Microsoft Enterprise Agreements - Microsoft SQL Server Strategies

In case you haven't heard it yet, Microsoft SQL Server 2012 is going to contain some major licensing changes. Customers with existing (or new prior to the release of SQL Server 2012) Enterprise Agreements (EA) or Enrollment for Application Platforms (EAP) with SQL Server included on those agreements have some great opportunities right now but should be working out a strategy to meet their current and projected needs.

If you're unaware of the changes, check out our blog on Network World to find out more details.

If you have SQL Server Enterprise on your EA or EAP before the release of the 2012 version you can continue to purchase the same licensing model until the end of your agreement. In other words, even though the SQL Server Enterprise server and Client Access License (CAL) model will disappear with the release of 2012, if you already have that model on your EA or EAP you can continue buying under that model until your agreement ends. Additionally, if you have SQL Server Enterprise processor licenses on your EA or EAP, you can continue to purchase processor licenses (rather than core licenses) through the end of your agreement.

This presents a number of opportunities for organizations to save money moving forward but having a strategy will be key! If you don't already have these products on your EA or EAP, you might want to consider if you should add them prior to the release of Microsoft SQL Server 2012 (as opposed to waiting until your next true-up which might mean you miss an opportunity). 

As always, let us know if we can help you create a Microsoft licensing strategy that is most beneficial to your organization!

Microsoft Windows Server Price Increase? Check Your Sources!

It has come to my attention that one of the large resellers is telling their US clients that Microsoft will be doing a 15% price increase on Microsoft Windows Server products effective January 1, 2012. The information I've received is that this is not accurate, that it does not apply to the US (Latin America may want to check into it though). 

However; I'm not a reseller and I'm not Microsoft so I don't have access to price lists. So, the point of my story? Check your sources! If one of your resellers is giving you this advice, please check it out with another reliable reseller and with your Microsoft account team. 

 Additionally, if your reseller does give you this type of wrong advice...might be time to re-evaluate resellers. Yes, everyone can make mistakes - but I'll tell you frankly, this reseller has been on my list of "least desirables" for a long time due to some of their practices and this just put a nail in their coffin for me. 

Happy Holidays - and here's hoping that January doesn't bring a price increase on Microsoft Server products!

Software Licensing Agreements - Enterprises Be Careful of What You're Signing!

I work with companies of all sizes so I see a lot of trends based upon size. One disturbing trend I've been seeing lately applies predominantly to my Enterprise customers who rely on their Procurement department to negotiate all contracts. 

Procurement is a key player in any negotiation, but I think it's risky to rely completely on them for finalizing a software licensing agreement. What may look benign to a Procurement expert may easily send off red alert signals to a licensing expert. Within the past month alone I have seen supposedly well negotiated language cost three of my newer clients over $5 million combined to a single publisher. While we can frequently get these agreements re-negotiated we were brought in after the publisher already had been made aware of the situation and their eye on the paycheck...hard to get much of a budge then. 

Here are some examples: 1) Microsoft Enrollment for Application Platform (EAP). Sure, this offers great discounts on SQL server as well as other products but be sure to read the fine print! This enrollment commits the company to licensing all of their SQL deployments (or other product that is enrolled) through the EAP. If you own legacy licenses and are running legacy versions but you didn't enroll those licenses into the EAP with Software Assurance you are essentially giving up your right to that license for the term of the EAP. Even new licenses that you buy but don't buy through the EAP are essentially useless. 2) Audit or true-up assistance program clauses. Check these over carefully to make sure that the scope of any outside assistance is clearly identified and restricted to the appropriate products, divisions and terms. Also make sure that it doesn't provide restrictions that the underlying agreement doesn't dictate (such as the requirement to purchase maintenance, etc). 3) Downgrade rights. Not all software automatically has downgrade rights. Attachmate products for example frequently do not permit downgrade rights unless you procure maintenance. If your technical organization needs to run older versions of the software make sure your agreement provides for you to procure additional licenses but still run the version that meets the needs of your organization. 4) Definition of the Enterprise, entity, affiliates, etc. Make sure this definition fits your organizations needs. Signing an agreement that defines your Enterprise as being all "Knowledge Workers" for example, isn't necessarily a good fit if you have a large percentage of users who do not use the technology being licensed (for example, licensing all your "Knowledge Workers" for the Microsoft Core CAL when you have a significant percentage that are on Novell and Notes with no Microsoft interaction except the Windows Server CAL). By definition you would have to procure licenses that would never be used and cost far more than the license you do need. 

While many of these apply to organizations of all sizes, I find that the small/mid-size organizations that rely more heavily on their IT or licensing staff to negotiate the contracts often catch these before signing (but yes, Procurement plays an important part so there may be many other costly mistakes these non-Procurement folks are making). 

My recommendation - Procurement, make sure the final review process includes your internal Licensing Expert (if you have one) or your IT team (if you don't have one). Also, give some solid consideration to having an external expert review it - the price tag is very reasonable and the risks are extremely high.