Microsoft revamps software licensing structure

 

Helps firms navigate ongoing contracts.

Microsoft has announced a number of changes to its licensing structure in an attempt to simplify licence management and costs for customers.

Joe Matz, corporate vice president of worldwide licensing and pricing at Microsoft, said in an interview with the company's PressPass service that the changes were led by customer feedback.

"I regularly visit organisations around the world to better understand their licensing needs. My team conducts global customer surveys that take the pulse of more than three million customers each year," he said.

"Customers feel the pressure of the economic environment and look for ways to save money on the IT investments they have already made. They are looking to Microsoft to deliver software licensing that provides flexible and affordable purchasing solutions that align with how they buy. That is top of mind for us as we design Microsoft Volume Licensing programmes."

Microsoft is planning to launch a number of packaged licence options from October in a choice of two contract options.

"Customers can purchase this offer through the Enterprise Agreement as an enrolment. By signing a Microsoft Enrolment for Application Platform, customers can choose between one of two flexible licensing models: one-year true-up, or three-year true-up," said Matz.

"For customers with a three-year true-up, we provide predictable costs with fixed payments for the term's life."

Matz claimed that customers could see lower costs by taking on the longer-term contract option.

Packaged licences, known as the Enrolment for Core Infrastructure, will help companies to ensure that all areas of a technical infrastructure are covered, Ma tz explained.

"Previously, customers would have purchased our infrastructure technologies using a combination of licensing models, including per-server, per-processor, per-operating system environment and subscription," he said. "With the Enrolment for Core Infrastructure, this is all accomplished on a simple per-processor basis."

Although customer demands have led to many of these changes, Matz conceded that the popularity of software-as-a-service and cheaper cloud-based applications have had an affect.

"Microsoft must strike a balance between providing traditional licensing solutions, and expanding into new ways to purchase and use software, like subscription and online purchasing. Virtualisation is clearly impacting how we license software," he explained.

"Ultimately, we will offer one unified purchasing experience so that customers can purchase and use software licences when they need them, with minimal to no barriers to purchasing and deployment.

"What this means is that customers can purchase through one agreement, and manage their licences through one platform, instead of managing multiple agreements today."

Copyright ©v3.co.uk


Microsoft revamps software licensing structure
 
 
 
Top Stories
 
 
IAG hands digital chief his own ‘Labs’ division
Enterprise ops chief squeezed out in restructure.
 
 
Sign up to receive iTnews email bulletins
   FOLLOW US...
Latest articles on BIT Latest Articles from BIT
The 5 Windows 10 privacy issues you should be aware of
Jul 31, 2015
There are a few unsettling details when it comes to Windows 10 privacy
Windows 10 is here! (For some)
Jul 29, 2015
Delivery of the free upgrade versions of Windows 10 began today - have you got yours yet?
Microsoft reveals Microsoft Send, a new enterprise chat app to rival Slack
Jul 27, 2015
Microsoft Send is MSN Messenger for grownups, and you could be using it at work very soon
Developers offered $500,000 grants to find HoloLens uses
Jul 8, 2015
Can augmented-reality end up in business?
Microsoft Tossup: The planning app for unorganised groups of friends
Jul 8, 2015
App allows friends to research venues, vote on plans and chat. And depending on how you run your ...
Latest Comments
Polls
Should law enforcement be able to buy and use exploits?



   |   View results
Yes
  14%
 
No
  51%
 
Only in special circumstances
  17%
 
Yes, but with more transparency
  18%
TOTAL VOTES: 808

Vote