10 Days and Counting... Adios Microsoft

[eseerc]

It has been nearly 10 days since Microsoft announced the OneDrive storage changes on their blog. Since then, the blog post has garnered over 1,600 (mostly) negative comments. A plea on Microsoft's own OneDrive UserVoice site to "give us back our storage" has yielded nearly 68,000 votes and nearly 4,000 comments. All of this backlash from consumers and Microsoft has yet to issue any kind of response.

I have been a long time supporter and user of OneDrive and Office 365. As an Office 365 customer, I am unaffected by the changes to OneDrive since 1Tb of storage is plenty for me. However, I will no longer support a company that has such a blatant disregard for transparency with its customers on such a major change to their products. The lack of response from Microsoft over these 10 days has been absolutely despicable and should be unacceptable to all of its customers. Placing blame on a handful of people utilizing the "unlimited" storage is deceitful and cowardly.

To be clear, I am not necessarily against the changes (although this is classic "bait and switch"). I understand the business end of their decision. I am against the method as to how the changes were rolled out and the lack of response to thousands of unhappy customers since then.

I cancelled my family's Office 365 subscription today and have migrated all of our data to another storage provider.

Adios Microsoft.

 

[rhapdog]

You have stated your case quite clearly and reasonably. I'd say 99.9% of those expressing concern over this issue have been so dramatic and emotional without a real clear stand other than they needed a reason to throw a tantrum.

Seeing so much tantrum throwing may be why Microsoft has decided not to address the issue. You can't reason with a 2 year old throwing a tantrum. You have to put that child in time-out and give them time to cool off before you can even talk. Now, I'm not saying this is the way Microsoft is looking at it, and there have been enough legitimate expressions that this should definitely be addressed.

Think about it this way. If a 2 year old acts that way, a parent would probably immediately spank the child. When the public acts that way toward a company, spanking isn't an option. It takes weeks of meetings and talks within the corporate structure to come up with a solution, especially for large corporations.

Should they have responded already? Yes. Are they capable of moving fast enough as a corporation to have responded? I doubt it. Will they ever respond? Only time will tell.

As for me, I need Office 365. I don't need OneDrive. I'm using a meager 8GB of storage right now, and that can easily be pruned down to under 100MB, because I have things on there that don't need to be. I keep my backups offline. Therefore, the OneDrive fiasco isn't an issue for me personally. The use of Office, however, is something I need.

I can't help but agree, however, with your stance. I hope Microsoft is listening. I also hope people replying in this thread will keep things civil, as you have.

 

[eseerc]

I've been following a few different message board/forums very closely on this issue. I agree that there is a lot of people complaining over the reduction in the free tier. As far as I'm concerned if it's free, there is not a lot of room to complain. Truth be told, my family is an Apple hardware family but have always utilized Microsoft products (OneDrive, Office 365, Outlook.com, Bing) for our associated needs.

Respectfully, I disagree with your position that Microsoft is not capable of moving fast enough as a company to have responded already. Within a simple 140 character post on Twitter, Satya Nadella could have simply posted "Hey @OneDrive customers.... we hear you and will be addressing you soon". Unfortunately, we are not given that courtesy.

My storage needs are also meager with about 35GB total. I have dabbled in Microsoft hardware a little bit (briefly owning a Surface 3) and have been waiting for the release of the new Lumias to determine if I would like to try a full fledged hardware switch. In the end, it boils down to a matter of principle and trust for me and I simply can't trust Microsoft right now.

This move potentially begins a slippery slope, where will the rash decisions end to appease stockholders? What other "free" services could see drastic changes/reductions? Bing Rewards? Office Online? OneNote?

 

[rhapdog]

In the end, it boils down to a matter of principle and trust for me and I simply can't trust Microsoft right now.

I don't trust any corporation. Period. Microsoft included. Apple included. Google included. None of them are truly philanthropists out to meet your best interests. They are in business to make money, and they will do it by hook and crook. Apple has proved that many times, as has Google, Microsoft, IBM, AT&T, Verizon, Intel, Qualcomm, Lenovo, well, you get the idea. They have all shafted their customers at one time or another, and many got where they are today by shafting the competition. It's what they do.

I don't trust Walmart. I still shop there. That's all I'm saying. I'm not trying to start an argument, but possibly open up a new angle to look at things.

Now, if this were a Pastor at a church betraying the trust of the congregation, then, yeah, by all means leave the church.

If this were a hot dog vendor and you found out they use real dogs for the meat, then by all means, stop buying from them.

If you're upset because a corporation lied about why they did something, well, it's your prerogative to not do business with them. If you do your research about every company you do business with, though, you won't do business with anyone for long. That's a sad fact, I'm afraid. There are VERY FEW companies that are really worth doing business with, and they are generally small shops, not large corporations.

In the end, Microsoft has probably not responded because they believe, rightly or wrongly, that their initial announcement is all the explanation needed. They may also believe that the whole thing will blow over in time and be forgotten. Only time will tell.

 

[tgp]

I don't trust any corporation. Period. Microsoft included. Apple included. Google included. None of them are truly philanthropists out to meet your best interests. They are in business to make money, and they will do it by hook and crook. Apple has proved that many times, as has Google, Microsoft, IBM, AT&T, Verizon, Intel, Qualcomm, Lenovo, well, you get the idea. They have all shafted their customers at one time or another, and many got where they are today by shafting the competition. It's what they do.

I don't trust Walmart. I still shop there. That's all I'm saying. I'm not trying to start an argument, but possibly open up a new angle to look at things.

Now, if this were a Pastor at a church betraying the trust of the congregation, then, yeah, by all means leave the church.

If this were a hot dog vendor and you found out they use real dogs for the meat, then by all means, stop buying from them.

If you're upset because a corporation lied about why they did something, well, it's your prerogative to not do business with them. If you do your research about every company you do business with, though, you won't do business with anyone for long. That's a sad fact, I'm afraid. There are VERY FEW companies that are really worth doing business with, and they are generally small shops, not large corporations.

In the end, Microsoft has probably not responded because they believe, rightly or wrongly, that their initial announcement is all the explanation needed. They may also believe that the whole thing will blow over in time and be forgotten. Only time will tell.

Good grief man, you nailed it 110%! :angel:

 

[eseerc]

I don't trust Walmart. I still shop there.

Perhaps "trust" wasn't the right term for me to use, although we are starting to miss the forest for the trees....

Imagine the next time you go to shop at Wal Mart, a big fat sign in the doorway reads "All Wal-Marts are now Sams' Club and require a membership in order to enter and shop. This policy change is due to an extremely small number (less than 1/10 of a percent) of customers who grossly took advantage of our everyday low prices." This is exactly what Microsoft did with OneDrive.

Fortunately for Microsoft, their market share with Office is the only reason they are able to execute this move with OneDrive in the manner they chose. In the above scenario, a consumer would likely go next door to Target to shop instead of paying to shop at Wal Mart. Wal Mart would quickly go out of business. In OneDrive/Office's case, there is no readily equivalent **and** widely accepted alternative to Office for consumers to use, especially the non-technical ones.Without the mass reliance on Office, Microsoft would have never been able to execute the changes to OneDrive. Regardless of someone's choice in cloud storage, the need for Office will likely still exist for many customers and Microsoft will continue to cash the check for each Office subscription.

 

[Reflexx]

You have stated your case quite clearly and reasonably. I'd say 99.9% of those expressing concern over this issue have been so dramatic and emotional without a real clear stand other than they needed a reason to throw a tantrum.

Seeing so much tantrum throwing may be why Microsoft has decided not to address the issue. You can't reason with a 2 year old throwing a tantrum. You have to put that child in time-out and give them time to cool off before you can even talk. Now, I'm not saying this is the way Microsoft is looking at it, and there have been enough legitimate expressions that this should definitely be addressed.

Think about it this way. If a 2 year old acts that way, a parent would probably immediately spank the child. When the public acts that way toward a company, spanking isn't an option. It takes weeks of meetings and talks within the corporate structure to come up with a solution, especially for large corporations.

Should they have responded already? Yes. Are they capable of moving fast enough as a corporation to have responded? I doubt it. Will they ever respond? Only time will tell.

As for me, I need Office 365. I don't need OneDrive. I'm using a meager 8GB of storage right now, and that can easily be pruned down to under 100MB, because I have things on there that don't need to be. I keep my backups offline. Therefore, the OneDrive fiasco isn't an issue for me personally. The use of Office, however, is something I need.

I can't help but agree, however, with your stance. I hope Microsoft is listening. I also hope people replying in this thread will keep things civil, as you have.

Just my opinion. But your exaggerated characterization of "99.9% of people with concerns being 2yr olds throwing tantrums" is the opposite of civil. It's not only incorrect, but it's direct insult on the users.

 

[rhapdog]

Just my opinion. But your exaggerated characterization of "99.9% of people with concerns being 2yr olds throwing tantrums" is the opposite of civil. It's not only incorrect, but it's direct insult on the users.

Is it an insult? Not meant to be. Just an observation and my honest opinion of what I see.

I never called anyone a "2 year old throwing a tantrum." I simply explained how parents handle that situation, and why a corporation might not want to deal with people who are acting in a way that closely resembles it. If you've honestly read through the posts about it objectively, then it would be difficult to come to a different conclusion. There are few that express themselves as well as this topic.

Let's get back to the topic, please.
I don't want to get in trouble from the moderators for

 

[920Walker]

Losing Office 365, as an Office user, would be a huge inconvenience no matter if I was unaffected by the storage change. Losing OneDrive would also be a huge inconvenience, as a MS device user.

 

[Reflexx]

Is it an insult? Not meant to be. Just an observation and my honest opinion of what I see.

I never called anyone a "2 year old throwing a tantrum." I simply explained how parents handle that situation, and why a corporation might not want to deal with people who are acting in a way that closely resembles it. If you've honestly read through the posts about it objectively, then it would be difficult to come to a different conclusion. There are few that express themselves as well as this topic.

Let's get back to the topic, please.
I don't want to get in trouble from the moderators for View attachment 116056

I'm not sure what you expected to happen when you label 99.9% of people like that.

I'd say 99.9% of those expressing concern over this issue have been so dramatic and emotional without a real clear stand other than they needed a reason to throw a tantrum.

I agree we should stick to the topic. I'd like to. But maybe just be a little more careful with how you're labeling people because it's hard to stick to the topic if someone says that 99.9% of people that agree with you cannot be reasoned with and are just throwing a tantrum.

Otherwise staying on topic means ignoring 99.9% of the people who disagree with you on the topic.

 

[Reflexx]

I don't trust any corporation. Period. Microsoft included. Apple included. Google included. None of them are truly philanthropists out to meet your best interests. They are in business to make money, and they will do it by hook and crook. Apple has proved that many times, as has Google, Microsoft, IBM, AT&T, Verizon, Intel, Qualcomm, Lenovo, well, you get the idea. They have all shafted their customers at one time or another, and many got where they are today by shafting the competition. It's what they do.

I don't trust Walmart. I still shop there. That's all I'm saying. I'm not trying to start an argument, but possibly open up a new angle to look at things.

Now, if this were a Pastor at a church betraying the trust of the congregation, then, yeah, by all means leave the church.

If this were a hot dog vendor and you found out they use real dogs for the meat, then by all means, stop buying from them.

If you're upset because a corporation lied about why they did something, well, it's your prerogative to not do business with them. If you do your research about every company you do business with, though, you won't do business with anyone for long. That's a sad fact, I'm afraid. There are VERY FEW companies that are really worth doing business with, and they are generally small shops, not large corporations.

In the end, Microsoft has probably not responded because they believe, rightly or wrongly, that their initial announcement is all the explanation needed. They may also believe that the whole thing will blow over in time and be forgotten. Only time will tell.

Most corporations have a goal of consumer trust. I'm sure that MS feels that same. They value consumer trust because that trust can directly lead to sales and profit. Sure, it may not be an altruistic reason behind the trust, but trust is still important.

I'd say that almost all of us are intelligent enough to know that MS is a corporation with the goal of making money. But many here feel burned by them right now, and we think that these decisions will have a negative effect on consumer trust.

But one thing MS wants is positive word of mouth. They want consumers to sing their praises.

We want to see Windows Phone succeed, and we've been out there singing its praises and getting people to try it. Now it seems like MS's actions have made us all look untrustworthy for getting people on to this platform.

 

[rhapdog]

if someone says that 99.9% of people that agree with you cannot be reasoned with and are just throwing a tantrum.

Wow. Great at misquoting people, aren't we? I never said that people that don't agree can't be reasoned with. OP is an example. We can have an open discussion. I even agree that MS took the wrong turn here. Perhaps you didn't read that part? However, I don't agree with some of the tactics and rhetoric people have resorted to.

Things like, "WTF! B***es can't do that to me! I paid for my d*** phone! Somebody kill those b******** at M$!"
Yeah, I've seen that more than you realize.

That is the type of language can't be reasoned with. That is a tantrum.

Even without the language, a large percentage of people were venting anger and being abusive. Language like, "What the h*** is wrong with you MS?" just isn't a constructive way to work through a situation.

 

[Reflexx]

Wow. Great at misquoting people, aren't we? I never said that people that don't agree can't be reasoned with. OP is an example. We can have an open discussion. I even agree that MS took the wrong turn here. Perhaps you didn't read that part? However, I don't agree with some of the tactics and rhetoric people have resorted to.

Things like, "WTF! B***es can't do that to me! I paid for my d*** phone! Somebody kill those b******** at M$!"
Yeah, I've seen that more than you realize.

That is the type of language can't be reasoned with. That is a tantrum.

Even without the language, a large percentage of people were venting anger and being abusive. Language like, "What the h*** is wrong with you MS?" just isn't a constructive way to work through a situation.

I've been in the threads that discuss this a lot. It's FAR from 99.9% of people like you insinuated.

I don't think it's reading you wrong if you imply that you can have a decent discussion with .1% of people.

And while you may agree with me on some points, I'm not really addressing that. I'm just saying that the way you framed it is not conducive for positive discussion, and as an Ambassador here I think you should be an example for a higher standard of discourse.

 

[eseerc]

To reel in this thread a little bit, I think everyone can be in agreement that Microsoft customers are owed SOME kind of response on this issue. To blatantly ignore this many upset customers (warranted or not) would just further damage the relationship with consumers. Hell, even someone saying "We're sorry you're upset, but this is our new policy" would be better than ignoring thousands of people.

 

[rhapdog]

Perhaps "trust" wasn't the right term for me to use, although we are starting to miss the forest for the trees....

Imagine the next time you go to shop at Wal Mart, a big fat sign in the doorway reads "All Wal-Marts are now Sams' Club and require a membership in order to enter and shop. This policy change is due to an extremely small number (less than 1/10 of a percent) of customers who grossly took advantage of our everyday low prices." This is exactly what Microsoft did with OneDrive.

Fortunately for Microsoft, their market share with Office is the only reason they are able to execute this move with OneDrive in the manner they chose. In the above scenario, a consumer would likely go next door to Target to shop instead of paying to shop at Wal Mart. Wal Mart would quickly go out of business. In OneDrive/Office's case, there is no readily equivalent **and** widely accepted alternative to Office for consumers to use, especially the non-technical ones.Without the mass reliance on Office, Microsoft would have never been able to execute the changes to OneDrive. Regardless of someone's choice in cloud storage, the need for Office will likely still exist for many customers and Microsoft will continue to cash the check for each Office subscription.

Understandable. One key difference is that with Walmart, I have no choice but to continue to shop there for some of my needs simply because in my small town there is no place else to go without driving for an hour and spending $25 or more in gas to get somewhere else. The Sam's Club membership is cheaper and easier than the drive. I'd be over a rock and a hard place. With OneDrive, there are choices in online storage. Some may not be as nice, some may be nicer. But at least we do have a choice to shop around. That's my advice. If you don't like where you shop, find a new one if it is available.

Losing Office 365, as an Office user, would be a huge inconvenience no matter if I was unaffected by the storage change. Losing OneDrive would also be a huge inconvenience, as a MS device user.

That's me. I'm not in it for the OneDrive. I'm in it for the Office. I just can't do without it, so I gotta have it.

 

[RumoredNow]

[INFO]99.9% is a common hyperbole we see in use all over the internet and in everyday speech during discussions.

I'm not sure it should ever be taken as being targeted at a reader secifically or as being upheld as a valid statistic.

It is a rhetorical tool.

This issue should be considered address by both sides and we should all move on to the topic at hand rather than focusing on language used.[/INFO]

 

[rhapdog]

To reel in this thread a little bit, I think everyone can be in agreement that Microsoft customers are owed SOME kind of response on this issue. To blatantly ignore this many upset customers (warranted or not) would just further damage the relationship with consumers. Hell, even someone saying "We're sorry you're upset, but this is our new policy" would be better than ignoring thousands of people.

Spot on!

 

[Wbutchart1]

I'm not sure what you expected to happen when you label 99.9% of people like that.


I agree we should stick to the topic. I'd like to. But maybe just be a little more careful with how you're labeling people because it's hard to stick to the topic if someone says that 99.9% of people that agree with you cannot be reasoned with and are just throwing a tantrum.

Otherwise staying on topic means ignoring 99.9% of the people who disagree with you on the topic.

In a position of conflict an person goes into one of three modes, parent where they feel responsible, adult where there is rational dialogue or child and tantrum. It is entirely right to say folks are in tantrum mode for the rational is we are throwing our toys out the pram until we get what we want, that's child mode, not adult. So the observation is completely fair. I guess my question is why you are so keen to defend it....?

 

[Muessig]

Rather than continue to argue with each other, which believe you me is really entertaining, I'm going to close this here now. The OP wanted to vent, it happened, let's move on.