[HN Gopher] Microsoft in court for allegedly misleading Australi...
___________________________________________________________________
Microsoft in court for allegedly misleading Australians over 365
subscriptions
Author : edwinjm
Score : 224 points
Date : 2025-10-27 14:54 UTC (8 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.accc.gov.au)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.accc.gov.au)
| misswaterfairy wrote:
| Awesome that the ACCC, Australia's consumer watchdog, is taking
| this up.
|
| It's really shitty that companies believe they can pull these
| stunts and get away with it.
| lysp wrote:
| The ACCC is actually quite switched on to any misleading
| conduct.
|
| They have gone after Airbnb / Airlines / Hotel Booking /
| Concert Tickets - for misleading conduct.
|
| Especially business that use drip pricing (adding compulsory
| hidden fees later) or misleading prices like in the Microsoft
| case.
|
| Anything sneaky - they're normally right on to it.
| yen223 wrote:
| I recently learned this, but the reason Steam offers 2-hour
| no-questions-asked full refunds was partially because of a
| lawsuit by the ACCC
| Qem wrote:
| > "Following a detailed investigation, the ACCC alleges that
| Microsoft deliberately hit this third option, to retain the old
| plan at the old price, in order to increase the uptake of Copilot
| and the increased revenue from the Copilot integrated plans,"
| ACCC chair Gina Cass-Gottlieb said.
|
| The product is so good that they need to scam people into buying
| it.
| xaxaxb wrote:
| Use LibreOffice on Windows. Microsoft Office used to come bundled
| with Windows, as an office suite. Now it's a subscription
| product. This is a bad decision; shows how Microsoft can't keep
| it up together. Even if it had been one-time purchase with LTS
| updates and everything, just like it used to, one could possible
| think of buying it. But, $100/year for personal use?? What's so
| great about MS Office that LibreOffice can't do?? Get
| LibreOffice, even if you use Windows.
| general1465 wrote:
| Excel
| xaxaxb wrote:
| At consumer-level, I believe LibreCalc should be enough. But
| yes, if you're in an org doing Excel-fu, you'd already get
| licensed access.
| TiredOfLife wrote:
| > Microsoft Office used to come bundled with Windows, as an
| office suite.
|
| Never was. You probably got it installed by friendly it guy or
| the store was just installing pirated versions.
|
| > Now it's a subscription product.
|
| There is also pay once version. https://www.microsoft.com/en-
| us/microsoft-365/p/office-home-...
|
| > But, $100/year for personal use??
|
| The subscription comes with 1TB of OneDrive storage. Look up
| how much 1TB of storage costs usually
|
| > What's so great about MS Office that LibreOffice can't do??
|
| Work with spreadsheets more complicated than two cells.
| lelanthran wrote:
| >> What's so great about MS Office that LibreOffice can't
| do??
|
| > Work with spreadsheets more complicated than two cells.
|
| I use both daily. You're misrepresenting what LibreOffice can
| do; 99% of the people I see using excel are using the exact
| same 20% of its capabilities.
|
| Quick-n-Dirty database that they can update during sales
| meetings and create charts from. You think another
| spreadsheet can't do that?
| zerosizedweasle wrote:
| I feel like tech companies are sparing no shenanigans to be able
| to say people are paying for AI. Shouldn't it sell itself if it
| is as world changing (in it's current form) as people claim?
| noir_lord wrote:
| Shhh - We aren't supposed to point out that the 4 Emperors of
| the Apocalypse are naked.
| jsheard wrote:
| https://www.perspectives.plus/p/microsoft-365-copilot-commer...
|
| Even after putting their thumb on the scale, the numbers are
| still dismal. Not even a 2% conversion rate.
| mrweasel wrote:
| At what point does someone in management step in and kill of
| the product? 2% should be a pretty clear sign that the
| product is either price entirely wrong, or just not something
| that anyone wants to buy.
|
| Are Microsoft just in to deep at this point? They killed one
| off their flagship brands (Office) in favour of Microsoft 365
| Copilot, shouldn't someone be fired for that decision at this
| point?
|
| I'm looking forward to the books and articles in 10 - 20
| years time, attempting to explain what happened internally at
| Microsoft these past years.
| estimator7292 wrote:
| The cost is already sunk and the only alternative to
| forcibly extracting any profit is to admit they got
| suckered into the hype and burned billions of dollars for
| nothing
| KvanteKat wrote:
| Sure, but the alternative is not really any better: if
| the choice is between being the guy who got it wrong vs.
| being the guy who got it wrong _and_ being the guy who
| persisted in throwing good money after bad, surely the
| former is prefereable. As far as I see, the fact that
| they keep going indicates that they genuinely still
| believe Copilot could pan out and become profittable in
| the long run.
| ulfw wrote:
| I don't even know what Microsoft 365 Copilot means. What
| idiotic branding. 365 means subscription I believe (you pay
| 365 days of the year). But Copilot? Huh? That's just a
| feature
| input_sh wrote:
| Wait until you hear about Microsoft 365 Copilot Chat,
| which is actually a stripped down version of Microsoft
| 365 Copilot!
|
| So, if you're a Microsoft 365 Business user, you now get
| "Microsoft 365 Copilot Chat" for free, which is just a
| standard web interface for interacting with Copilot (not
| to be confused with GitHub's Copilot, which is _also_
| owned by Microsoft, but I digress).
|
| _But_ , if you pay for an upgrade from M365 Copilot Chat
| to M365 Copilot-without-the-chat, then you also get an AI
| button in Microsoft 365 apps (Outlook, Teams, Word...)!
|
| Realistically this shouldn't be a surprise to anyone that
| ever owned or at least considered purchasing an Xbox, or
| even worse ever had to interact with Azure.
| lelanthran wrote:
| > Are Microsoft just in to deep at this point?
|
| Investment-wise, none of the large companies invested in AI
| can afford the bubble to pop.
|
| They're just going to ride the tiger out.
| this_steve_j wrote:
| The marketing has 100% shifted to the creation of workloads
| using "Agents".
|
| Presumably the hyperscalers can begin conflating the number
| of "agents" created with "boring jobs eliminated" and thus
| herald the industrial revolution.
|
| But first: Your subscription price is increasing and now
| includes 5 Agents.
| tencentshill wrote:
| Rebranding Office as Copilot was an easy, sleazy way to gain
| millions of locked-in paid subscribers.
| devsda wrote:
| I don't know how it was during the dot-com bubble, but the
| current AI hype is the biggest "Fake it till you make it"
| operation I've ever seen.
|
| My only worry is about the huge impact on rank and file
| employees when they issue the "we are re-aligning our strategic
| direction/priorities and we are focusing on effective resource
| utilization" pr statement.
| jdgoesmarching wrote:
| Atlassian yanked core Jira Service Manager features into their
| premium plan which, you guessed it, includes AI.
|
| For our company of >30 people this amounted to a ~$7k/mo
| increase.
| mikebonnell wrote:
| Pretty sure Microsoft is going to try and get a settlement. The
| evidence is very clear.
| akulbe wrote:
| Google is doing exactly the same thing. Our monthly rates for
| Workspace went up because of the AI crap we didn't ask for.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| The price went up because the seller was willing to bet enough
| people would keep paying it to more than offset the people who
| stop paying it. The addition of a feature no one wants is just
| marketing to make buyers feel better about having less money.
| trashb wrote:
| I feel like a lot of people don't internalize this.
|
| The features don't matter as long as people put up the price
| for what they require. The job of the salesman/marketing team
| is to bet on a balance that will net the company money. The
| features are just the sales pitch that convince you you need
| the latest and greatest (comparable to a sports car salesman
| selling you the new v8 model instead of the more economical
| v6).
| jeppester wrote:
| It should not be normal that companies are trying to fool their
| customers. I may be wrong, but I feel that dark patterns have
| gotten worse and have become quite normalised.
|
| I'm well aware that companies are not your friends, and they are
| only in it to earn as much money as possible etc. But in the
| ideal world it should never be a consideration to willingly
| deceive your customers. Then something is wrong that needs
| fixing.
| zerosizedweasle wrote:
| If your product is this bad and no one wants to buy it
| normally, maybe you should build a new product.
| estimator7292 wrote:
| But it's so much more profitable for shareholders to force
| users to engage with the shitty product
| givemeethekeys wrote:
| It's much cheaper for execs to buy bundled "it can do
| everything for less!" junk for the peasants.
|
| That and, they're paying for Excel anyway...
| cogman10 wrote:
| Literally the exact reason we ended up with MS teams
| instead of slack.
| wat10000 wrote:
| Even if you have a great product, you'll still get more
| money out of people if you apply some dark patterns like
| this. It's very hard for a company to resist that siren
| call.
| vjvjvjvjghv wrote:
| Making new products is very hard. Just look at the innovation
| output of the tech giants. Compared to the resources they
| have it's pretty pathetic. They are simply out of ideas.
| alex1138 wrote:
| There's no accountability either on a liability - legal, prison
| - level or a personal duty to make sure you Do The Right Thing
| (when, of course, you have a family to feed)
|
| Behavior like what some of the tech giants do (and I don't
| crusade against "big tech" but individual cases are ridiculous)
| wouldn't be justified if you, like, wrote it down on a piece of
| paper and showed it to them, but they get away with it because
| you can just ignore all feedback, you don't have to actually
| answer support tickets from a distance of potentially hundreds
| of miles away (if you acted like that to my face, well, you
| wouldn't dare)
|
| Some are worse than others; some legitimately just do not care
| how much evil they're pumping out into the world
| (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1692122
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42651178)
| tsunamifury wrote:
| Uber, Airbnb and DoorDash are the primary dark pattern users in
| the industry.
|
| I am an executive design leader and all hires from these three
| companies are screened in detail about their honesty level in
| their designs due to how many issues I have with these
| companies training their workers to lie.
|
| If you work for them know that it's a black mark on your
| record.
|
| I have hired two from these companies who literally opened the
| interview with "I want to leave X because they literally are
| lying"
| kenjackson wrote:
| What are examples of their lies?
| noir_lord wrote:
| Welcome to 2025 - Cyberpunk without the cool aesthetics but
| _all_ the downsides.
|
| I realised the last time I was in a major city (I live in a
| village) at night just how close we are, ebikes wizzing around
| with youngish adults wearing corporate logos all over
| themselves while using e-cigs, gangs of others waiting outside
| each restaurant for a pickup.
|
| Straight out the opening of Snowcrash but without the cool car.
|
| We really did invent Torment Nexus from the classic cautionary
| tale "Don't Create The Torment Nexus".
|
| I love computers, I love programming (and have for 35 years), I
| really really am coming to detest larger and larger parts of
| the modern tech scene - consumer tech and the
| Microsoft/Meta/Googles of the world.
| Asmod4n wrote:
| Thank luck we aren't in the Warhammer 40k universe yet.
| noir_lord wrote:
| If anything we'd be more likely to open a portal to hell
| for Argent Energy.
|
| `Meta today announced a strategic partnership with Union
| Aerospace Corporation - the deal will give Meta access to
| UAC's energy network powering the next revolution in AI.`
| wat10000 wrote:
| We thought computers were different. That freedom of
| information would throw off the shackles of the old order and
| usher in a new era of human flourishing.
|
| Turns out computers weren't different at all, they just
| hadn't caught the full attention of government and business
| yet.
| matheusmoreira wrote:
| I think I became depressed because of this. I used to be so
| enthusiastic about computers. We had the freedom to do
| anything we wanted. Now they're locking everything down,
| destroying everything the word "hacker" ever stood for. I'm
| watching it happen in real time. It's heart breaking.
|
| Computers are world changing technology. They are so
| powerful they could defeat police, judges, governments,
| militaries. Left unchecked, they could wipe out entire
| segments of the global economy. They could literally
| reshape the world. The powers that be cannot tolerate it.
| tremon wrote:
| Computers _are_ different, because of zero-cost copying. It
| 's much easier to achieve a digital monopoly than with
| physical-world products. That should also mean that
| antitrust enforcement should be _stronger_ on software
| companies, and the scope of enforcement should be broader.
| Yeul wrote:
| The things companies can get away with in America is insane.
| Amazon really feels like Weyland-Yutani.
| noir_lord wrote:
| I'm not in the US so I suspect some of it is slightly
| blunted by generally stronger worker protections but Amazon
| has had multiple issues here as well and we still have the
| "gig economy" stuff just the same.
|
| It's not a good direction things are trending.
| matheusmoreira wrote:
| So when is Johnny Silverhand gonna show up? He's over two
| years late by now...
| natebc wrote:
| The other Cyberpunk. Not that it's any better but we for
| sure won't have Judy there to save our asses.
| thewebguyd wrote:
| You can thank Friedman for that with the whole "The social
| responsibility of business is to increase profits" mindset and
| the Dodge vs. Ford court case that ruled Ford had to operate
| his company in the interests of its shareholders above all
| else.
|
| We need to end shareholder primacy and have stronger antitrust
| enforcement.
| itopaloglu83 wrote:
| Leaving the markets uncontrolled is the problem. Fine the
| hell of them for acting anti-consumer and they will quickly
| align themselves with the realities.
| ares623 wrote:
| Or just lobby harder tbh
| plorg wrote:
| Better yet, pursue structural remedies. Break up or shut
| down bad actors.
| themafia wrote:
| Friedman told people what they wanted to hear.
|
| Unsurprisingly Friedman was lauded and rewarded for this
| behavior.
| kevin_thibedeau wrote:
| The interests of the shareholders doesn't mean extract all
| profit immediately.
| AnthonyMouse wrote:
| > the Dodge vs. Ford court case that ruled Ford had to
| operate his company in the interests of its shareholders
| above all else.
|
| That case is from _1919_ and it doesn 't say what most people
| think it says.
|
| The problem there was that Ford was trying to claim he could
| do whatever he wants because he has the most votes, minority
| shareholders be damned. In practice what companies do now is
| that they do whatever they want and come up with some
| explanation for why it's in the interest of the shareholders,
| e.g. charitable donations are tax deductions and strengthen
| the company's brand with customers, instead of explicitly
| telling the other shareholders to eat sand.
|
| The real problem with modern companies is diffuse ownership.
| You invest your retirement money in some fund, the fund is
| the thing that actually elects the board and what the fund
| wants is to increase profits, and typically short-term
| profits at that, so they elect a board to do it and that's
| what happens. It's not because the law _requires_ them to do
| that, it 's because that's the result of that incentive
| structure. And then all the companies that you own as a
| shareholder are out there screwing you over by double when
| you're their customer.
|
| Whereas if you have a company owned and operated by the same
| people, then they can say "hey wait a minute, this is only
| going to increase short-term profits by a small amount and
| it's going to make everyone hate us, maybe we shouldn't do
| it?" Which is the thing that's missing from large publicly-
| traded companies.
|
| > stronger antitrust enforcement
|
| This is the other thing that's missing. Even if companies are
| trying to screw you, if they have a lot of competition then
| they can't, because you'd just switch to one that isn't. But
| now try that in a market where there are only two incumbents
| and they're both content to pick your pocket as long as the
| other one is doing the same.
| giancarlostoro wrote:
| I call it Marketing Driven development. Its also responsible
| for a drop in higher quality software as business people have
| to justify their jobs and push developers off maintenance
| tickets that are "low priority" items but still impact enough
| customers that it should be embarrassing.
| vjvjvjvjghv wrote:
| There aren't enough opportunities to make the profits they need
| to keep the stock price up in an ethical manner. So they have
| to use dark patterns. It will keep getting worse with these
| trillion dollar behemoths having to maintain their growth
| rates. Ads everywhere. AI will become more and more of a tool
| for manipulation.
| themafia wrote:
| > and have become quite normalised.
|
| Enforcement agencies are asleep at the switch. Without any
| pressure to constrain them then these major corporations will
| stop at nothing.
|
| > it should never be a consideration to willingly deceive your
| customers.
|
| They don't see it that way. They just see it as a new profit
| stream that they're daring enough to capture.
| jbombadil wrote:
| Looks like Microsoft is taking a page out of the cable companies'
| playbook. Next up, there will be "discounted" Copilot 365 or
| whatever: a 2 year contract with the "promotional price" locked
| in and a penalty fee for cancelling early.
| tzs wrote:
| They have switched people to the plan with Copilot in the US too.
| I just checked and next renewal is set for the $99 plan with
| Copilot instead of the $69 plan I had been on.
|
| I remember some email from them saying the Copilot was now on my
| plan, but I don't recall anything saying that this was actually a
| different, more expansive plan, or that Copilot was just a trial
| and the plan would switch until I took action, or anything like
| that.
|
| Here's how to get back to your old plan:
|
| * find the Services & Subscriptions page on your account and
| select Manage.
|
| * click "Cancel Subscription".
|
| * On the page that brings up there will be an option to switch to
| a different plan. That should have the "Personal Classic" plan.
| There's also "Family Classic" for people that want the family
| plan without Copilot.
|
| Another way that some have reported works is to simply turn off
| recurring billing. That then sometimes triggers an offer to
| switch plans that includes the Classic plans.
| thehoff wrote:
| Thanks, just did this on our family plan.
| inquirerGeneral wrote:
| They also added more to the 365 Family Manager family premium
| plan though -- they ended Copilot Pro as that was an add-on
| that made no sense when people already had to juggle the other
| two copilots that are finally "settling in".
|
| Good move there, at least.
|
| > https://www.linkedin.com/posts/nickdc_copilot-pro-is-no-
| more...
|
| > https://www.linkedin.com/posts/nickdc_copilot-pro-is-no-
| more...
| EvanAnderson wrote:
| Thank you. This workflow worked for my US account just fine,
| though my account just said "Subscriptions" rather "Services &
| Subscriptions".
|
| My plan renewed back in May at the new rate. Microsoft did not
| advertise that there was any way to remain with the "Classic"
| plan. I've also never used the Copilot "features". I'd
| absolutely sign-on to a class action suit to get some money
| back. Even if it ends up just enriching the attorneys (which
| class actions inevitably do) Microsoft needs as much
| "correction" about this behavior as possible.
| adrr wrote:
| At least they are putting the linkedin product people to good
| use.
| bxparks wrote:
| Yes, it was infuriating.
|
| In addition to the Classic option that is shown only after
| hitting "Cancel", they also had a secret "Microsoft 365 Basic"
| option for $20/year. It includes no Office products, but
| provides 100 GB of OneDrive. Which is all I needed. So
| Microsoft is getting $20/year from me that they don't deserve.
|
| Why do I pay them even $20/year? It's insurance against the
| same kind of BS from Google. I back up my Google Drive to
| OneDrive.
| deepspace wrote:
| I tried this and the only options I got were CAD 101 for the
| family subscription with AI and CAD 109 for the Classic one
| without AI ! ?
| johnmw wrote:
| Just another heads up - I switched to Family Classic and when
| it renewed it dropped all access to my family members. I wasn't
| aware it would do that and had a family member unable to use
| their "full" email account until I had worked it out and was
| able to re-link them.
| nephrite wrote:
| It is strange that MS added third option but lied that there was
| not. They could just not include it, could they?
| nashashmi wrote:
| You can still do the same now. Go to cancellation and be offered
| a package without AI.
| Liquix wrote:
| or cancel your subscription. you would not continue to
| patronize a restaurant that intentionally put an extra charge
| on your bill to make themselves more money. why continue to pay
| M$ after they deliberately tried to trick you to squeeze out
| more profit?
| moi2388 wrote:
| Huh, I just noticed I had also been switched. Nice, just switched
| back. F*ck off with the AI bullshit already, Microsoft.
| sandworm101 wrote:
| Every bad day for Microsoft is another great day for Linux.
|
| You have choices. Make them.
| aquafox wrote:
| I once bought an Office 2016 license and when I installed it this
| year on a new laptop, it turned itself into a trimmed down O365.
| After the first Office update, I got a non-closable ad next to my
| Excel spreadsheet to upgrade to a full O365. Even more, I was
| only able to save files to OneDrive and not locally. That was not
| what I originally paid for!
| Tepix wrote:
| It's fraud. Plain and simple.
| amlib wrote:
| Software as a Service is fraud
| paganel wrote:
| > I was only able to save files to OneDrive and not locally.
|
| I find this very infuriating, and I've stopped using MS for
| more than 10 years now. They used to be a proper software
| company, with their flows, of course, but quite professional in
| the great scheme of things. But what you're describing goes
| against everything that I've valued as a computer programmer
| when I entered this field of work ~20 years ago.
| stevesimmons wrote:
| I am in the UK.
|
| I got Microsoft's emails, did not want Microsoft's forced
| imposition of Copilot in my Office subscription (regardless of
| price), found the classic option mentioned in online forums, and
| managed to switch to it just before my renewal.
|
| My 89 year old aunt on the other hand got stung for the unwanted
| forced upgrade. I had to call Microsoft, complained about them
| unfairly exploiting vulnerable customers, and eventually got a
| downgrade and the difference refunded.
|
| What really annoys me about this - quite apart from the initial
| deception/misrepresentation - is I now expect Microsoft to pull
| similar tricks in future. A real disincentive to sign up to any
| other 'value-added' services.
|
| Why make subscriptions so full of traps that consumers end up
| hating you? (Yes, I know, so some GM can hit this quarter's
| bonus)
|
| That reminds me, having just cancelled Spotify (due to their
| price rise), Disney+ is next on the list. Maybe Netflix too.
| sireat wrote:
| This 30 Euro jump in Europe was a kick in the pants for me.
|
| Even though it is still a relatively good deal for a Family Plan
| (compared to say Google Drive or Dropbox) for OneDrive, I finally
| dropped my Microsoft 365 Family plan.
|
| The final straw was that the Copilot was completely unhelpful and
| hallucinated features Office portal does not have.
| loeg wrote:
| Semi tangential, but I'm amazed there isn't more uproar over what
| Microsoft is doing with Windows 10 <-> 11 and devices that don't
| have hardware TPM. Just completely fucking their user base, to
| what end? A one-time bump in sales for hardware partners?
| mythrwy wrote:
| They have been screwing over their user base for a long time
| though incrementally.
| loeg wrote:
| Things were pretty good for like a decade, from Windows 7
| through most of 10!
| iptq wrote:
| The $50 million punishment feels so insubstantial to Microsoft
| that they probably wouldn't even think twice before doing similar
| things again or worse. Only things that could threaten the bottom
| line would actually make companies reconsider.
| mattmanser wrote:
| No expert, but these fines are usually exponential. Usually
| they start with a slap on the wrist of $100,000s, then climb to
| the millions.
|
| That the opening figure is so high it's clear that if MS ever
| do it again the fine will be in the billions.
|
| So you might even say it's actually a moderately strong
| statement by the Australian government that they're not playing
| around.
| inejge wrote:
| > The $50 million punishment feels so insubstantial
|
| It's potentially quite a bit more. TFA mentions another two
| penalties: "three times the total benefits that have been
| obtained and are reasonably attributable" (~2.5 million
| customers times $40+ for the difference in subscrptions times
| three is $300 million), or "30 per cent of the corporation's
| adjusted turnover during the breach turnover period" if the
| preceding can't be reasonably calculated (I'm not going to dig
| through Microsoft's financial statements, but it's probably
| substantial.) The greatest of three is taken.
|
| If you still think it's pocket change, the point of fines is
| not to bankrupt the company, but to lead them to less shitty
| behavior by disincentivizing the alternative. It takes a
| persistent effort and time.
| stevenkkim wrote:
| This happened to me in the U.S. too. Family plan went from $99/yr
| to $129/yr. I was going to just going to resentfully accept this,
| when I just got annoyed and said, "you know what? we don't use
| word and excel enough to justify this and there are definitely
| alternatives." Only when I went to cancel did I find out that
| they tried to force me onto the $129 "with AI" plan (who actually
| thinks AI features are worth anything? I've never used them in
| office or really any MS product) and that the "without AI" plan
| is still $99.
|
| I decided to cancel anyway because I was still resentful.
|
| Thing is, either $99 or $129 for the Family plan is actually
| quite reasonable, our family has 5 users. I just don't like
| giving money to deceitful or disrespectful companies.
|
| If Microsoft had just kept the pricing the same as they had for
| many years, I almost certainly would have re-subscribed.
| giancarlostoro wrote:
| The worst part is it literally costs them the same to tack on
| AI they are just hiking the price in order to generate more
| revenue. Running Word locally does not cost them more.
| kenjackson wrote:
| Actually I doubt that's true. There is a cost to running AI
| in the cloud (I assume its not run locally).
| stevenkkim wrote:
| Yeah, I'm pretty sure it's in the cloud and not local.
| Still useless to me.
|
| I use AI all the time when coding (very useful) and ChatGPT
| in general is also very useful. Never found Windows co-
| pilot or Office co-pilot useful for anything.
| dmix wrote:
| > Family plan went from $99/yr to $129/yr.
|
| How did you find out it was $30 more? Did they email you?
| stevenkkim wrote:
| Yes, here's the email. No mention of the $99 no-AI option.
|
| Thank you for being a valued Microsoft 365 subscriber. To
| reflect the value we've added over the past decade, address
| rising costs, and enable us to continue delivering new
| innovations, we're increasing the price of your subscription.
|
| Effective February 14, 2025, the price for Microsoft 365
| Family subscriptions will increase from USD 99.99* per year
| to USD 129.99* per year. To continue with the new price, no
| action is needed--your payment method on file will be
| automatically charged. To make changes to your subscription
| plan or turn off recurring billing, visit your Microsoft
| account at least two days before your next billing date.
|
| By maintaining your subscription, you'll enjoy secure cloud
| storage, advanced security for your data and devices, and
| cutting-edge AI-powered features, along with all your other
| subscription benefits. Thank you for choosing Microsoft.
|
| Learn more about how to manage your subscription, including
| how to cancel and switch your subscription.
|
| * Subscription prices listed do not include any discounts,
| promotions, or special offers that may be available.
| EvanAnderson wrote:
| Same email here. My plan renewed in May. Absolutely no
| advertising that I could keep my "classic" plan. It seemed
| like the only choice was $129 or the highway.
|
| I just did the steps described in[0] to convert back to the
| "Classic" plan. Microsoft says my plan will renew in May
| for $99, but I'm not getting the $15 of the $30 I was
| forced into paying in May back. I've never used any of the
| Copilot "features". I'd rather have my renewal discounted
| by $15 to $30.
|
| As I said in another comment: We need a US class action. It
| will only enrich the lawyers but it might serve as some
| type of deterrent to Microsoft. Maybe. Probably not.
|
| [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45722444
| dmix wrote:
| Netflix and Spotify also auto bump the prices even for
| auto-renewal. I believe the issue here is that Microsoft
| created a new pricing category while keeping the $99 one,
| but bumped everyone to the new one. That is where it gets
| sketchy.
|
| If they eliminated the $99 one then it might be a
| nothingburger.
|
| Might be class action worthy.
| jay_kyburz wrote:
| I had to update my credit card details on Dropbox, but the
| website it so badly designed, I almost just canceled. I'm not
| sure if its dark patterns or incompetence.
|
| I _suspect_ they switched me from annual billing to monthly
| while I was updating, but the support chat guy said I was still
| annual. If it turns out he was wrong, I'm out.
| stevenkkim wrote:
| I suspect Dropbox doesn't care about b2c customers anymore...
| only b2b
| matheusmoreira wrote:
| So... How's Libre Office these days?
| Nicook wrote:
| works well enough for me!
| octaane wrote:
| Works really well! Switched over to them earlier this year,
| dropped Microsoft suite entirely, and it works just fine.
| mallets wrote:
| Have the family plan prepaid for 2 years, mostly for the 1TB
| OneDrive. The new plans are almost double the cost here, hope
| this AI bundling dies a painful death by then. Though that
| doesn't guarantee price cuts I guess.
| chasd00 wrote:
| So Microsoft can change the terms of a contract between you and
| it without your approval? That's ...odd.
| zahlman wrote:
| Did anyone else look at the submission headline and think that
| was an oddly specific number of subscriptions?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-10-27 23:01 UTC)