Click here for the Computerworld article.
Please opine. If this is true, it's the death knell for Win10, because most people don't want Office 365. But then Computerworld is known for writing clickbait. Opine, please? I have no opinion, or else a contrary one, because of the thurott article, click here. LOOK AT THE ARTICLE COMMENTS, too.
Why those comments? Look at this quote in the article (I bolded the key clause): "There are a few changes to the apps coming up that are part of helping them get ready for their release with Windows 10," Aul wrote. "We will also remove 'Preview' from the app names and in about one week, you will need an Office 365 subscription to edit on Windows 10 PCs and larger tablets."
That goes against the above 'click here' Mr. Aul wrote showing MS Office 95 installed in Win10. At issue: can we install prior MS Office on Win10 and use it, or are we required to buy Office 365, now? Hence, the angered comments in the Computerworld article.
Compare with this new Ed Bott article in ZDnet. Ed is known for being an MSFT fanboy.
My beefs with MS are limited to the restrictions on the interface, 'sharing', and the too-many-arcane-hidden settings. Just to be clear, this is not an anti-MS post, but a wtf on the Computerworld article; for Mr. Aul's statement is alarming.
Seeking input, if you are willing. Thank you!
Edited by brainout, 15 July 2015 - 08:22 PM.