Upgrade from office XP student edition...

R

Rockyr

Sorry, but according to Microsofts' website today, it says that ANY previous
edition of office XP suite will qualify for the upgrade to office 2007.
Unfortunately, they made a mistake and have not informed the public, so
people like me are stuck with a $297 upgrade that won't work.

[email protected]
 
J

JoAnn Paules

You should have been told when you bought the previous version that it was
*not* a qualifying product for any upgrades. If you have issues with that,
then you need to contact Microsoft directly.


--
JoAnn Paules
MVP Microsoft [Publisher]

~~~~~
How to ask a question
http://support.microsoft.com/KB/555375
 
O

Opinicus

You should have been told when you bought the previous version that it was
*not* a qualifying product for any upgrades. If you have issues with that,
then you need to contact Microsoft directly.
Click to expand...

Even if he was, policies can change. A public statement made on a corporate
website by a corporate entity constitutes a binding contract in many
jurisdictions nowadays. (This is the source of the "breach of contract"
question I asked when I first heard about this "mistake".) I'll bet if
someone wanted to take MS to court over this issue they'd win. MS said
publicly that all Office XP suites qualify for the upgrade to Office 2007.
MS said so for a considerable period of time, sufficient for many people to
be informed about it, believe it, and take action upon this information--to
their own cost. Furthermore MS said so long after the statement that SE
editions didn't qualify was made, thus superseding it.

Right now I'm so pissed off by this mess that I'm seriously considering not
moving on to Office 2007 at all.
 
M

Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]

Misprints are common and are not usually allowed for tort causes.

--
Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]

Post all replies to the group to keep the discussion intact. All
unsolicited mail sent to my personal account will be deleted without
reading.

After furious head scratching, Opinicus asked:

|
|
||| Sorry, but according to Microsofts' website today, it says that ANY
||| previous
||| edition of office XP suite will qualify for the upgrade to office
||| 2007. Unfortunately, they made a mistake and have not informed the
||| public, so people like me are stuck with a $297 upgrade that won't
||| work.
|
|| You should have been told when you bought the previous version that
|| it was *not* a qualifying product for any upgrades. If you have
|| issues with that, then you need to contact Microsoft directly.
|
| Even if he was, policies can change. A public statement made on a
| corporate website by a corporate entity constitutes a binding
| contract in many jurisdictions nowadays. (This is the source of the
| "breach of contract" question I asked when I first heard about this
| "mistake".) I'll bet if someone wanted to take MS to court over this
| issue they'd win. MS said publicly that all Office XP suites qualify
| for the upgrade to Office 2007. MS said so for a considerable period
| of time, sufficient for many people to be informed about it, believe
| it, and take action upon this information--to their own cost.
| Furthermore MS said so long after the statement that SE editions
| didn't qualify was made, thus superseding it.
|
| Right now I'm so pissed off by this mess that I'm seriously
| considering not moving on to Office 2007 at all.
 
O

Opinicus

"Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]"
<[email protected]>


||| Sorry, but according to Microsofts' website today, it says that ANY
||| previous
||| edition of office XP suite will qualify for the upgrade to office
||| 2007. Unfortunately, they made a mistake and have not informed the
||| public, so people like me are stuck with a $297 upgrade that won't
||| work.

|| You should have been told when you bought the previous version that
|| it was *not* a qualifying product for any upgrades. If you have
|| issues with that, then you need to contact Microsoft directly.

| Even if he was, policies can change. A public statement made on a
| corporate website by a corporate entity constitutes a binding
| contract in many jurisdictions nowadays. (This is the source of the
| "breach of contract" question I asked when I first heard about this
| "mistake".) I'll bet if someone wanted to take MS to court over this
| issue they'd win. MS said publicly that all Office XP suites qualify
| for the upgrade to Office 2007. MS said so for a considerable period
| of time, sufficient for many people to be informed about it, believe
| it, and take action upon this information--to their own cost.
| Furthermore MS said so long after the statement that SE editions
| didn't qualify was made, thus superseding it.

Misprints are common and are not usually allowed for tort causes.

True. But this particular "misprint" is still there after how many weeks?
Months?

http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/products/FX101754511033.aspx#1

I remember first talking about this sometime last year for Dog's sake.

Since that page went up "Microsoft Works 6.0–10; Microsoft Works suite
2000–2006 or later; any 2000–2007 Microsoft Office program or suite; any
Microsoft Office XP suite" have been in the Office 2007 upgrade path and
there's been no official statement to the contrary.

I can see lawyers making big bucks off this on both sides...
 
J

JoAnn Paules

I can understand that. At best Microsoft may offer to return his money but I
wouldn't count on that happening. And if he doesn't ask them directly, they
will not even know he exists.


--
JoAnn Paules
MVP Microsoft [Publisher]

~~~~~
How to ask a question
http://support.microsoft.com/KB/555375
 
B

Bob I

Opinicus said:
"Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]"
<[email protected]>


||| Sorry, but according to Microsofts' website today, it says that ANY
||| previous
||| edition of office XP suite will qualify for the upgrade to office
||| 2007. Unfortunately, they made a mistake and have not informed the
||| public, so people like me are stuck with a $297 upgrade that won't
||| work.

|| You should have been told when you bought the previous version that
|| it was *not* a qualifying product for any upgrades. If you have
|| issues with that, then you need to contact Microsoft directly.

| Even if he was, policies can change. A public statement made on a
| corporate website by a corporate entity constitutes a binding
| contract in many jurisdictions nowadays. (This is the source of the
| "breach of contract" question I asked when I first heard about this
| "mistake".) I'll bet if someone wanted to take MS to court over this
| issue they'd win. MS said publicly that all Office XP suites qualify
| for the upgrade to Office 2007. MS said so for a considerable period
| of time, sufficient for many people to be informed about it, believe
| it, and take action upon this information--to their own cost.
| Furthermore MS said so long after the statement that SE editions
| didn't qualify was made, thus superseding it.

Misprints are common and are not usually allowed for tort causes.

True. But this particular "misprint" is still there after how many weeks?
Months?

http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/products/FX101754511033.aspx#1

I remember first talking about this sometime last year for Dog's sake.

Since that page went up "Microsoft Works 6.0–10; Microsoft Works suite
2000–2006 or later; any 2000–2007 Microsoft Office program or suite; any
Microsoft Office XP suite" have been in the Office 2007 upgrade path and
there's been no official statement to the contrary.

I can see lawyers making big bucks off this on both sides...
Click to expand...

Reading the web site literally, the trial version of Office 2003 would
suffice, or a Pirated version. I don't think they will be making
exceptions for those either.
 
M

Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]

Wait and see... wait and see.

--
Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]

Post all replies to the group to keep the discussion intact. All
unsolicited mail sent to my personal account will be deleted without
reading.

After furious head scratching, Bob I asked:

| Opinicus wrote:
|| "Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]"
|| <[email protected]>
||
||
||||| Sorry, but according to Microsofts' website today, it says that
||||| ANY previous
||||| edition of office XP suite will qualify for the upgrade to office
||||| 2007. Unfortunately, they made a mistake and have not informed the
||||| public, so people like me are stuck with a $297 upgrade that won't
||||| work.
||
|||| You should have been told when you bought the previous version that
|||| it was *not* a qualifying product for any upgrades. If you have
|||| issues with that, then you need to contact Microsoft directly.
||
||| Even if he was, policies can change. A public statement made on a
||| corporate website by a corporate entity constitutes a binding
||| contract in many jurisdictions nowadays. (This is the source of the
||| "breach of contract" question I asked when I first heard about this
||| "mistake".) I'll bet if someone wanted to take MS to court over this
||| issue they'd win. MS said publicly that all Office XP suites qualify
||| for the upgrade to Office 2007. MS said so for a considerable period
||| of time, sufficient for many people to be informed about it, believe
||| it, and take action upon this information--to their own cost.
||| Furthermore MS said so long after the statement that SE editions
||| didn't qualify was made, thus superseding it.
||
|| Misprints are common and are not usually allowed for tort causes.
||
|| True. But this particular "misprint" is still there after how many
|| weeks? Months?
||
|| http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/products/FX101754511033.aspx#1
||
|| I remember first talking about this sometime last year for Dog's
|| sake.
||
|| Since that page went up "Microsoft Works 6.0–10; Microsoft Works
|| suite 2000–2006 or later; any 2000–2007 Microsoft Office program or
|| suite; any Microsoft Office XP suite" have been in the Office 2007
|| upgrade path and there's been no official statement to the contrary.
||
|| I can see lawyers making big bucks off this on both sides...
||
|
| Reading the web site literally, the trial version of Office 2003 would
| suffice, or a Pirated version. I don't think they will be making
| exceptions for those either.
 
Top