Microsoft Managed Services
-
@nerdydad said in Microsoft Managed Services:
The Forbes article is saying that it is aiming towards business customers first, which makes sense. More clients per business account means increased efficiency in making money. This leads me to wonder how long before potentially servers are licensed the same way.
Business is already nearly licensed this way with Windows 10 Enterprise + SA. Monthly is just a way simpler and more logical billing cycle.
There's really very little here, in reality.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Microsoft Managed Services:
@travisdh1 said in Microsoft Managed Services:
I wonder how long before we're forced into the monthly service model. It might be the "last straw" for my personal use of Windows when it comes down to it.
Windows 10 is "free" for all intents and purposes for home use now. There's no going back from that. MS knows that that would be the nail in the Windows coffin. I put that at essentially a zero risk situation.
I don't doubt that they'll always have a free version of one sort or another from now on out, I just question how useful it will be. They'll want to push people to the paid versions of course, the only question is how blatant and/or how soon they'll start removing features.
-
@travisdh1 said in Microsoft Managed Services:
@scottalanmiller said in Microsoft Managed Services:
@travisdh1 said in Microsoft Managed Services:
I wonder how long before we're forced into the monthly service model. It might be the "last straw" for my personal use of Windows when it comes down to it.
Windows 10 is "free" for all intents and purposes for home use now. There's no going back from that. MS knows that that would be the nail in the Windows coffin. I put that at essentially a zero risk situation.
I don't doubt that they'll always have a free version of one sort or another from now on out, I just question how useful it will be. They'll want to push people to the paid versions of course, the only question is how blatant and/or how soon they'll start removing features.
No, it's anything but "of course". There is extremely little business logic to doing that. If anything, "of course" they WON'T do anything like that, because it would be the end of their products. They are in the most desperate, precarious OS position of the last two decades. They are anything but stupid and are certainly not going to drive all their customers away.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Microsoft Managed Services:
Windows 10 is "free" for all intents and purposes for home use now.
How is it free? Upgrades for the lifetime of the hardware may be free now, but you still effectively pay a licence fee for every new Windows machine you buy, don't you?
I see a disconnect between phones which are generally rented (for both businesses and consumers) for a couple of years and then upgraded (at least here in the UK), and PCs which are generally bought and kept for 5 years or more. I can see why Microsoft (and HP and Dell) would like PCs to adopt the phone business model which is making Apple so rich by persuading consumers to replace their perfectly good iPhones with near identical new models every 2 years because they're under a 2 year contract and so the upgrade feels like it's free (same monthly fee).
I suspect this is more about selling more Surfaces, or helping Dell and HP sell more PCs, rather than further monetising Windows ((although like I said above, Microsoft get a licence fee for every new Windows PC sold). They also need to get to the stage where replacing a PC, and migrating all your settings, applications and files, is as simple as replacing a phone, which is currently isn't anywhere near. One of the main reasons businesses don't upgrade their PCs more often is the sheer hassle of the upgrade process, rather than the cost of the new hardware. This initiative seems to be addressing that problem.
-
@carnival-boy said in Microsoft Managed Services:
@scottalanmiller said in Microsoft Managed Services:
Windows 10 is "free" for all intents and purposes for home use now.
How is it free? Upgrades for the lifetime of the hardware may be free now, but you still effectively pay a licence fee for every new Windows machine you buy, don't you?
That's totally true, and that's why it is only effectively free and not actually free. But the majority of hardware within scope of potential purchase for consumers includes that licenses whether it will be used or that, hence the "effectively." Unless you are in the 1% that build their own computers, you are basically stuck with Windows being an included price in everything - or buying Mac which is even more expensive. So for normal people, Windows is a negative cost, not a positive (e.g. a discount, not an add on.) Technically companies could sell OS-less devices in the consumer space, or Linux machines, but in reality they don't.
-
@carnival-boy said in Microsoft Managed Services:
I see a disconnect between phones which are generally rented (for both businesses and consumers) for a couple of years and then upgraded (at least here in the UK),...
Normally they are purchased in the US. While possible to rent, I know of no one with a plan like that.
-
@carnival-boy said in Microsoft Managed Services:
This initiative seems to be addressing that problem.
I agree. And I think they saw this in the Linux world. Fedora with rolling updates... updates are easy and "always" work. CentOS with LTS... updates are a pain and often fail.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Microsoft Managed Services:
Normally they are purchased in the US. While possible to rent, I know of no one with a plan like that.
The old Toshiba systems were always lease/rent.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Microsoft Managed Services:
hardware within scope of potential purchase for consumers includes that licenses whether it will be used or that, hence the "effectively." Unless you are in the 1% that build their own computers
The marginal cost of getting Windows Home Edition is like $50 for a large OEM. Considering that Microsoft funds huge portions of the marketing of the OEM's to MDF, I'd argue it's a loss for OEMs to try to push other OS's.
$7 per user per month is a trivial marginal cost for the US and EMEA. The real question is if they will do regional based pricing or discounts (A $3 China or India subscription).
If I have to rewrite or migrate an application to get it off Windows, if I have to retrain users on how to use an application it's going to have to be some market where my labor cost is low and my volume of staff is high (Call Center, Retail). Even call centers can absorb that (Average revenue per minute if 76 cents a minute make that a joke to justify).If the value proposition of Linux was $7 a month (and the ability to retrain and move apps and hassle of migrating was that low) I'd argue you should likely have been on Linux.
If anything this is great for Microsoft as it turns the OS licensing discussion into a monthly "drip" vs a large sunk cost, or 3 year ELA renewal/negotiation.
-
@storageninja said in Microsoft Managed Services:
@scottalanmiller said in Microsoft Managed Services:
hardware within scope of potential purchase for consumers includes that licenses whether it will be used or that, hence the "effectively." Unless you are in the 1% that build their own computers
The marginal cost of getting Windows Home Edition is like $50 for a large OEM. Considering that Microsoft funds huge portions of the marketing of the OEM's to MDF, I'd argue it's a loss for OEMs to try to push other OS's.
Likely, or at least a brake even which carriers risk and isn't worth taking a risk on something so nominally profitable.
-
@storageninja said in Microsoft Managed Services:
$7 per user per month is a trivial marginal cost for the US and EMEA. The real question is if they will do regional based pricing or discounts (A $3 China or India subscription).
That's a tough one these days. It would easily make you start buying in cheaper locales.
-
@storageninja said in Microsoft Managed Services:
If anything this is great for Microsoft as it turns the OS licensing discussion into a monthly "drip" vs a large sunk cost, or 3 year ELA renewal/negotiation.
Yup, I like it. Everyone wins, except the people who aren't running Windows well and/or paying for it. All legit users, plus MS, win, if done smartly.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Microsoft Managed Services:
@storageninja said in Microsoft Managed Services:
$7 per user per month is a trivial marginal cost for the US and EMEA. The real question is if they will do regional based pricing or discounts (A $3 China or India subscription).
That's a tough one these days. It would easily make you start buying in cheaper locales.
Well licensing can prevent you from using cheap licenses in expensive areas.. so you'd have to move your workers.
-
@dashrender said in Microsoft Managed Services:
@scottalanmiller said in Microsoft Managed Services:
@storageninja said in Microsoft Managed Services:
$7 per user per month is a trivial marginal cost for the US and EMEA. The real question is if they will do regional based pricing or discounts (A $3 China or India subscription).
That's a tough one these days. It would easily make you start buying in cheaper locales.
Well licensing can prevent you from using cheap licenses in expensive areas.. so you'd have to move your workers.
It CAN, but not without often crippling mobility.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Microsoft Managed Services:
@storageninja said in Microsoft Managed Services:
If anything this is great for Microsoft as it turns the OS licensing discussion into a monthly "drip" vs a large sunk cost, or 3 year ELA renewal/negotiation.
Yup, I like it. Everyone wins, except the people who aren't running Windows well and/or paying for it. All legit users, plus MS, win, if done smartly.
I think moving home users to a monthly subscription model for their entire computer is actually a good move. Gets rid of huge up front costs to getting a computer, allows for frequently new hardware to be out there, hopefully killing off a lot of the old crap like XP still running on the internet causing us issues.
Of course, these days that's mostly outside the US, so not sure that will ever change.
-
@dashrender said in Microsoft Managed Services:
@scottalanmiller said in Microsoft Managed Services:
@storageninja said in Microsoft Managed Services:
If anything this is great for Microsoft as it turns the OS licensing discussion into a monthly "drip" vs a large sunk cost, or 3 year ELA renewal/negotiation.
Yup, I like it. Everyone wins, except the people who aren't running Windows well and/or paying for it. All legit users, plus MS, win, if done smartly.
I think moving home users to a monthly subscription model for their entire computer is actually a good move. Gets rid of huge up front costs to getting a computer, allows for frequently new hardware to be out there, hopefully killing off a lot of the old crap like XP still running on the internet causing us issues.
Of course, these days that's mostly outside the US, so not sure that will ever change.
Only good answer there is dropping Windows. If people outside of the US didn't run Windows that problem would essentially just vanish.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Microsoft Managed Services:
@dashrender said in Microsoft Managed Services:
@scottalanmiller said in Microsoft Managed Services:
@storageninja said in Microsoft Managed Services:
$7 per user per month is a trivial marginal cost for the US and EMEA. The real question is if they will do regional based pricing or discounts (A $3 China or India subscription).
That's a tough one these days. It would easily make you start buying in cheaper locales.
Well licensing can prevent you from using cheap licenses in expensive areas.. so you'd have to move your workers.
It CAN, but not without often crippling mobility.
I don't buy this. If you can afford to send your employee from a cheep workzone to an expensive one, you can afford to pay $7/m instead of $3.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Microsoft Managed Services:
@dashrender said in Microsoft Managed Services:
@scottalanmiller said in Microsoft Managed Services:
@storageninja said in Microsoft Managed Services:
If anything this is great for Microsoft as it turns the OS licensing discussion into a monthly "drip" vs a large sunk cost, or 3 year ELA renewal/negotiation.
Yup, I like it. Everyone wins, except the people who aren't running Windows well and/or paying for it. All legit users, plus MS, win, if done smartly.
I think moving home users to a monthly subscription model for their entire computer is actually a good move. Gets rid of huge up front costs to getting a computer, allows for frequently new hardware to be out there, hopefully killing off a lot of the old crap like XP still running on the internet causing us issues.
Of course, these days that's mostly outside the US, so not sure that will ever change.
Only good answer there is dropping Windows. If people outside of the US didn't run Windows that problem would essentially just vanish.
So why haven't they?
-
@dashrender said in Microsoft Managed Services:
@scottalanmiller said in Microsoft Managed Services:
@dashrender said in Microsoft Managed Services:
@scottalanmiller said in Microsoft Managed Services:
@storageninja said in Microsoft Managed Services:
If anything this is great for Microsoft as it turns the OS licensing discussion into a monthly "drip" vs a large sunk cost, or 3 year ELA renewal/negotiation.
Yup, I like it. Everyone wins, except the people who aren't running Windows well and/or paying for it. All legit users, plus MS, win, if done smartly.
I think moving home users to a monthly subscription model for their entire computer is actually a good move. Gets rid of huge up front costs to getting a computer, allows for frequently new hardware to be out there, hopefully killing off a lot of the old crap like XP still running on the internet causing us issues.
Of course, these days that's mostly outside the US, so not sure that will ever change.
Only good answer there is dropping Windows. If people outside of the US didn't run Windows that problem would essentially just vanish.
So why haven't they?
Herd mentality.
-
While tongue in cheek, that's primarily what it is.
