@AVmcclint, nothing has been released yet. We're simply getting a heads up on what's to come.

@blackholemac @CGundersen

So what happens to the macs that have been deployed that using the same Plist Do those have the be serialized by using the serializer package, or would those be fixed through office updates? If they are not re serialized does office just stop working. Will Microsoft kill office on those Macs so to speak?

The only way i got office to actually work in el capitain is to build it into the image. Then deploy that image with capser. It does not work correctly if installing during imaging or post. The program would not open.

@AVmcclint

I agree i wish there was more documentation of this process.

@pgh

If you have deployed using the same plist, yes, the "Microsoft_Office_2016_VL_Serializer.pkg" will need to be used to repair/correct licensing issue. I'm not sure what happens when you reach deadline later in Q1 2016 (if you haven't run serializer). Your Office install turns into a pumpkin? Sorry.

@pgh, there's no process to document yet. Nothing has been released yet. Things are still a work in progress.

To answer your question about serialization...

If you copied the com.microsoft.office.LicenseV2.plist license file from one Mac to another then come v15.20 that license file will break and Office applications will stop working. You'll have about three months to correct this in your environment once the new software releases in January.

anybody see the Office 2016 15.17 VL installer yet ?

Hi do, @tcandela .
Just downloaded from VLSC, now I have to package the installer together with the updaters (Outlook and Word) and I'm good to go.

Hi @Jachk so you have the 15.17 VL installer.pkg did it also come with the serializer.pkg ?

updaters.pkg for each Office 2016 application are individual updater downloads for each (word excel pppoint etc..) ?

to get it from VLSC do i need login credentials ?

Yes, this is what you you'd find in the DMG.

And yes, you need credentials to log in the VLSC.

I found that the VL serializer is still the old "launch an app and then delete it." version. I believe that the 15.20 (?) version that will be released in a week or two should have a serializer that will work in a deployment environment.

I ran the serializer from Self Service to test deployment and the (copied over) com.microsoft.office.LicenseV2.plist file was not modified in any way. Should this have happened? It also was unmodified when running the serializer package locally.

So, on that (the copied file not getting updated): I have had to script the removal of the copied licensing file, and THEN run the serializer, which works like a charm. pbowden said that a future version of the serializer will overwrite the plist no matter what.

#!/bin/bash

# check for existance of Office 2016 licensing file and remove it if found or echo and exit if not
if [[ -e "/Library/Preferences/com.microsoft.office.licensingV2.plist" ]]; then
    echo "License file found! Removing it!"
        rm /Library/Preferences/com.microsoft.office.licensingV2.plist
        exit 0
else
    echo "License file not found! Exiting!"
fi
exit 0

I don't understand how people are having so much difficulty with all this. Its about as simple as can be.

1. Take the Microsoft_Office_2016_Volume_Installer.pkg from the VLSC portal and install it any way you like -> DONE

OR

1. Take the office 365 installer package from the publicly available MS site i.e. the Retail/non VL version. Install that first, then install the VL serialiser package -> DONE

No mess, no fuss.

/Shrug

@calumhunter Comments in this thread indicate the serializer package would be a way to fix (i.e. properly license) machines that used a duped com.microsoft.office.LicenseV2.plist file.

The latest info appears to be that you must remove the copied/existing v2 plist before running serializer. It's on MS's radar for correction ... and thanks to @calumhunter for getting that clarified on Slack. :)

the process is the same.
currently the 15.17 serialiser does not remove/overwrite an existing v2.plist
but then it doesn't have to yet because the apps still function correctly with a copied v2.plist

MS will fix the serialiser to remove/overwrite the v2.plist before the apps fail to work with a copied v2.plist
don't concern yourself too much with this. It will be fixed when it needs to be.
The process will remain the same as mentioned above.
If you wish to be super proactive, run a preflight script to remove the v2.plist before the vl serialiser package installs.

I deployed a policy yesterday that runs the script that @dgreening shared before running the Serializer package. However, the new unique .plist doesn't get generated on some machines even though the .pkg says that the "installation" succeeded, leaving the user prompting for activation the next time an Office App starts.

I manually placed the widely used standard .plist as a temporary workaround but I really want to get the Serializer package to work to avoid massive activation issues when Microsoft pulls the plug on this activation method.

Tested the policy on a test device first and that worked fine. Anyone else got this issue as well?

@rschenk How did you install the Office apps on the machine where teh serialiser failed?
What installers did you use?
Did you use the updater installers or the full suite or standalone app installers?
The updaters do not contain the licencing helper stuff which the serialiser requires to be installed first.

Only the full suite installer or standalone app installers are supported.

@calumhunter I've build a custom .pkg containing the Microsoft_Office_2016_Volume_Installer ISO from september (pre 15.17), the separate 15.17/15.17.1 patches, the latest autoupdater,the license .plist, and a script to install Office + the patches and to place the .plist in Library/Preferences.

Pretty much the same method that most admins used I believe. :)

@rschenk Thats your problem

Use the full suite installer or the standalone app installers

The links to these installers can be obtained from here:
http://macadmins.software

I'll repeat again, do NOT use the updater packages. Use only the standalone packages.

Like i said in my post earlier, i think you are doing far too much work and over complicating things

1. Grab the full suite installer from the http://macadmins.software site
2. Deploy/install the full suite installer package (15.17) (contains all the apps in one pkg ~1.3gb)
3. Deploy/install the VL serialiser package to licence the 15.17 suite of apps

end of story.

no repackaging, no scripting, no plist

no mess, no fuss

@calumhunter

I've just rebuild my .pkg using the same method including the Serializer without the default license .plist and I did a modification on the script to run the Serializer at the end. This seems to work in my test VM resulting in a generated license file so new installations should be covered.

What do you suggest concerning the existing installations? Replace all the current apps with the full installers and a second run of the Serializer package?

for existing installs simply run a script to remove the plist if it exists before the serialiser package installs.
You could pull apart the serialiser package and insert a preinstall script and use that.

on computers that yet to have Office 2016 installed, installing the new v15.17 Microsoft_Office_2016_Volume_Installer.pkg should license the installation correctly.

no need to use the serializer.pkg

I can also confirm what @tcaldana has mentioned. The latest version of the VL installer works just fine

@calumhunter wrote:

Like i said in my post earlier, i think you are doing far too much work and over complicating things Grab the full suite installer from the http://macadmins.software site Deploy/install the full suite installer package (15.17) (contains all the apps in one pkg ~1.3gb) Deploy/install the VL serialiser package to licence the 15.17 suite of apps end of story. no repackaging, no scripting, no plist no mess, no fuss

I thought the VL serializer PKG isn't needed if the full VL installer is run? Someone corrected me in another thread when I mentioned the same, needing to run both.