it, the fewer of your files you'll need to convert/jailbreak some day. (Plus you might help to stave off some big dystopian-future scenario, which is nice.)
do it and see your marketshare moving to GNU/Linux (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:The Ultimate Steal? (Score:5, Interesting)
So 20 people leave their PCs on with the screen saver before they go on a two-week vacation, don't notice they still have documents open somewhere, and they get back a bill of $1.25 X 16 days (2 weeks plus the extra weekend) X 24 hours X 20 people, or $9,600.00.
That will happen exactly ONCE before they all switch to anything else ... at that point, even vim or pico look better.
Re:The Ultimate Steal? (Score:2, Interesting)
Excuse me, sir, handles PDF import/export?
The import feature is still at beta stage, and it sucks. I'm yet to find a pdf, as simple as it may be, that it is capable of importing without ruining the layout. There was even an bizarre case when it put the images upside down.
That said, the export function is another thing. Never had trouble with it, and always use it to have a nice presentation.
How about a stray process? (Score:5, Interesting)
Excellent point. Unless MS isn't charging for the time in-between keystrokes. In which case their pricing scheme might be worth it. =)
Which reminds me of something. I've closed Word on my work machine before when I've had a document open on a USB stick. Then try to USB eject the stick and it won't go. Go into task manager and see that some word-ish program still has an open handle on it.
Run task manager, kill the exe, and I can eject the USB drive. No real problem but it raises a question: What if this stray process was billing me?
Re:The Ultimate Steal? (Score:3, Interesting)
Typically though, I just use a plain-text editor for keeping actual information, as opposed to formatted content like letters. For that, I use vim, although there are millions of great plain-text editors.
Re:Pretty Remarkable (Score:4, Interesting)
The CEO all made the decisions that were in the best interest of their company
If that was actually true, we wouldnt be here. The word you are looking for in that sentence isnt 'company' the word you are looking for is 'bond-holders'.
The free market does not exist, its a concept invented and held onto by irresponsible people who need something to point at when they fail. Because, its not THEIR fault afterall...
Since they can't see what every other CEO is doing behind closed doors, they can't factor that in.
That line of thought can certainly be called many things, but logical is not one of them. Do you really think being a CEO involves simply wearing a suit and having a good smile? There are actually numbers that get put in those 'behind closed doors' formulas. When it comes to the bottom line, EVERYTHING is a known. To think that this all just came up out of the blue and took all these people by surprise is the height of ignorance. What those idealistic CEOs actually saw when looking at the numbers was EXACTLY what was going on behind closed doors, and they thought 'hey if that place can do that and get away with it, so can we.' and so on... and so on... and so on... well you get the idea. Greed isnt a difficult concept to grasp, and I think you know that. Unfortunately, we are now 'enabling' those who got caught up in greed. As if to say 'dont worry, we know you just made some bad choices and none of this was really your fault'. If the free market existed, the idea would be to eliminate those whos choices caused a problem in which the company would fail. But thats not what we are doing, and it really is the height of irony that we are proclaiming to be supporting the free market, by taking away one of its supposed fundamental pillars. That of the best wins, is no longer true. It is now, that of the biggest wins.
Now, these CEO's who took the risks and failed, have the feeling that there is no longer any risk. They didnt feel the needed reprecussions of a bad decision, which means they didnt LEARN what the failure was. If that is to be our countries reaction to this type of situation... then we can just consider the past 18 months 'practice'. You take a little while to think about that, and I mean REALLY think about it, and come back and tell me where you think it ends.
Re:Patent application != model for future. (Score:1, Interesting)
That's all well and good, except that... hmm... who would this particular patent work as a defensive weapon against? No MS competitor is using this obnoxious rental model, are they? I mean, 80% of the posts in this thread are about how stupid it is, how it can't work, and so on. If it's a legal weapon, then it's a legal weapon against something that doesn't exist.
So to paraphrase the Sherlock Holmes quote: with the other possibilities ruled out, than the only thing left, however unlikely it may seem, is that MS really is considering doing this.
Re:The Ultimate Steal? (Score:4, Interesting)
Try Open Office for Mac which is very fast. Recently released with real Mac integration and NeoOffice will soon be dust in the wind.
Re:The Ultimate Steal? (Score:3, Interesting)
A: Have realized that when compatibility with the outside world counts, especially with VBA, Microsoft Office Wins.
Hmm, that's funny. Around here were I work, we don't drink the Microsoft or Apple Kool-Aid.
You realize that once you break that initial vendor lock-in, there is no 'compatibility with the outside world' that matters? Why stick with what the 'outside world' does, when what the 'outside world' does is wrong?
Phrased another way:
Why continue pounding square blocks through round holes, just because that's what everyone else continues to do? It's still wrong.
Re:Depends on the options (Score:3, Interesting)
" ... or paying $50 for the 50 hours you actually use it (which is probably being generous in the time students actually use Office)? ..."
Well, I beg to differ. Not that students use Office Software more than you believe; they may or they may not. I'm referring to HOW students use Office Software. Put simply, they dawdle. The IM is open, there is texting to cellphones (via the PC, the cellphone, or both), there is music playing on the PC, there is a whole lot of stuff going on that is not really homework so much as an exercise in avoiding homework. But, that copy of Office is open, and the ticker is ticking. I find it hard to believe you could do a years' worth of average Student-At-The-Home-Computer-Doing-Homework in under 50 hours. More like 6 hours a night, Office open the whole time, but a whole lot of simultaneous things going on as well.
Just my 2c; having raised more than one teen (whom got good grades and who did graduate from college with honors).
Per Hour vs Per Month (Score:3, Interesting)
Having users pay per hour is ridiculous. Nobody will stand for it. A flat monthly fee will be far more effective.
I'm not sure how it worked in other countries, but in Australia, our ISPs used to bill per hour. It was horrible. You would log on, and then feel this immense pressure to go to all the sites you had to go to as quickly as possible. Then in the early 2000s they all started charging a flat monthly fee (with a capped data rate) instead. Immediately the "product experience" changes.
Whether you're paying the same amount or not, it's a far better experience. You can just leave the Internet switched on all day and use it leisurely.
If they bill per-hour for MS Word, it will be the same degraded experience. You'll be in a rush to do your work. Every minute you spend in another window will feel like a minute wasted. You'll hurriedly close down all your documents if you have a coffee break.
There's no way out of this - charging per-hour for software equates to a horrible user experience. Nobody's going to switch to this from the current model.
Re:pay to park,....... (Score:3, Interesting)
Oh, I still remember my childhood when we had quite literally nothing but a more or less sealed roof over our heads (ok, it was leaky, but we knew the spots where it leaked). Christmas was a lot of selfmade stuff and clothing, and cars were... well, our cars did work, but me and my dad spent a lot of time in our garage fixing stuff.
Before you ask, no that wasn't right after the war, that was the 70s and 80s. Yes, there were poor people back then, and there were people who went from poor to well off by work and not through government hand-me-downs. We didn't have the nicest and coolest gadgets, and our TV lasted (with IIRC 2 repairs) for the forementioned 20 years. But if we did that today, we'd ruin the economy, right? I mean, how do you think we could sustain that 10% profit increase per year? Think about it, to keep this up people'd have to buy a new car every other month in a few years!
But how should they do that, their jobs are in China.
The economy isn't really in ruins. Hell, we're not even a decade down, looking at the stock index. Was the economy in ruins just before the turn into the 21st century? Well, no, but back then most people still had jobs.