Friday, February 9th 2018
![Microsoft](https://tpucdn.com/images/news/microsoft-v1723816949774.png)
Microsoft Office 2019 Will Run on Windows 10, and Only Windows 10
As reported yesterday, Microsoft changed the way how they license Windows 10 to their OEM partners. But buckle in folks, the changes just keep on coming. In what looks like an effort to push Windows 7 and Windows 8.1 owners to upgrade, Microsoft has officially announced that Office 2019 will only work on machines with Windows 10 and the next LTSC release of Windows Server. That's only the tip of the iceberg though. Unlike previous version of Office that came with 10 years of support, Office 2019's support lifecycle is shortened to five years of mainstream support and two years of extended support. Additionally, the client applications are only available with a Click-to-Run installer. However, Microsoft will continue to provide a MSI installer for the server applications.
Source:
Microsoft
85 Comments on Microsoft Office 2019 Will Run on Windows 10, and Only Windows 10
Also I'm almost sure you posted from a computer or wasted 1 hour formatting that comment on a phone screen. You'll have to do with 2 more uses of the computer for the rest of the year, right? :) It looks like you concluded there are 2 types of users: your type, and the wrong type. Office isn't worth it, OO/LO and Google Drive can replace Office, old people use Windows 7, etc. No need to cite the source for this, I'm sure you wouldn't just claim that reality somehow perfectly aligns with your personal preferences. :)
In this day and age of $500 mid-rangers, and $1000 flagships, a lot of people (especially at the lower end of the income brackets) decide to either stick with their old flagships or buy a new low-end to mid-range device. That's why globally Samsung, Xiaomi, Huawei and BKK (Oppo, Vivo, OnePlus) rule the roost, not Apple: they just keep on churning out millions upon millions of cheap, low-end to mid-range devices that people buy. I'm not the average public, and neither are you. The average public, as I said in my post that you so very kindly quoted, uses their work computer for their computer-y usage, not their own. For the few times when they need a computer, they'll usually just wait till they're back at work.
And obviously I was exaggerating with the 3 times a year comment, but the actual need for a computer (vs really want) is a much smaller amount of tasks than ever.
The "downside" of the mobile industry is that it still evolves fast, unlike the PC segment. Which means you can't reasonably hang on to a mobile for more than 3 years. Those companies you listed sell millions upon millions of phones because they're disposable. They become obsolete very fast so in the long run you end up paying a lot more. The problem isn't always the amount of disposable income, it's mostly that people are bad at math, finances, or any kind of long term planning, and many put too high a price on image. People are willing to starve a little to get that new model, 1st world or 3rd.
I randomly browsed on Amazon India (as an example) and found decent 5* laptop choices for ~$300. But ANY ~$2-300 laptop from the past 10 years will do a good job at almost any regular task. A lot better than any phone for that matter, even a $1000 iPhone X. It doesn't have to be high end, it doesn't have to be new, and you can hang on to it for close to a decade because advances are pretty slow recently. Even if you buy one for $500 that's $50-80 per year. So that $500 phone? In 18 months it stops receiving any updates, it will feel significantly slower, and you'll probably have to invest another $50 to swap the battery or buy a new one. That's what, $200 per year at best? Going on the same assumption you made above this money could be a sixth of your yearly disposable income. Every year. Just for the phone.
P.S. About the "ruling the roost" remark, I guess it really depends on what you consider "ruling" to mean. When it comes to businesses there's one metric above all: profit. It's a special kind of ruling to sell a lot more than your competition but still not make the same profit.
Anyway, I'm getting off the bus here. Doesn't make sense to keep this going. You're making some very exaggerated and even conflicting arguments. We're also pretty much off topic... :)