[LINK] Microsoft (was: GPLv3 - Update)

[Malcolm Miles]

On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 12:03:15 +0930, you wrote:

>> ... they've been pushing Software Assurance (tm) over the past few years.   
>> However, as I understand it, customers have called their bluff on SA
>
>I wouldn't say "called their bluff" so much as done the math.
>Any organisation that signed up for SA is now spending more
>money than they would have buying the software outright.

It depends on when your Microsoft agreement ends. If your agreement
doesn't expire until say July next year then, if you had SA on Office
and XP then you would be saving money as the new versions of these
products are expected to be released before then. Generally if there
is one product upgrade during the lifecycle of your Microsoft
agreement than you will come out ahead if you take up Software
Assurance.

>Worse for Microsoft is the graphics requirements for the Vista
>user interface.  They're much higher than on corporate PCs
>being installed today.  So an entire "Vista Premium Ready"
>fleet of PCs will need to be installed to run Vista.  Corporates
>lease their PCs for three years, so Microsoft are looking at
>three years before they see much corporate revenue from Vista.

All the thousands of PCs at work currently running XP will happily run
Vista, no need to upgrade. No pretty Aero Glass UI but that is not a
great loss.

-- 
Best wishes,
Malcolm