Microsoft Software Asset Management Review SAM
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@Carnival-Boy said:
Well, he definitely doesn't have a copy of any agreements.
Who agreed to the volume license agreements then?
Me.
I don't suppose that you have a copy?
I think that if you log into the volume license center than you can get a copy of it, but I am just guessing.
-
Also check the EULA, might just be in there.
-
This is a big reason why, when dealing with brand new companies, I try to make them think VERY carefully about if they need Windows. The penalty is huge.
-
If you use tons of Windows, the penalty is small overall. But bringing in that one Windows server in an otherwise Windows free shop can create a lot of overhead.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
I think that if you log into the volume license center than you can get a copy of it, but I am just guessing.
I assumed so, that's why I asked how to get it as I couldn't find it. But I've found it now. Or at least, I've found a copy of our Open Licence Agreement. But I can't find anything there that say Microsoft can audit everything - even non-Microsoft software and hardware. Where did you get this information from? Are you sure you didn't dream it?
All I can see on auditing is this passage:
- Verifying compliance.
Customer must keep all usual and proper records relating to the Products Customer runs. Microsoft may request that Customer conduct an internal audit of all Microsoft Products in use throughout Customer’s organization, comparing the number of Products in use to the number of effective Licenses issued in Customer’s name. Following any audit, Customer agrees to deliver to Microsoft a written statement signed by its authorized representative, certifying that either (1) Customer has sufficient Licenses to permit all usage disclosed by the audit, or (2) Customer has ordered sufficient Licenses to permit all usage disclosed by the audit. By requesting an audit, Microsoft does not waive its rights to enforce this agreement or to protect Microsoft’s intellectual property by any other means permitted by law, including conducting an onsite audit.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
@scottalanmiller said:
I think that if you log into the volume license center than you can get a copy of it, but I am just guessing.
I assumed so, that's why I asked how to get it as I couldn't find it. But I've found it now. Or at least, I've found a copy of our Open Licence Agreement. But I can't find anything there that say Microsoft can audit everything - even non-Microsoft software and hardware. Where did you get this information from? Are you sure you didn't dream it?
All I can see on auditing is this passage:
- Verifying compliance.
Customer must keep all usual and proper records relating to the Products Customer runs. Microsoft may request that Customer conduct an internal audit of all Microsoft Products in use throughout Customer’s organization, comparing the number of Products in use to the number of effective Licenses issued in Customer’s name. Following any audit, Customer agrees to deliver to Microsoft a written statement signed by its authorized representative, certifying that either (1) Customer has sufficient Licenses to permit all usage disclosed by the audit, or (2) Customer has ordered sufficient Licenses to permit all usage disclosed by the audit. By requesting an audit, Microsoft does not waive its rights to enforce this agreement or to protect Microsoft’s intellectual property by any other means permitted by law, including conducting an onsite audit.
Doesn't that cover the scenario? You are being asked to do the former in the hopes of avoiding the latter?
-
You can always grab a solicitor and see what they think that you need to do.
-
I'm sure that what you are bound to do is different in the UK than in the US.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
Doesn't that cover the scenario?
No. The agreement says I have to audit our Microsoft licences. You say I have to audit our Linux Workstations. They are completely different things.
If it said "Microsoft may request that Customer conduct an internal audit of all Microsoft Products and any other non-Microsoft products that we specify in use throughout Customer’s organization" then I'd get your point.
Maybe it is different in the US. I know the US is a pretty crazy country at the best of times.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Doesn't that cover the scenario?
No. The agreement says I have to audit our Microsoft licences. You say I have to audit our Linux Workstations. They are completely different things.
If it said "Microsoft may request that Customer conduct an internal audit of all Microsoft Products and any other non-Microsoft products that we specify in use throughout Customer’s organization" then I'd get your point.
Maybe it is different in the US. I know the US is a pretty crazy country at the best of times.
Maybe you don't have to. You'd have to ask a solicitor. It's a self-audit, so they only know what you choose to disclose. But that means you don't need to mention printers, phones, etc. either.
-
-
@scottalanmiller said:
If you use tons of Windows, the penalty is small overall. But bringing in that one Windows server in an otherwise Windows free shop can create a lot of overhead.
How many companies do you run into today that don't have windows at all?
-
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
If you use tons of Windows, the penalty is small overall. But bringing in that one Windows server in an otherwise Windows free shop can create a lot of overhead.
How many companies do you run into today that don't have windows at all?
Depends on what they do. Datacenter I contract for has no windows at all. We couldn't even run windows on the old stuff if we wanted to as it was IBM system I.
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
If you use tons of Windows, the penalty is small overall. But bringing in that one Windows server in an otherwise Windows free shop can create a lot of overhead.
How many companies do you run into today that don't have windows at all?
Depends on what they do. Datacenter I contract for has no windows at all. We couldn't even run windows on the old stuff if we wanted to as it was IBM system I.
OK that was their data center - but they had not a single employee on a windows system?
I know this is becoming more common in silicon valley, but the rest of the country/world?
-
Also unless the EULAs changed last time I've had SAM come. You do agree to be Audited, but there is nothing about you having to use the paper work they push on you. Most people are scared to push SAM back any as they don't have good paper work in place and think they could fail. We've always kept good internal records, and then given those over to SAM. They ask us to fill out lots of random paper work with the same information in a different format. No. You either take what we give you or we will charge you $150/hr for doing your work. It worked every time for us. Never had an issue with a single review.
-
@Dashrender said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
If you use tons of Windows, the penalty is small overall. But bringing in that one Windows server in an otherwise Windows free shop can create a lot of overhead.
How many companies do you run into today that don't have windows at all?
Depends on what they do. Datacenter I contract for has no windows at all. We couldn't even run windows on the old stuff if we wanted to as it was IBM system I.
OK that was their data center - but they had not a single employee on a windows system?
I know this is becoming more common in silicon valley, but the rest of the country/world?
CloudatCost, Digital Ocean and others are entire hosting companies that are non-Windows. It's more common than you think. Especially outside of the US where the "Windows everywhere" mentality doesn't exist.
-
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
If you use tons of Windows, the penalty is small overall. But bringing in that one Windows server in an otherwise Windows free shop can create a lot of overhead.
How many companies do you run into today that don't have windows at all?
Not many but they are increasing. But this is why you make the decision before you bring them in. Don't bring them in and find out what it means afterwards.
-
Most companies make bad decisions. Most companies go out of business. Most need help. Nearly all CAN do without Windows, they just choose to take on the Windows overhead. Sometimes for good reasons, sometimes for bad ones (like they couldn't be bothered to evaluate and look at the long term costs.) That lots of companies make bad decisions doesn't mean that we shouldn't try to help them make good ones - which might easily mean using Windows, but they should choose it because it is right for them, not because they just did something random and hoped that it would work.
-
@Dashrender said:
OK that was their data center - but they had not a single employee on a windows system?
I know this is becoming more common in silicon valley, but the rest of the country/world?
Why would we. What tools would windows provide to someone who uses no windows only software. It was all Linux VDIs even on the call center floor. (and this is a retail/online and mail order catalog chain.) No windows at all.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
Most companies make bad decisions. Most companies go out of business. Most need help. Nearly all CAN do without Windows, they just choose to take on the Windows overhead. Sometimes for good reasons, sometimes for bad ones (like they couldn't be bothered to evaluate and look at the long term costs.) That lots of companies make bad decisions doesn't mean that we shouldn't try to help them make good ones - which might easily mean using Windows, but they should choose it because it is right for them, not because they just did something random and hoped that it would work.
Heck the county paid $50,000 a year to use SirsiDynix for the libraries because someone at the library "liked it" it sucked and client side was based on java. Evergreen is a way better FOSS ILS but they didn't want to learn a new system. http://evergreen-ils.org/
