Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Customers Get No Bang for Buck

sammy baby writes "Software missing its ship date is commonplace enough that it's usually only mentioned for yuks. However, subscribers to Microsoft's Software Assurance program are discovering that it can have some very real repercussions. According to NetworkWorld, many licencees are discovering that due to slipping release dates, many thousands of dollars spent on these contracts have brought them zero return."

22 of 328 comments (clear)

  1. Can't Finger Just Microsoft by ackthpt · · Score: 5, Insightful
    According to NetworkWorld, many licencees are discovering that due to slipping release dates, many thousands of dollars spent on these contracts have brought them zero return."

    At what point did these customers forget they are dealing with a software company? Missed dates, slippage, heck, I work as a programmer and there's often good reasons (You can have it now unfinished, untested or with bugs OR you can wait for it to be finished, passed Q/A and tested), granted there are numerous examples of Microsoft using the customer for testing after rollout ("Oh, that bug will be fixed in the next service pack"), but again I don't think they're unique. They're just singled out because Microsoft is a favorite whipping boy. Imagine the losses that may be incurred by (more) flawed code being released on schedule.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    1. Re:Can't Finger Just Microsoft by Omnifarious · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Except, of course, that Microsoft is selling something it bills as a subscription. People expect certain things from a subscription, and regular, on-time releases are among them. I would go so far as to say that Microsoft is being very misleading in calling it a 'subscription' and then not adopting processes that lead to a very regular and predictable release cycle.

      If they can't actually deliver the product, they shouldn't offer it. Of course, I'm sure that when people bought it, there were probably pages and pages of fine print disallowing them from holding Microsoft responsible for anything at all, so I doubt they could be sued for fraud, but that's what'd happen in a normal marketplace.

    2. Re:Can't Finger Just Microsoft by belmolis · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The fact that software doesn't always come out on time isn't the point. The point is that for a lot of people the main reason to pay thousands of dollars for software maintenance is to get upgrades without having to pay extra for them. If they don't get them, they have reason to think twice about shelling out for software maintenance. They can forgo maintenance and purchase upgrades when they come out if they decide that they are worthwhile, or they can use FLOSS products, where with luck somebody else will improve it, and where if necessary they can make improvements themselves or hire somebody else to do it. Microsoft's delays are reducing the reason not to go with these alternatives.

    3. Re:Can't Finger Just Microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Im unsure whether you read the article, but the problem is 2-fold.

      Yes, the CTO of Digitech is an absolute fool. He was "expecting" a release, but you don't sign a contract in July, 2002 for something thats going to be released. I assume he wasn't given any guarantee's in writing about the release date.

      That said, the main reason to buy into Software Assurance is to get the upgrades. Hell, the whole thing is marketed towards smaller companies so they can get upgrades when they are released. And if you don't buy into Software Assurance (or the Enterprise Agreement), you don't get things like "Intelligent Message Filter" for Exchange, for example. If you want to get all the upgrades and software, they do tricks like that to force companies into signing Software Assurance (if they want all of MS's products, that is), and the companies are realizing there is no guarantee of any value for the Software Assurance program.

      So in other words, companies might start looking for alternatives, a whole host of contracts are coming up for renewal, and MS are looking at a lower bottom line because of it. Expect some announcements for MS soon that announce new software releases, or "sweeteners" in their licensing agreements.

    4. Re:Can't Finger Just Microsoft by denissmith · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It isn't merely a case of Microsoft being a favorite whipping boy. A few years ago when Microsoft announced its move to the new software assurance scheme and people complained loudly that a program where they paid Microsoft a set annual fee for a two year timeframe and MS contracted to maybe release new software and maybe not - those complainers were treating MS as their favorite whipping boy. We are merely saying WE TOLD YOU SO.

      This isn't about slipped delivery schedules, or product quality - its about money.

      The old scheme where people paid for upgrade licenses was abandoned because MS wanted, I believe the phrase was "a more predictable revenue stream" - in other words a MS tax on businesses regardless of the delivery. In short a scam, because that is what it is - I am not bashing MS when i relate that - I am telling the truth.

      --
      I have nothing to hide. So, why are you spying on me?
    5. Re:Can't Finger Just Microsoft by ePhil_One · · Score: 5, Informative
      They could offer something like perpetual licensing . . . then there is no risk with slipped schedules. Term licensing is where you get fucked.

      Microsoft does offer perpetual licenses. Buy a copy of Windows XP and you are licensed to run it forever. What software assurance offers is an entitlement to all upgrades released while your contract is in effect, only Open Source and a few small titles offer upgrades in perpetuity. Plus, many companies already took advantage of these term to upgrade Windows 2000 workstations to Windows XP, so its not as bad as the headline makes out. Then again, I've successfully negotiate terms in my maintenance contracts that they are valid until Product X is released to cover for slippage, in those cases where the manufacturer was attempting to collect for Product X in advance. I wouldn't be surprised to see MS release Windows YA (NT 5.2) as an interim, just to keep folks happy, Sort of a Windows ME for the NT generation.

      Of course, we also passed on the killer opportunity MS's Software Assurance offered us. We're not racing to be the first on the block with MS's latest.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisted little posts, all alike.
  2. Re:In all fairness... by MrRTFM · · Score: 5, Insightful

    yes, but people aren't paying an annual subscription for Duke Nukem forever - that's the problem.

    We all know that software is late, but we shouldn't have to pay for it if it doesnt arrive.

    --
    You can't expect to wield supreme executive power, just because some watery tart threw a sword at you
  3. The ridiculous risk of paying in advance by ashitaka · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I am one of those IT managers that had a real problem with Microsoft's Licensing 6.0. By essentially forcing IT managers into pre-paying for upgrades every three years that they may or may not use and removing any possibility of customer loyalty upgrades, Microsoft went from fair preservation of their revenue flow to outright extortion.

    Essentially you are being asked to pay a substantial amount of your IT budget for an upgrade sight unseen. Usually before you bring a product into your company you evaluate it for technical soundness and applicability to user needs and business requirements.

    Microsoft seems to assume that their upgrades will always meet these requirements.

    --
    If you don't want to repeat the past, stop living in it.
    1. Re:The ridiculous risk of paying in advance by overshoot · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Usually before you bring a product into your company you evaluate it for technical soundness and applicability to user needs and business requirements.

      Microsoft seems to assume that their upgrades will always meet these requirements.

      No, they're quite realistically acting on the observation that eventually you'll adjust your requirements to fit their product. For instance, NT4.0 is going to be replaced because one of those "business requirements" is "continuing support."

      I've watched as W2K replaced NT4.0 and WinXP replaced W2K. At each step, the IT staff reported all sorts of problems with the new version and no material benefits. In reponse, their management ordered them to solve the problems so that the new flavor could be deployed.

      That's real life on the front lines, theory notwithstanding.

      --
      Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
  4. Calculating the value of a sealed box... by LostCluster · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's impossible to tell in advance what these contracts are going to be worth. In short, these people paid for any updates to Windows in 2004 or 2005 on the assumption that there would be one. Microsoft never promised one, but they hinted that Longhorn should be ready by then, and it's been Microsoft's habit to release a new OS every two or three years.

    Well, sorry, no new release. Nobody promised one, they just assumed like fools that there'd be one. Ton of money wasted. Oops.

    Thing is, how can Microsoft ever sell these subscriptions again to companies that paid and got nothing?

  5. For instance: by eddy · · Score: 5, Informative

    Just to show that this couldn't possibly come as a surprise for whoever PHB'es penned these agreements:

    Customers who "upgrade" to the Licensing 6.0 scheme also lose ownership of Microsoft software products and are thereby nudged into limited term licensing with periodic extensions (with or without any code updates), as shall be dictated by Microsoft -- in other words, software leases. -- The Inq. 16 July 2002

    ..and..

    "According to a report on News.com, a survey of 1000 technology managers around the world showed that the 60% of companies that signed up for the deal have ended up paying more." -- The Inq.. 21 March 2003.

    So it's not "news" that this scheme would cost you a whole lot with the possibility (and high probability) of giving almost nothing in return.

    If anyone who signing up for Licensing 6.0 actually believed that Microsoft would let them get the next great thing "for free", then I've got one nice bridge to sel^H^H^Hlease them.

    --
    Belief is the currency of delusion.
  6. You get what you pay for... by syousef · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The CIO of a company should know better than to get a maintenance contract just so he can upgrade based on a roadmap that may or may not materialize. If you want the maintenance only so you can upgrade, wait until the upgrade is out and THEN sign a maintenance contract.

    The CIO needs to make it clear in summary to the CEO and CFO that these are the expected benefits, these are the assumptions I'm making and these are the risks. In my opinion he didn't do his job and now he's blaming Microsoft for failing to pedict the future, and he's making a fool of himself in the process.

    If you're going to blame Microsoft, blame them for something they've done wrong. Don't try to penalize them for telling you what their plans are (a good practice in my opinion), or for your own stupidity. It makes you look like a whinning twit when you do have a legitimate complaint.

    --
    These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
  7. Now how can they say that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    many thousands of dollars spent on these contracts have brought them zero return.

    Why, just in the last few months they got Blaster and Bagel and MyDoom and Skynet and...

  8. What would the smartest man on Earth do? by craXORjack · · Score: 5, Funny
    Microsoft recently said it was working on something called XP Reloaded, which appears to be an interim release of the desktop operating system before the big upgrade to Longhorn now slated for 2006. It also lets Microsoft put some software in the pipeline for Software Assurance customers. A similar upgrade is rumored for Office,

    John Conner: Boss, our customers realize they have been ripped off.
    Bill Gate: We've seen this problem before. We'll just release Service Pack 5 as a new OS. It's new if we say it is. Have Marketing design a new splash screen. That will fool all those bumpkins.
    John Conner: <snicker> You're right again Bill!
    Bill Gate: Yes I am, because I am smarter than everyone else.
    John Conner: Then do you think you could help me out? My mother, Sarah, is being chased by a cybernetic killing machine sent from the future...

    --
    Liberals call everyone Nazis yet they are the closest thing to it.
  9. Golden Opportunity for Open Source by Rick+the+Red · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Hey, boss, Microsoft gave you nothing for something. Now check out this OOo stuff, where you get something for nothing."

    --
    If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
    1. Re:Golden Opportunity for Open Source by Rick+the+Red · · Score: 5, Funny

      Uh, thanks for the "Funny" moderation, but I was serious.

      --
      If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
  10. That's why I didn't do it by peacefinder · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I happened to be in charge of IT for two different small companies near the Software Assurance deadline, and made the recommendation to decline the move to SA.

    In both cases, it just did not look worthwhile... I didn't think the Microsoft product cycle was likely to be fast enough to warrant the subscription. (Plus I was annoyed with the enforced change, as were many other folks in the industry... but that wasn't sufficient basis for the decision, alas.)

    But it was a pretty high stakes game. Guessing wrong would cost thouands of dollars in the long run for each company. It's quite a relief to see that I guessed correctly... so far.

    Amusingly, Microsoft has now managed to give pretty much all of its business customers cause to be annoyed with them. The first group was annoyed by the enforced choice between the loss of upgrade value and the expense of Software Assurance. The second group, that chose SA, should be getting pissed off right about... [checks watch]... now.

    --
    With reasonable men I will reason; with humane men I will plead; but to tyrants I will give no quarter. -- William Lloyd
  11. Don't pay the ferry man... by Gavin+Scott · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think the ultimate product for stupid people will be pre-paid health insurance (coming soon to an HR department near you I'm sure).

    Once you've paid for such a plan, it's in the provider's interest for you to die as quickly and efficiently as possible so that they get your money but don't have to provide any services in return.

    The Microsoft pre-paid license program is just one step below this.

    On the other hand, the typical business customer might actually like a way to pay for *not* having software updates, since constantly having to upgrade to the latest version is a pain in the neck, along with having to deal with the feature bloat that is required to otherwise motivate people to upgrade.

    This is the business that RedHat has gotten into where in exchange for money they guarantee that the software you're running today will remain supported for a much longer period and you won't be forced to upgrade before you want to, and it's clearly the direction Microsoft is tring to move as they start running out of compelling feature-based reasons to upgrade from verison N to N+1.

    So if you don't want things to change, by all means pay in advance, but if you're looking forward to new features, wait until the product actually ships before handing over your money.

    G.

  12. Priceless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    MSDN Subscription: $2,000
    Windows XP License Agreement x 200: $12,000
    Office License Agreement x 200: $20,000
    Being Bill Gates and laughing all the way to the bank for having to provide nothing extra: Priceless

    For all your price gouging and junk software there's Microsoft. For everything else, there's Open Source.

  13. Microsoft pulled this on MSDN already by Desolation+Row · · Score: 5, Insightful

    From two years (2000 through 2001) Microsoft provided essentially nothing in the way of new programming tools (or heaven forbid, bug fixes) to it's $2,000/seat MSDN customers.
    After two years of 90% profit margins ($200 worth of duplicate DVD/CDs + shipping), in 2002, they raised the price by about $1000 for 2002's .NET so their net profit remained $1800/year.

    So, except for the few MSDN customers who were smart/quick enough to figure out what Microsoft was up to, they ended up paying $7000 + $2500/yr for .NET. (To be fair, it comes with a free copy of Office 2003.)

  14. Wanna bet? by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I think you put to much faith into CTO's. After all there has been plenty of warning this could happen. Did they listen? No. The kind of people that signed are the ****** who believe in "roadmaps". I have even seen them critize Linux for providing roadmaps/timelines and claiming this is why MS was better.

    Small problem. There is a huge difference between publishing a roadmap/timeline and keeping it. Software is sadly a hugely complex product. Worse it is horribly interconnected meaning that it takes forever to properly test and you can bet the moment it is out someone comes accross a situation you never though off.

    But this is well known. So nobody in their right mind counts on a software product being released on time or in a promised form. Like the real world you only trust what is actually right there in front of you.

    Would you buy a car that during the testdrive fails the brake test but they promise they fix it in yours? Of course not. So why do you buy software that you tested as broken but they will fix it in a patch they are going to make?

    This is even worse. This is like buying a car on the promise that if they come out with a better model in 3 years they will give you that one.

    No the people who signed up for this are MS junkies of the worst kind. They will signup again cause it is easier then thinking. Worse if they don't signup again they will have to admit they weren't thinking the first time. Signup again and all they gotta do is gloss over the fact that nothing was received in return. That is easy.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  15. Are Microsofts programs becoming "good enough"? by TheCeltic · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It appears to me that Windows/Office/etc. are finally becoming "good enough" and people/companies are not seeing the need to upgrade anymore. (I know.. both windows and office are still buggy and closed source, but for most desktop users they are good enough... finally). What does this do to Microsoft's business model of "force your customers to upgrade every x number of years"? I imagine that is why Bill G. wants the world to go to subscription based software (i.e. rent Office per month).

    --
    =-=-=-=-=-=-=-= - The Celtic - =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=