Microsoft Managed Services
-
@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.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Microsoft Managed Services:
While tongue in cheek, that's primarily what it is.
LOL - nice bleed over!
-
@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:
$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.
Can afford versus will afford aren't the same. Sure, it's only $4, but it's about mobile workers choosing the source of their machines.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Microsoft Managed Services:
@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:
$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.
Can afford versus will afford aren't the same. Sure, it's only $4, but it's about mobile workers choosing the source of their machines.
Again that will come down to the cost of training and software dev to move them to a platform that doesn't have this issue.
-
@dashrender said in Microsoft Managed Services:
@scottalanmiller said in Microsoft Managed Services:
@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:
$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.
Can afford versus will afford aren't the same. Sure, it's only $4, but it's about mobile workers choosing the source of their machines.
Again that will come down to the cost of training and software dev to move them to a platform that doesn't have this issue.
or just buying in places where the cost is drastically lower.
