Read the fine print in Microsoft's new application platform license

By | July 16, 2009, 5:59am PDT

Summary: Microsoft (unsurprisingly) isn’t touting the fact, but its newest licensing agreement could leave customers product-less if they don’t renew it. As of October 1, Microsoft will offer customers with its Application Platform Agreement license the right to buy software covered in the contract. But even with that new clause, is the APA a good deal?

Microsoft (unsurprisingly) doesn’t tout the fact, but its newest licensing agreement could leave enterprise customers product-less if they don’t renew it.

As of October 1, Microsoft will offer customers with its Application Platform Agreement (APA) license the right to buy software covered in the contract. But even with that new clause, is the APA a good deal?

Microsoft APA — an “all you can eat” license for Microsoft’s server products — was a big topic at Microsoft’s Worldwide Partner Conference show for its reseller partners this week. The APA license is focused on products that Microsoft considers part of its “application platform,” including SQL Server, BizTalk Server, SharePoint Server, Visual Studio and the Dynamics xRM “everything relationship management” business software.

In many ways, the APA is like Microsoft’s Software Assurance (SA) add-on to its volume-license agreements. Except for one, as one reader told me recently:

“There is an important difference between the APA licenses and the ‘old’ ones that Microsoft doesn’t tell you and that is that when the APA  license runs out you don’t own the products. Normally if you decide to not have a SA license anymore you still own the products.

“When the SA ends, you own perpetual rights to the most recent version that was released during the SA coverage. But when APA ends, you don’t get any perpetual rights (unless bought separately or somehow negotiated in),” Microsoft licensing expert and Senior Vice President of  Distributed Desktop Services at NET(net), Inc. Scott Braden confirmed.

When contacted about the APA particulars, Microsoft officials acknowledged the current limitation of the APA license. A spokesperson told me the following via e-mail:

“Today, under the former Application Platform Agreement (APA), new software licenses that are added during the agreement term need to be purchased at the end of the agreement or need to be de-installed…. If the customer has Microsoft Software Assurance (SA) when they purchase Microsoft Application Platform (App Plat), they keep the rights to the latest version of the software licenses.If a customer doesn’t have SA at the time they decide to purchase App Plat, then they need to purchase the software licenses to retain the latest version.If a customer opts not to purchase the software licenses at renewal, then the software licenses revert to the original version they purchased.”

Starting October 1, however, Microsoft is planning to add a new option to the APA to allow customers to buy products they licensed under APA. That new volume-licensing option is called the Enrollment for Application Platform.

“Based on customer feedback, Microsoft [will be] offering customers the option to purchase licenses for new deployments which they will have rights to at the end of the new Enrollment for Application Platform under the Enterprise Agreement,” the spokesperson confirmed.

At the partner conference this week, Microsoft is playing up the benefits of selling customers the APA license. Microsoft officials told partners in one session that the APA will help them get them larger Enterprise Agreement volume-license renewals. Microsoft is suggesting partners try to sell APAs as part of their “Oracle Compete” mission, emphasizing the “fixed upfront license costs (via APAs) for competitive migrations.”

Microsoft is highlighting pricing as a custsomer benefit of the APA.

“The Microsoft Application Platform is designed for customers that want to standardize on the products in the suite and build applications to get to market faster,” the spokesperson said. Micosoft is “offering up to 40 percent savings if customers decide to purchase the software license upfront in the 1-year model or at the end of the 3-year term.”

The APA license is a pure rental deal as it stands now. It gets a little more flexible in October with the new option to buy licensed software. But I’m still wondering whether the gotchas of the license will outweigh any kind of cost savings that customers might accrue by going the APA route. Anyone have any direct experience with the APA license?

Update: More on what is in the APA and the coming changes can be found on Richard Gibbons’ “Rich from Bechtle” blog.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Mary Jo has covered the tech industry for more than 25 years for a variety of publications and Web sites, and is a frequent guest on radio, TV and podcasts, speaking about all things Microsoft-related. She is the author of Microsoft 2.0: How Microsoft plans to stay relevant in the post-Gates era (John Wiley & Sons, 2008).

Disclosure

Mary-Jo Foley

Freelance journalist/blogger Mary Jo Foley has nothing to disclose. WYSIWYG (what you see is what you get). I do not own Microsoft stock or stock in any of its partners or competitors. I have no business ventures that are sponsored by/funded by Microsoft or any of its partners or competitors.

Biography

Mary-Jo Foley

Mary Jo Foley has covered the tech industry for 25 years for a variety of publications, including ZDNet, eWeek and Baseline. She has kept close tabs on Microsoft strategy, products and technologies for the past 10 years. In the late 1990s, she penned the award-winning "At The Evil Empire" column for ZDNet, and more recently the Microsoft Watch blog for Ziff Davis.

Got a tip? Send her an email with your rants, rumors, tips and tattles. Confidentiality guaranteed.

58
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: Read the fine print in Microsoft's new application platform license
dfwekrdfe1601-24353656908314123402586717488499 Updated - 11th Nov
Hey there,to your advantage establish. Info are usually tightly helpfull in addition to keeps many people huge amount of some time when i burn across a absolutely sure issue when they are not instead when it comes to trying to discover blogposts like that happy I am ready aimed at greater, bye happy bears jerseys,cheap aaron rodgers jersey,cheap walter payton jersey,cheap wes welker jersey,cheap randy moss jersey, A lot of people as to why head on your websites weblog and after that acquire you will have points inserted in fitting here on the other hand less than proclaimed you will find while i found out all of this certainty write-up, My partner and i off from to be stop our-self between making wisecracks all of the following. Awesome write-up partner!
0 Votes
+ -
As it should be...
Mike Cox 16th Jul 2009
You need to pay to play with these fine products. If a company is so short-sighted that they let their APA run out, they deserve to be stripped of all products covered under said APA. Microsoft is slaving away on making these products the best in the world, the least you can do is pay and PAY WHEN YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO. For example, I have signed perpetual care agreements with Microsoft. They bill us every year and include several hundred pages of threats with the invoice. I then bring the invoice to finance and DEMAND full payment. My rep then takes me out for an expensive dinner and we celebrate. It is easy.
0 Votes
+ -
Deluded
rob.ratcliffe.77@... 16th Jul 2009
It is a pure and simple money grab. Any savings the customer will see on these so called 'best in the world' products will be wiped out by the renewal fees. Basically, what MS is doing is making you pay essentially for nothing. Literally nothing, are you happy with that? I certainly am not, if I want to purchase licenses, CAL's etc, I expect to be able to keep them.
0 Votes
+ -
Then buy the CAL/SAL's
de-void-21165590650301806002836337787023 16th Jul 2009
Nothing is forcing you to have to use this new program. If you would rather pay a discounted fee while, for example, you build your new business or expand your existing one and, later, once your business design is settled, buy an EA which gives you perpetual rights, then go ahead.

With this new program you're trading a 40% discount for perpetual rights. You can't have both.
0 Votes
+ -
You signed up for Perpetual Care?
nizuse 16th Jul 2009
What did MS charge you for? Your soul?
0 Votes
+ -
You misunderstood
nucrash 16th Jul 2009
In order to keep paying for the perpetual care, he has to have at least one child per agreement term to cover the cost of the contract. If he doesn't provide them with a child's soul, the contract is void and the licenses are forfeit.

This has been a very popular licensing plan with many churches.
0 Votes
+ -
Bonus term extension
snberk341 16th Jul 2009
Using a first child gets an agreement term extension.
They will want you to sign up for a perpetual lock in clause as well, for ALL your children, and your children's children.
  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
RE: You signed up for Perpetual Care?
fatman65535 Updated - 17th Jul 2009
Is that anything like M$'s Plays For Sure music licensing scheme? If so, did they not recently do away with it???

BTW, did you have to sign the agreement with blood???
0 Votes
+ -
You signed up for Perpetual Care?Mk2
elderlybloke 17th Jul 2009
Greetings nizuse,

If you read Mike's post carefully you will notice he is denigrating , not praising Microsoft.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: As it should be...
fatman65535 17th Jul 2009
I am curious.

Is the name of your M$ rep named Lucifer???

Possibly also known as Mephistoles???


Because it certainly sounds like you sold your soul to the devil.

Your comment reminds me of an old National Lampoon Radio Hour episode that dates back to the oil crisis of the 70's. The voice over talent spouts: "Monolithic Oil, we are going to make you pay... and pay... and pay... and pay..." as his voice slowly fades. I guess one could change Monolithic Oil to Micro$haft and have the same result.

You are so pathetic.

Any business owner looking to contain costs for average office worker tasks should explore their options; before signing a blank check to M$.
0 Votes
+ -
You're new here aren't you?
thx-1138_@... Updated - 17th Jul 2009
Yep, but don't sweat it - Mike Cox is ZDNet's perennial, razor-sharp lampooner. He's kinda like an institution.

Trust me virtually everything posted by MC is said tongue-in-cheek.

At any rate, relax .. and don't take things so personally.

:*)
0 Votes
+ -
Hooked several
Dr. John 17th Jul 2009
He hooked several with that one.
0 Votes
+ -
10 out of 10 Mike !
JeremyAllison 17th Jul 2009
New fish, new fish.....

happy
This is a quality post, full of details.

Software 101 - revenge of the accountants
0 Votes
+ -
MS is running scared - they need to ensure revenue when
their perception and marketshare is at an all time low.

Brilliant - bilk your customers and ensure they never
stop paying. Tony Soprano would be proud.
0 Votes
+ -
Thank you for the laugh.
Hallowed are the Ori 16th Jul 2009
MS is running scared - they need to ensure revenue when their perception and marketshare is at an all time low.

Too funny.

Around 90% of the total number of computers on the planet are running an OS made by Microsoft... and you seriously want to claim that they are "running scared"?

Too funny.
0 Votes
+ -
You may laugh but he is right.
nucrash 16th Jul 2009
This isn't about Microsoft competing with other companies. This is about Microsoft competing with their legacy products.

The reason for this is obvious. If they struggle to keep a solid release schedule as they did with Office and Windows from 2003 to 2007, then people don't see a reason to buy Software Assurance. But if you take away their previously earned upgrades, "Oh Noes, We gotta downgrade!"

I have a similar company that I work with using a legacy product that basically fell into disuse from the rest of the world and yet for some reason or another, my company still uses it. I have to pay maintenance on the program each year and install a new key on each workstation annually. If I don't, the application stops working. If I install a new workstation, I have to get a new key. This is a frustrating matter that I don't have a lot of control over.

I am still fighting against signing up for any of these programs because Microsoft's release patterns are so temperamental.
0 Votes
+ -
OH NO! You have to PAY for software???
de-void-21165590650301806002836337787023 16th Jul 2009
Who'dathunkit? Charging you for software that a business has had to pay people to build, support and maintain. What a crime.

Huh?

You have a legacy product that is no longer sold and you want it patched and fixed so that it continues to run on newer OS' and platforms. What makes you think that you SHOULDN'T be paying for it? You're now experiencing the fallacy that staying on an old app "cause it just works" often leads one down a path of VERY expensive support.

This new program is a trade-off: Microsoft gives you a 40% discount and freedom to use whatever of its platform products you want, you give up the right to have perpetual usage at contract termination.

This is a great program for those building a new business (or dynamically changing a current one) and decreases costs during the period of rapid growth. Then, once things have stabilized, you get to buy perpetual-use CAL/SAL's.

What's NOT to like (other than the fact you have to pay MS for its work)?
0 Votes
+ -
If only that were true...
jeremychappell 16th Jul 2009
But the simple fact is that Microsoft's products aren't the "best"
anymore (at least not in the broad sense). There are plenty of other
offerings that are markedly better. Many of those are open source.
Take IIS as an example - it's not the market leader, it's not the best
product, Apache is. Or SQL Server, what does that have that's worth
paying for over MySQL? Visual Studio and Eclipse?

Microsoft is might be installed on a lot of machines, but there are
alternatives out there, often free alternatives. Why wouldn't a business
start to investigate these?

Microsoft is running scared, it's scared of it's own legacy products that
users often prefer (XP) it's scared of free alternatives, it's scared of a
paradigm shift to the web.

The only part that Microsoft really has sewn up is the home market,
and even that seems under threat.

Sure Microsoft isn't worried about tomorrow, or next week or even
next year, but it is worried about the next five years, and after that.
0 Votes
+ -
Finally someone with sense...
storm14k 16th Jul 2009
I laugh when the Microbrains go to talking about MS software when they don't lead in anything except the desktop and office suite. They can stretch and get away with the argument on consumer desktop apps but when it comes to this arena its a no go. The opposing technologies are proven and often free. Seriously...only a nut would waste their money on a deal like this to start up a business.
clearly all of you responding to this article are not at all familiar with Microsoft or industry enterprise licensing and are just looking for another Microsoft posting to rant about. One important detail that was left out of the article are the details of the pricing for APA and the up front cost savings. While on the APA, customers pay dramatically less for those technologies, helping customers to reduce the cost for their projects. This is a subscription licensing model, and it isn't for everyone. Think of it like leasing the car.

Unless it just makes you feel better about yourself, get the facts before going on a rant.
0 Votes
+ -
Microsoft always wanted to get there. They are just doing it in their usual sneaky manner.

No way they would call it "Enterprise Software Rental Agreement", or ESRA.

ESRA would scare everyone away.
0 Votes
+ -
No such Limitations with GPL and Linux
Dietrich T. Schmitz Updated - 16th Jul 2009
Folks, keep your eyes wide open, ok? The list of limitations you face when purchasing or upgrading to Microsoft Windows grows longer by the day.

Mary Jo highlights yet another limitation with Microsoft's APA License.

It's just another limitation you face amid all of the direct and indirect expenses of maintaining a 'temporary right' to use Microsoft application and operating system software.

If that doesn't sit well with you, then that is a 'normal' response.

CIOs/CFOs, CPAs are eager to get down to substantive reasons for why they need to go through yet another round of captilization and expense on potentially unneeded, unnecessary purchases that won't accrue to their bottom line.

Eyes Wide Open Folks. It's your business and profitability at stake.

That price sticker on Ubuntu 9.04 Linux ($0.00) and the licensing terms (GPLv2/v3) are looking really good.

Thank you very much for reading another alternative viewpoint.
0 Votes
+ -
**BREAKING: GPL IS MORE LIMITED**
Loverock Davidson 16th Jul 2009
The GPL FORCES you to give up your hard work and code. That is right, when you code on linux using linux libraries you are FORCED to give up all rights to your software.
0 Votes
+ -
Please post the section of the GPL
Ole Man 16th Jul 2009
that "FORCES" you to use the GPL whenever you "code on linux using linux libraries".

You can (thetorically speaking of course, I question your ability to do so) write your own code and libraries, leaving yourself free to do what you will with your "hard work" and thumb your nose at the GPL.

Why don't you try it sometime, instead of continually whining and beeching about Linux?
  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
Not GPL.v.3 which expressly forbids ...
mwagner@... 17th Jul 2009
... the co-mingling of proprietary code with GPL code. Even GPL.v.2 requires you to redistribute any modifications to Linux source-code for free. In short, if your code uses ANY GPL-protected code in it, it MUST be redistributed under the GPL and must be entirely free of charge.
0 Votes
+ -
I should have been more specific
Ole Man 18th Jul 2009
Of course the GPL dictates that the distributor pass on the same rights to any GPL code that was afforded the distributor.

This is the fly in the ointment to most developers (remember monkey-boy's developers, developers, developers speech/dance?). They seem to think that they should be able to misappropriate (steal, for all practical purposes) GPL code and publish (distribute) it according to their own rules, without even giving credit to the GPL where credit is due. With no reference at all to the PRICE!

Tell me a question? How much Microsoft code can you appropriate as your own? Zilch! Zero! Nada! Niente! You won't see any Microsoft code because it is well hidden. Microsoft gives you a "tool" to use as a developer. In other words, YOU are developing FOR Microsoft, with zero pay from Microsoft.

So do you think you should be able to seize any OSS software and sell it as your own, because FOSS doesn't HIDE their code, as does Microsoft?
0 Votes
+ -
Why the GNU GPL Still Matters
Dietrich T. Schmitz Updated - 16th Jul 2009
Why the GNU GPL Still Matters

Try again LD.
  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
Doh!
jeremychappell 16th Jul 2009
No it doesn't, not unless you wish to redistribute the code. If you want to
modify the code for your own use you can do that. If you want to
redistribute it then everyone downstream is assured the same rights you
had to the original code. Simple.

But why is that relevant here?
0 Votes
+ -
carbon footprint
pgit 17th Jul 2009
You can't waste any more heat, and energy generating it, than with a standard toaster. A toaster oven is basically a toaster on it's side. Heat rises, so putting it on it's side reduces your carbon footprint. You could put a standard toaster on it's side as well, but a toaster oven has a door.

You should replace your toaster with a toaster oven. You can bake potatoes with it in addition to making toast. You can really only make steak fries with a standard toaster, and it takes a long time.
0 Votes
+ -
Re-read the GPL
NoCalDrummer 17th Jul 2009
Hmmm... spoken like a true MS-fan. The GPL only says that if you use GPL code to create a new program and that program is distributed, you must supply the code.

If I were to write something for my own use, not try to distribute it, I don't have to publish the code. (Much like if I were to create a spreadsheet to balance some accounts.) If what you say is true, you would have to "give up" every moment of revisions created.

If you don't like the terms of the GPL, then don't use GPL code. Simple enough. No one is forcing you to use it, nor are they forcing you to NOT reap the benefits of your efforts.
0 Votes
+ -
**BREAKING: GPL IS MORE LIMITED**Mk2
elderlybloke Updated - 17th Jul 2009
Now there is the bloke who praises rather than denigrates Microsoft.
MJ, you disapoint me...

SA only give you the perpetual rights to the software if you bought them in the first place,

This kind of "pay as you go" is nothing new.

Pedro
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
SA is different from APA
Mary Jo Foley 16th Jul 2009
Hi.... I thought the same. But did you see Braden's quote in the post. It doesn't seem like it is.

?When the SA ends, you own perpetual rights to the most recent version that was released during the SA coverage. But when APA ends, you don?t get any perpetual rights (unless bought separately or somehow negotiated in),? Microsoft licensing expert and Senior Vice President of Distributed Desktop Services at NET(net), Inc. Scott Braden confirmed.

MS doesn't seem to be disputing this either... MJ
Actually there is no gotcha, you are not making an apples to apples comparison between the right programs. The APA agreement is not an evolution of the EA (Where you pay for Perpetual Licensing Rights and Software Assurance in Years 1-3 and then SA only during the renewal periods), it is an evolution of the ESA (Enterprise Subscription Agreement). In an ESA (and the APA), we give you to the option to only purchase Software Assurance, without having to pay for or own the License component. As with all Software Assurance, even on the EA, SA coverage terminates if the customer does not renew their agreement. The only difference here is since the customer hasn't purchased an L, they have no perpetual license rights outside of SA. This is built into the savings you see in the APA and though the program isn't for everyone, it is a great option for customers who have a need for consistent predictable budgeting and want to stay current on technology at the absolute lowest cost of acquisition. It is no secret that this a subscription based offering, and when making the APA offer to a customer we are very upfront that it is a subscription offering.
0 Votes
+ -
Oh, it's that simple.
TripleII-21189418044173169409978279405827 16th Jul 2009
Glad you cleared that up, how can a customer be confused? I'll take an ESA, hold the L, take a 3 year SA with an option to roll into an ASA if the SA doesn't pan out but have one question before I sign on the dotted line, what's the purchase price after the ASA runs out? Of course, CALs are even easier since they are 100% flat cost across the board no matter what option they take right?

Hmmm, maybe I am being skeptical, but I suspect this is simply another layers for the partners to be able to simply make the purchasing process so complicated nobody knows what they are buying (or renting) as the case may be. Naw, a way to confuse customers, bait and switch, hidden costs, hidden terms, surprise costs if you want off the treadmill, that could never be the case.

TripleII
0 Votes
+ -
Re: Oh it's that simple
fme3 16th Jul 2009
Yea I would be the first person to admit that we offer a number of licensing programs and picking the best one for your organization is best done in partnership with your Reseller and Microsoft Licensing Specialist.

The creation of new programs like the APA (and the Enrollment for Core IO) is not designed to create a "bait and switch" or to limit choices. New programs are offered to allow our customers to buy in new ways that better align to their purchasing and budgeting needs.

In terms of your questions about options at the end of an APA Agreement you have two choices: You can continue to renew the agreement and continue the subscription or you can purchase the products you are using as License Only on Select or Open. There are no "hidden costs" or "double buying" since you would never have been charged for perpetual license rights for the product (as mentioned earlier, these savings are built into the APA agreement).

Also, I should point out that your characterization of the CORE CAL is not accurate. It is the same as every other product - on the EA it is License and Software Assurance in years 1-3 and then SA only in the renewal years not "flat regardless of options".

I would encourage anyone with questions regarding the program to work with your Reseller Partner and Microsoft License specialist to demonstrate what options are available to you and comparatively which would be the best for your preferences over a 6+ year period (no hidden costs or surprises here).
Nah, I'd rather just blindly click 'Accept.' Microsoft and ethics? Now that's funny.
0 Votes
+ -
Microsoft is all about saving you money.
TripleII-21189418044173169409978279405827 Updated - 16th Jul 2009
There is no way Microsoft would be rolling this program out if they thought they would make more money than current licenses. I have heard of zero businesses who were dissatisfied with SA in the first place, They saved a ton of money while MS delayed their OS for year after year. Microsoft feels customer's pain though, and this rental option will save the enterprise millions upon millions. You know the end of contract purchase price will only be pennies (about 95) on the dollar. MJ does a disservice even bringing APA to light causing concern. It would have been better to let the partners "surprise" the users if they decide they just want off the treadmill.

TripleII
0 Votes
+ -
This won't save the customer money
rdawson@... 17th Jul 2009
Microsoft has for years been trying to get into a subscription payment model for their software so they can guarantee revenue each month/year.

The SA was supposed to entitle customers to upgrades to the latest and greatest. It saved Microsoft money by delaying operating systems as people's SA's expired since they did not deliver new operating systems in quite a few SA lifetimes (I currently work for a company that this happened to).

If you have to spend additional money to keep the product after "renting" it then it is not a money saver. And talk about angering your customers by not alerting them prior to them "getting off the treadmill" as you put it. That would be a horrible customer relations fiasco to patch up after the fact. Can you show me what the end of contract price will be? I bet that is solely dependant on how much you spend per month on the product just like a lease...
0 Votes
+ -
long day?
tmsbrdrs 2nd Aug 2009
The OP was very obviously using sarcasm, at least it was obvious to me.
0 Votes
+ -
Never Trust Microsoft
David Blomstrom 16th Jul 2009
From software to philanthropy, the Microsoft empire is one big sham.
0 Votes
+ -
Crystal clear ...
Golodh2 17th Jul 2009
Microsoft have made the strategic decision that they want to move towards "Software as a Service". What we see here is simply a step along that route. It's consistent, it's simple, and it's predictable when you realize it.

Let's face it: in today's market a revenue stream that depends on product upgrades and product improvements is far too uncertain. Why? Because today most software products are quite mature, and improvements are at best incremental. Therefore customers may well decide *not* to buy the improved upgraded version when left to themselves.

What can Microsoft do about this?

Well: first of all it can create peer pressure and planned obsolescence. As in: add at least one new feature in every new product version that isn't available in the old one, and then make sure that it's so tightly integrated with the new product that people will use it. It then becomes a hassle not to have it, which is an incentive to buy the upgrade. It's not perfect but it worked so far.

Secondly, Microsoft can ensure that it's not cost-effective for organizations to buy "just enough licenses to cover what's being used". Because of the cost of continuous usage monitoring, Microsoft's right to conduct audits when it feels like it, and damaging fines when it discovers anything out of kilter. That's the economic underpinning of the bulk licences.

Thirdly, Microsoft can ensure that the low-cost "we'll just keep using these old licenses" option gradually disappears. Which is what they're currently doing with the APA's.

Don't feel bad about it, it's just business. But it helps if you're clear about what's happening.
0 Votes
+ -
As clear as ...
thx-1138_@... Updated - 17th Jul 2009
...mud actually.

"...Don't feel bad about it, it's just business. But it helps if you're clear about what's happening."

Clear? The only thing clear here is the fact that the traditional s/w licensing model is being deliberately and blatantly eroded. The effect of implementing a rental-centric, SaaS-type licensing model (i.e. APA) is as you correctly imply is an unmistakable move toward the Cloud.

By watering down the longevity stakes for new enterprise/commercial license agreements, the intent is - ironically - and as you describe it 'crystal clear': force enterprise into the ongoing licensing dilemma; distaste at the terms of SA-to-APA regulatory constraints - and that is only for MS!

The inevitable truth is that by literally forcing the hand of enterprise into accepting gradually weaker control and autonomy over the terms/nature of license agreements, MS (and others such as Oracle, SAP, Apple) will gain their preferred objective - migration of enterprise to the Cloud. The obfuscation of intellectual property rights will (to my prediction) lead to authoritarian like controls over the centralized data, resources and administrative capacities for all enterprises involved.

So to say that enterprise users 'shouldn't feel bad' is simply a smug brush-off. The Cloud and all that SaaS is purported to be is a huge compromise for any corporate / enterprise entity. The decision making process should be well researched, well documented and exhaustive - prior to a move toward the Cloud.

The initial benefits made through decreased infrastructure and administrative costs (in the Cloud) begin to lose their attraction in the face of absolving control to some degree over: identity management, user-rights management, application management, data integrity and data confidentiality - all of which are central principles in the running of traditional data-centers. Granted, transparency is good .. in Accounting - but it has little relevance insofar as the physical control and administrative security of data-centers is concerned. The latter two factors are things the Cloud will never be able to guarantee to its enterprise users.

This is the new world we've now arrived at .. heaven help us.
"What-Me worry?"
0 Votes
+ -
There's an idea!
thx-1138_@... 17th Jul 2009
Moving MAD magazine out of paper sales and into the cloud ... that way, instead of having to buy MAD mag' anymore, you could just rent it.

"All work and no play, make Ole a dull boy."

By the way .. in your ear
0 Votes
+ -
Thanx!
Ole Man 18th Jul 2009
I'm sure you know where you can stick it.....
0 Votes
+ -
You don't read too well
thx-1138_@... Updated - 18th Jul 2009
"...I'm sure you know where you can stick it..... "

Yes, as a matter of fact, i do. Since you obviously missed it first time, i'll say it real slow like, 'in ... your ... ear'.

I've just thought of a new motto for you Ole: "Open source with a closed mind". H3ck! You could even publicize it under the terms of GPL v3.0 so anyone (well, Linux users at least) can see just what a prize tw@t you are.



0 Votes
+ -
Thanks again!
Ole Man 19th Jul 2009
I know how difficult it must be for one to be as ?ostentatious, ?shallow, crass, vulgar, insulting, derogatory, insolent, offensive, and ?disrespectful as yourself, but we can always depend on you to come through.

Have a nice day, and try not to stab too many in the back today. What comes around goes around.
0 Votes
+ -
@Ole: yours is a predictable comeback for a hypocrite
thx-1138_@... Updated - 19th Jul 2009
You start by posting inane, worthless trash and groundless 'bull puckey' the likes of links to a MAD magazine tribute site ... and then have the audacity to call me crass and vulgar? You pathetic moron.

If you have anything useful to say about the subject matter in the article - say it! Don't p@#s around and post your juvenile crap.

You're open source rants have no place here either, in case you haven't noticed. The *actual subject* of the article is the possible terms of enterprise licensing for Windows 7 - not OpenGPL, GPL or any other FOSS dross you peddle. But then again, i should expect as much 'meaningless twaddle' from someone who uses MAD mag' as his official information source for all things IS/IT. That's *obviously* why you posted the link-to.

At any rate, you've started something you can't finish - and obviously can't handle the truth about how embarrassing and out of touch with reality you sound.

Take some good advice: take a deep breath, relax, go back to sleep - and lay off the hallucinogens.

0 Votes
+ -
RE: Read the fine print in Microsoft's new application platform license
dfwekrdfe1601-24353656908314123402586717488499 Updated - 11th Nov
Hey there,to your advantage establish. Info are usually tightly helpfull in addition to keeps many people huge amount of some time when i burn across a absolutely sure issue when they are not instead when it comes to trying to discover blogposts like that happy I am ready aimed at greater, bye happy bears jerseys,cheap aaron rodgers jersey,cheap walter payton jersey,cheap wes welker jersey,cheap randy moss jersey, A lot of people as to why head on your websites weblog and after that acquire you will have points inserted in fitting here on the other hand less than proclaimed you will find while i found out all of this certainty write-up, My partner and i off from to be stop our-self between making wisecracks all of the following. Awesome write-up partner!

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix