Software Assurance needs to offer better support, say IT
directors
Business users of Microsoft products are calling on the software
giant to improve the value of its flagship Software Assurance
licensing programme.
Microsoft is preparing to announce major changes to its
four-year-old business subscription licensing package in September,
with the new scheme expected to come into effect early next
year.
User groups and analyst organisations have highlighted a number
of key issues for business users. They want Microsoft to stick to
its announced schedule of product releases. Many IT directors have
told Computer Weekly they have not received full value from
Software Assurance because the introduction of new products and
upgrades has slipped.
Users also want significant improvement in the support and
training that is bundled in with Software Assurance. Microsoft has
already tried to answer user concerns on this issue by bundling
some training and tools into an earlier update to the license
programme.
Analysts and users have also said simplification of licensing
regimes and better asset tracking tools to handle software licences
should be included by Microsoft.
Although Microsoft will not provide a preview to the planned
changes to Software Assurance, the company has urged users to
contact it and explain what they want from the revised scheme.
Mark Buckley, Microsoft licensing marketing manager, said, "We
are looking to customers. I am happy to take direct feedback and
pass [it] back to Redmond."
He said Microsoft was running a series of round-table
discussions with users to gain an understanding of what they would
like to see.
Many users are reluctant to publicly criticise Microsoft, but
last month the blue chip user group the Corporate IT Forum (Tif),
held a Q&A session with IT directors to discuss Microsoft
licensing.
"Large, medium and smaller organisations [said they] were opting
out of Software Assurance, citing cost and the Microsoft roadmap as
issues," said David Roberts, chief executive of Tif.
Denise Plumpton, chairman of Tif and director of IT at the
Highways Agency, said she wants Microsoft to offer longer support
for products and more flexible licensing.
"Instead of buying software assurance all at once, it would be
useful to choose which applications you wanted for your business,"
she said.
Commonly used applications could be hosted on a server and
accessed via server licences while more specialist products would
be installed on desktops, according to Plumpton.
Nick Leake, controller technology systems and services at ITV,
is sceptical about Software Assurance and makes limited use of the
scheme.
"We tend to avoid Software Assurance as it is expensive to have
to pay for the product twice over three years - we think it is
better value to upgrade less frequently," he said.
Mike Tonkiss, head of IT at ADM Milling UK, said, "The
improvements between releases and the additional overhead of
deploying versions means the benefits are marginal."
One user who did not want to be identified said, "I would like
to see Microsoft recognise that customers use very little of the
functionality of their products, and offer scaled back levels of
product/functionality for lower cost," he said.
Analysts spell out user requirements
Microsoft must address the issue of server virtualisation if it
is to convince users of the value of its new Software Assurance
regime, according to Dan Kusnetzky, vice-president at analyst
IDC.
Server virtualisation allows users to pool servers to run
applications during peak periods, and scale back once the peak is
over. "Users cannot pay the full software fee for every machine
being run during a peak load period," he said.
Rob Hailstone, research director at IDC, said that Microsoft had
to address users' need for tools to audit what software has been
deployed, how many licences are being used and when they are up for
renewal.
John Holden, senior research analyst at Butler Group, said in
addition to better asset tracking and licensing tools Microsoft
customers wanted Software Assurance to deliver more training and
third-party software integration and bundling.
Assurance issues
- Basic cost of licences
- User's refresh cycle not in step with Microsoft product
releases
- Cost of upgrading software.
Source: Corporate IT Forum