I don't mind the "subscription" model to their software (we've been doing
this for years with everyone else--Mathematica, MathCAD, AutoDesk, etc.),
but what "is" starting to worry me are the changes to the Campus License
Agreement each year. It was definitely more cost effective for us at the
USAF Academy to purchase the original Campus License Agreement Version 1 two
years ago, since we were requiring our students to purchase Windows and
Office Pro previously; plus we had to provide the Backoffice CALs. So it
saved both the students and the campus money to "lease" our software.
When the Service Academies began negotiating a "joint license" with
Microsoft over 4 years ago, we insisted upon an upper bound to the price
increase each year (which turned out to be 10%). However, Microsoft has now
changed the conditions of the Campus License Agreement each year, adding
more products, deleting some products, and now making all products under
Version 3 ala-cart. With all the changes to the agreement each year, we may
no longer be able to make similar price comparisons.
Fortunately, this year we have the option to just "renew" our Version 2
license, but I don't believe we will be able to do that next year. I want
some assurance that we will not constantly be paying more for less with each
new iteration of the agreement.
Larry W. Bryant
Director, Academic Computing
2354 Fairchild Dr, Suite 6F9
USAFA, CO 80840
From: Con Dietz [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2001 1:50 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [LICENSING] Microsoft Licensing
I have been told on occasion that "I just don't get it." Sometimes it is
even true! Now, I would say to Microsoft, "You just don't get it."
Why is Microsoft trying (I hope unsuccessfully) to get all of us (higher
education institutions) to lease software annually instead of buying a
license to use?
Don't they know that:
1) it will cost us more,
2) not everyone needs the latest and greatest every year,
3) even if we wanted the latest and greatest it might not be efficient to
learn about the new software every year,
4) all of us (that I know about) collectively (through Educause) and
individually, want to, and take steps to, prevent unauthorized use,
5) we want graduates to be cognizant of the software used in their careers,
6) it is in the best interests of Microsoft to have higher education teach
students to use their software.
I could go on, but at some point we (higher education) will be forced to use
other software. I have tried to talk to Microsoft representatives at
multiple levels regarding the fact that their site licensing policies will
cause us to spend money we don't have and have licenses we just don't need.
They fail to get it.
Which is it?
1) I just don't get it, or
2) Microsoft just doesn't get it.
How can we have an impact? What could Educause do in support of it's