This article has been moved to our new platform:
RDS and other licensing related white papers: https://mscloudlicensing.com/document-library/
RDS licensing questions from the community
https://mscloudlicensing.com/forum/
RDS Blog Article
https://mscloudlicensing.com/blog-articles/
I love the question “What’s your cloud strategy?” It’s the new ice breaker for salespeople around the globe. My thoughts? Why bother asking customers about their cloud strategy if it does not include licensing? The BIGGEST mistake service providers (SPLA’s) make is selling a solution first and worrying about the licensing impact later. They build data centers, talk about virtualizing, even talk about the savings of cap ex vs. op ex, but never talk about the licensing until someone brings it up or they get audited. Just because the technology enables something, does not mean you can license that way.
VDI is a prime example of this. “You can host virtual desktops as a service right? Install the desktop OS on a server and stream it? Why not? The concept has been around for years. I ‘Googled’ VDI as a service and several companies are doing this…it must be right…right?” Wrong! Yes, technically speaking you can host virtual desktops using Windows 7/8. Licensing gurus and the product user rights and the audit team will disagree with you. Unfortunately there’s no way to do this under SPLA. Next question that comes up is “why?” Wish I knew the answer, perhaps Microsoft is looking out after the OEM manufactures, but then again they launched Surface.
Microsoft is auditing everyone. There are few guarantees in life, but one guarantee is not everyone under the SPLA program is licensing correctly. Just a word of advice, know the licensing before implementing a solution.
Thanks for reading,
SPLA Man
Whether you’re signing a new SPLA or renewing your old one, timing is everything. When you sign an agreement, you are bound by the use rights at the time of sigining. For example, if you sign a new SPLA in April, 2013 you will be bound by the SPUR (product use rights) for April 2013.
Why is this important? As with technology, licensing is always evolving. As an example, with the release of SQL 2012, Microsoft switched from a processor based licensing structure to a core based licensing structure. Since the 2013 SPUR only has core licensing (not processor), you will be forced to license by core when you sign a new SPLA regardless of which version you have installed. In other words, anyone (whether renewing or new) who signs an agreement after December 31st, 2012 will be forced to license by core.
Windows 2012 is another change that can impact your usage reporting. With the release of Windows 2012 last August, anyone who signs a new SPLA after August 31st, 2012 will be forced to license by the 2012 use rights. You can run previous versions such as 2008, but you will need to license by the current SPUR.
What happens if you sign a new SPLA in August before the license change? You will have 3 years (SPLA is a 3 year agreement) to license the old way. The catch? If you migrate any servers to the 2012 version you will have to license those servers by the 2012 use rights. For example, if you are running SQL 2008 R2 Standard edition and decide to migrate to SQL 2012 Standard edition, the new server will need to be reported by the core not by processor!
Ask in advance for the licensing impact before renewing your SPLA agreement. Better yet, follow this blog for the latest updates and you will be well prepared!
Thanks for reading-
SPLA Man
Article update: We created a new website called MSCloudlicensing to help SPLA and CSP partners understand the different program options and use rights available to them. The site is designed to be a collaborative platform, which includes a forum to ask and answer licensing questions, document library, and licensing articles. It’s more in depth than a simple blog. Check it out, it’s free! www.mscloudlicensing.com
In my years of managing the SPLA program, I came to the conclusion that no one likes to babysit an Exchange server. Organizations do not have the resources or the time to constantly monitor a server, and hosters (if that’s a word) feel the pressure of managing a mission critical application such as email. If it goes down, not only can you lose a customer, but the customer might lose business as well!
For those hosters that feel up to the challenge, Exchange can be a very profitable opportunity. Whenever there is complexity, along comes value…which every hoster needs to run a business. What’s the downside? As always, there’s a concern over licensing.
Exchange for SPLA partners (hosters) comes in five flavors: Exchange Basic, Standard, Standard Plus, Enterprise, and Enterprise Plus. Each comes with different functionality as well as price. From experience, 90% of what is being reported is the Exchange Standard SKU. The breakdown of each SKU is as follows:
Exchange Basic – Think of OWA/POP Mail only
Exchange Standard – Features of Exchange Basic as well as shared calendaring and mobile device synchronization
Exchange Standard Plus – Features of Exchange Standard plus the full Outlook client
Exchange Enterprise – Includes all the features of Exchange Standard as well as unified messaging and anti virus/spam features
Exchange Enterprise Plus – All the features listed above plus the full Outlook client
The list above is just an overview, for a full feature list check out the SPUR (user section). The way you license Exchange is by user. Every user that HAS access to the software will need a license; not who does access. Think of your cable company, they will charge you regardless if you turn your TV on or not. User licenses works the same way.
In my opinion, the key to a successful Exchange launch is to offer a multi-tenant (shared) environment. If you license Windows by processor (Exchange runs on a Windows OS) and Exchange by user, the more users you have on that particular server the less expensive it is for the user. Eventually all you are charging is the cost of the Exchange license. That’s how large service providers are able to seemingly charge less. They have thousands of users accessing a limited number of servers in a shared environment.
If a customer wants a dedicated environment (one server hosting one client) the end customer can bring their licenses to you and you host it for them, or provide the licenses via SPLA, but the cost per user is going to be higher (unless it’s a large enterprise).
Once you offer Exchange, it makes it easier to offer other collaboration applications as well; such as SharePoint, CRM, and Lync. Who knows, you might become the next Amazon or Rackspace.
Thanks for reading!
SPLA Man
The newest addition to the SharePoint family has features that are built off it’s younger sibling; SharePoint 2010, but offers cool/semi cool new features as well. For a full list check out Microsoft.com/sharepoint.
Personally, we don’t care about the features, all we care about is how to license it! SharePoint 2013 for Hosting Providers is not overly complicated, and if you knew how to license SharePoint 2010, chances are you will know how to license the 2013 version.
To license SharePoint 2013, you will either need to license by user (intranet sites) or by processor (extranet site). If it’s for your customers employees or contractors, you have to license by user (SAL). If you require Enterprise functionality, you will need to license SharePoint Standard and Enterprise together. (SharePoint Enterprise is an additive license to Standard).
Some things did change with the new edition. For starters, I noticed the lnaguage in the SPUR has changed for the processor based license. It now reads:
All content, information, and applications accessible by internal users must also be accessible to external users. Access to servers that provide content, information, and applications that are limited to internal users, must be licensed under SharePoint Server 2013 SALs. “External users” means users that are not either (i) your customer’s employees, or (ii) your customer’s onsite contractors or agents. All other users are “internal users.”
In other words, if you have users that are external and internal, you can license by processor for both scenarios. The trick is this – the same information has to be accessible to both groups. If it’s not, you would have to license internal users by SAL and external users by processor. If you are running this in a virtual environment – you will have to license the virtual processors.
To recap:
1. If you license SharePoint by user (internal employees only) you need to report SharePoint Standard Sals. If you need SharePoint Enterprise, you need to report SharePoint Standard + SharePoint Enterprise
2. SharePoint requres SQL (either Standard or Enterprise)
3. SharePoint Foundation is free.
4. Always report Windows
5. External users = processor.
6. Virtual environment? – Must license virtual procs (if external)
I wrote a new blog post that tells a fictitious story about a SPLA licensing SharePoint incorrectly. You can check it out
Hope this helps! Thanks for reading.
SPLA Man
If you recently went through an audit or just nervous about being notified, I outlined ten steps that service providers can take to arm themselves more efficiently and be compliant.
This is not bulletproof by any means. Use this as a guide when looking at your own environment. Look at it from the auditors eyes. What information would they need to verify that I am compliant? The SPUR (Service Provider Use Rights) is the best reference when it comes to Microsoft SPLA. You can download a copy here. If you have trouble sleeping at night; this is a must read.
Thanks for reading,
SPLA Man
SPLA Licensing 