Submitted by “Microsoft quietly raised last week its per-incident support prices across the board for Windows and Office. Support for Windows XP and Windows Vista now costs USD 59 per incident. Prior to the Vista launch, the per-incident support price for Windows was USD 39. Vista users get their first 90 days of support for no charge. Support for Office XP and Office 2007 now goes for USD 49 per incident, compared to USD 35 per incident prior to the January 30 Windows Vista/Office 2007 retail launch. Office 2007 users also get their first 90 days of support for free.”
Even if you have a retail version you have to pay after 90 days? Not that most peoples hould even need to call in with google around, but if so, it is still very disappointing to hear.
Though I’m sure managing the volume of calls they receive is tough.
Imagine the conversation that prompted this:
Microsoft employee: Linux is now a direct competitor. Look how much redhat charges for support, we can now raise our prices while appearing equally competitive.
Microsoft executive: Sounds like a great idea. This way we can make even more money by selling a defective product.
But this is somewhat misleading because most people get support from their OEM who may not charge anything at all, as long as you continue using Microsoft-only products. I recall a fun chat I had with off-shore support because I could not access safe mode with FreeBSD’s boot0: “do you know how to reinstall windows?” I’m just hoping that the premium paid by RHEL users who require support translates to better service.
“This way we can make even more money by selling a defective product.”
I was waiting for a comment like this to appear on this thread, lo and behold it was the second one.
MS doesn’t make any money from their consumer level support; it’s a huge cost center for them and they actually lose money every time they answer a support call which is why they push their online no cost support options so hard (newsgroups, KB’s, etc).
When I worked in PSS back in ’02, average cost per call was over 500 bucks (factor in employee salary, infrastructure costs, etc and it shouldn’t be hard to see why).
The OEM’s are worthless and usually push off calls to MS in the end anyways. Regardless, that 60 bucks guarantees you a solution, or you get a refund. Turns out to be a legitimate bug? Refund.
*yawn*
The cost for support is part of what the consumer pays for, it is the cost of doing business. The consumer also pays for Mr. Gates foundation as well as MS employee salaries. Consumers pay for all this along with the privilage of spending large sums of money for buggy software. OEM’s are worhless because they push off calls to MS because of software issues? MS fanboys are annoying enough, but MS shills are elitist snobs.
After the “free” support period is over, consumers can of course choose to pay 60 bucks per call, or find another source of support or education. So be it, but I would think that MS would be more interested in solidifying a warm and friendly relationship with their customers duirng a time when the competiton is growing and doing a far better job with satisfying their respective customers.
“The cost for support is part of what the consumer pays for, it is the cost of doing business.”
In this case, the price for the 90 day warranty support is built into the cost of the product, hence why retail versions cost more than an OEM version (which comes with zero warranty support). 90 days is plenty of time for a customer to call in as many times as they need to get their system up and running. This new system is actually better than the old way; previously a retail version of Windows came with 2 free calls…any more than that and the customer had to pay.
“The consumer also pays for Mr. Gates foundation as well as MS employee salaries.”
Actually, stockholders are who indirectly pay for Gates’ foundation, not consumers. Even moreso, it is Gates himself who pays, as it was he who purchased his own stock in the first place. His salary (which consumers do directly pay for) is less than .1% the amount he donates to charity each year, i.e. that’s all paid for out of his own pocket.
“Consumers pay for all this along with the privilage of spending large sums of money for buggy software.”
As opposed to getting buggy software for free? For most companies and consumers, the cost of a license is worth the guarantee of getting something fixed should it break. And as I stated before, if it’s a bug, there is no cost to the consumer…MS absorbs that cost 100%.
“MS fanboys are annoying enough, but MS shills are elitist snobs.”
Fine, I’m a shill/snob, but am also factually correct. At no point did I sink to the level of name calling in my response.
“So be it, but I would think that MS would be more interested in solidifying a warm and friendly relationship with their customers…”
MS regularly gets high marks when it comes to customer support (> 90% customer satisfaction), much higher than almost all other software vendors. Much higher than most call centers period. I’d like to know which competition you’re speaking of, as well as their options/prices for their comparable products, as well as their overall CSAT (customer satisfaction) ratings. Then we’ll compare apples to apples rather than vague assertions.
“MS regularly gets high marks when it comes to customer support (> 90% customer satisfaction), much higher than almost all other software vendors….”
According to ACSI (http://www.theacsi.org/), MS scored 73%, so I must question your “factually correct” assertion.
“At no point did I sink to the level of name calling in my response.”
The arrogant tone of your posts doesn’t get you a pass.
As for the rest of your specious arguments, no matter how you cut it, the consumer pays, including shareholders return on investment. Of course “For most companies and consumers, the cost of a license is worth the guarantee of getting something fixed should it break”, but to say that “MS absorbs that cost 100%” is “factually” incorrect.
After the “free” support period is over, consumers can of course choose to pay 60 bucks per call, or find another source of support or education. So be it, but I would think that MS would be more interested in solidifying a warm and friendly relationship with their customers duirng a time when the competiton is growing and doing a far better job with satisfying their respective customers.
Chortle. You know that email from Jim Allchin in which he says he would buy a Mac if he weren’t a Microsoftie and Microsoft had lost their “customer focus”? Well, I’ve never been involved in MSDN which people say is Da Bomb, but as a consumer that last part made me think maybe he actually sent it sometime between the release of Win98 and that of WinME.
OEM’s are worthless, but I never had a single call passed to MS; it was always “oh, nobody knows why that happens; reboot/reinstall.”
I used to work as a Microsoft Enterprise Technical Router until last year and you would be surprised regarding the number of calls that Microsoft support centers get on a daily basis, ranging from large companies with huge and complex problems to end users having problems to locate their e-mails or asking how to change their wallpaper.
However, I don't think that the same fees apply in my country although those call were definitely charged after some sort of “grace period”.
It wold seem logical with all the money rolling in from Vista they could actually lower costs. Blame it on Steve G. and Linus T.
It wold seem logical with all the money rolling in from Vista they could actually lower costs. Blame it on Steve G. and Linus T.
Who is Steve G? Is he a rapper?
J
Sorry.
Just kidding, happens to all of us. Come to think of it, maybe Steve J is a Shrink Rapper!
Blame it on the weatherman…
MS seems to do it’s best to repel all customers with lower incomes. Maybye they wish to become sort of elitist softmare vendors? Or maybye they just wish to sqeeze their customers dry? Either way, every other software developers (GNU/Linux devs in particular) only gain from this decision.
LOL i hope that was a bad Joke cause if anything Mr.Jobs and Mr.Torvald are the only things remotely keeping MS from really giving it too us.
Agreed, imagine a world where the only choice would be Windows XP or Vista.
Microsoft could screw you over senselessly and you would have nothing else to do but pay up.
This Windows only world would be an ideal place for jason.Knight
“This Windows only world would be an ideal place for jason.Knight.”
I’m mildly amused. It would humor most to know that I run OSX as my main (non-job related) OS. I make my living writing software with/for MS products, so I do have a slant in their direction, however I don’t base my career on decisions made by other companies…if I did that, I’d have gotten out of the computer biz a long time ago.
Anyone who knows me knows that I am rabidly anti-McSoft.
What did McDonalds’ software division ever do to you?!
Gutter food at a quality price.
So.. they forced you to eat food? What’s that got to do with software?
…because we all know that Microsoft has one foot in bankruptcy court. This company certainly has turned “milking the customer” into an art form hasn’t it? It’s bad enough it has foisted its software onto a captive audience. Now, it’s nickel and diming them to death. I’m glad I don’t use Office or Windows any longer.
…because we all know that Microsoft has one foot in bankruptcy court.
We wish. Microsoft are safe-ish for the foreseeable future even if they don’t shape up, and they have in the past. I personally don’t think much of the company’s strategy at any time, but it’s undeniable they eventually woke up to the Web, for example.
If worst comes to worst and they don’t improve with Ballmer at the helm, Gates might “pull a Dell” as someone put it. (Though it would be more accurate to say that Michael Dell “pulled a Jobs”.) And if they get bought by a competitor with a clue, Windows might be around for quite a while yet. We always wondered about Microsoft Linux. Anyone for Red Hat or Unbreakable Windows? [EDIT: Now THAT would be a funny name!]
Edited 2007-02-06 01:13
Oh please, enough with this BS.
Microsoft provides MORE than ample support online. This is for call-ins only, how many times have you felt the need to call Microsoft for support?
This is for call-ins only, how many times have you felt the need to call Microsoft for support?
Probably the same number of times you can’t use online support because your system isn’t working…
That’ll be ‘zero’ then.
Omnce. It was for my dad. He had a working system and wanted more memory. The system board didn’t support that so we got a new board. All fine and dandy, swapped boards. Now, a STOP error was encountered. Now ay to boot the system anymore.
Googling left us with “maybe a virus” which obviously wasn’t the case as the old system boots just fine.
Calling the support, they came up with a brilliant answer:
“reinstall windows”
It was the first _and_ the last time I called MS support……
Why would you call support for that?
I will tell you right now, NT does not bode well to motherboard changes.
That would fix it.
You’d have to go to device manager and remove all the ACPI stuff.
You know Apple also charges $59 an incident? I can’t find Redhat’s pricing data but I would bet its similar.
It’s great running a business with no competition isn’t it? Just keep on raising the prices and we have to swallow it.
So you get to pay $60 to speak with someone in india to try and work around a bug in their software. Brilliant!
Line up and get ready to be milked (some more)
You’re making the mistake of assuming that everyone is calling about a bug in Windows. More often than not it’s just someone not being able to figure something out or not knowing how to do something.
Yet another great idea from the Vice-President of Microsoft’s Great Stupid Ideas Division (a lifetime friend of the Minister for Silly Walks).
Seriously, the Windoze monopoly sucks. Whole countries that are run this badly get blacklisted.
Sure, if you take into account the huge quality progress undergone thru Vista and Office 2007 which are almost totally bug-free, it means that in fact customers will need to call much less often to solve incidents.
So Microsoft is in fact lowering its prices…
I use Ubuntu and I smile folks….
Sure, if you take into account the huge quality progress undergone thru Vista and Office 2007 which are almost totally bug-free, it means that in fact customers will need to call much less often to solve incidents.
That must be some powerful weed they smoke on your planet. Even if it were true, how do you think that would sell, anyway? “We made it less buggy, so we had to charge you more for each individual incident?”
To me and most rational people that must surely sound like “we had to make sure we keep ripping you off left, right and centre”.
I think he was being sarcastic…
Could be, could be.
…Or, they’ve planted a whole heap of really annoying bugs in Windows Vista (UAC, Aero, WGA anyone?) and now hike the support costs, wait for 90 days, send out a critical Windows Update to unlock the ‘features’ then retire on the support lines’ income.
Cynic? What cynic?
I’m thinking due all the bad Vista publicity their estimated sales figures are down. Since windows and office is their bread and butter they need to make revenue somewhere else.
So their prices are now inline with their competition. Apple already charges $59/incident and the only figure I can find for novel is $600/incident, but I’m assuming thats for server support and not desktop (hopefully). I can’t find any prices posted by redhat.
So, to recap Microsoft isn’t charging anymore than anyone else and most people have support from their OEM anyway.