TL;DR: 20th of July (4 days time)
Not a massive fan of "...all versions of Visual Studio 2013 and 2015 will require you to sign in using a Microsoft account..." though. [source: from an email]
Not a massive fan of "...all versions of Visual Studio 2013 and 2015 will require you to sign in using a Microsoft account..." though. [source: from an email]
OK, MS wants our data. So do Apple, Google, FB. No news. But they already have everything: The user (MS account) when downloading VS. The id of the copy (serial number or whatever), all kind of information related to the Windows Version, the currently logged in user, machine data, ... VS or Windows can collect usage data, etc.
Why do they want me to sign in VS? They already have it all, don't they?
Or are there simpler (less paranoid :-)) reasons?
Simply to assert their self-assigned rights over everything that you write, think and do and to line up ready to easily collect the drip feed of cash they want from everyone.
For this they trade you semi-functional software, vague promises that are usually broken and marketing hype.
That's how all "ecosystems" work.
Which is why I'm not in one for my personal stuff. At work however, they're lining up like good cows for the next milking. They've forgotten that SQL 2014 cost and the Azure price rise already...
Microsoft are trying to move away from boxed software and into software as a service. Linking everything into your MSDN account is one way to "tick" that box.
In 2013 at least, there is a "enter serial" button (forget the exact wording) and you can simply grab a ye' olde serial from your MSDN account and plop it in. But doing so breaks TFS Online (since that relies on your Microsoft Account/MSDN Account for permissions to access projects).
But if you'd prefer not to use TFS Online then just use GitHub. Visual Studio supports it. Heck GitHub even released a funky extension to make it just that much easier (and that too requires you to login to an account).
You don't need to sign in if you specify a retail product key [1].
[1] http://sanderstechnology.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/imag...
Considering the backlash they got with always-connected XBOX ONE and their subsequent backpedaling[1] after the criticism... plus the fact that many government programmers' computers cannot connect to the public internet, that type of requirement seems draconian. Does MS expect government programmers with security clearances not to be customers of VS2015?
Going forward, you will need to sign in to Visual Studio 2013 and 2015 with the Microsoft account associated with your active MSDN subscription through BizSpark.
BIZSPARK GRADUATION CHANGES: BizSpark members who complete the graduation process after 3 years in the program can keep most of the software downloaded through the program. However, because all versions of Visual Studio 2013 and 2015 will require you to sign in using a Microsoft account associated with an active MSDN subscription, startups will need to renew their MSDN subscriptions for each user running Visual Studio after graduation. BizSpark members have access to discounted MSDN subscriptions as part of their Graduation Offers. If you decide not to renew your MSDN subscriptions after graduation, you can still use one of these free editions: Visual Studio Community and Visual Studio Code.
If you have already downloaded Visual Studio 2013 and save your product key prior to the release of Visual Studio 2015 on July 20, you will be able to continue using Visual Studio 2013 after you graduate. You can find more information about graduation here.
So if you grab a license key before July 20th for VS2013, you can keep using it after your MSDN expires, but you can't keep using VS2015.
Maybe this is just Bizspark though, and doesn't apply to normal MSDN subscriptions.
Yes, the BizSpark situation would be understandable. In that case, dev teams of startup companies are getting 3 years of free (or $100?) Microsoft software. It is to be expected for some quid pro quo to happen: MS lets you use software for free -- and you in turn, are required to actively sign in.
That's a different situation from retail/enterprise MSDN subscriptions. Enterprise customers such as corporations and government are not intended for BizSpark so it wouldn't make sense to punish those paying customers with draconian login requirements. In any case, many of those enterprise customers behind firewalls can't connect to the internet.
Probably implies that at least the IDE only (no subscription) version will not require signing in.
Guess we'll have to wait and see what actually transpires but I hope they don't require login. Sometime I like to code offline and I don't want to get locked out of my IDE.
If I had to sign in to use software I'd be fecked in this situation again. Made me re-evaluate things pretty sharpish.
Do not, under any circumstance, underestimate the sheer insanity of any Microsoft licensing scheme. At my new $dayjob, they spend $1-2MM/year on Microsoft licenses and support, and it's taken close to 9 months to get Microsoft to fix some incorrectly issued licenses. Not to mention, Microsoft has rolled out some new license portal that only like TWO people know about at Microsoft, so a bunch of shiny new licenses (to the tune of $750K) went "missing" because no one, even our Microsoft rep, apparently knew about the new portal which the licenses had been created in (and which, in fine Microsoft tradition, does not support any of our old licenses...)
As the only linux guy here, it is astounding, absolutely astounding to me, how many man hours are wasted just dealing with Microsoft licensing. They probably could have ported their entire stack to open source alternatives in the time it's taken just to get our SQL Server licenses straightened out. But I get the feeling that being a Microsoft shop means you have to develop Stockholm Syndrome just to make it through your day, or else you'd go mad from dealing with Microsoft and their VARs.
Furthermore, if you you're not trapped on Unix, what system could you easily get up and move your life and your work to?
> They probably could have ported their entire stack to open source alternatives in the time it's taken just to get our SQL Server licenses straightened out...
I bet they'd still be trying to figure out which broken front-end to use to interact with PGSQL. Then we'd see a headline like "After a 10-year Linux migration, Munich considers switching back to Windows and Office".