Vista - Volume License (How is this a good value?)

I want to preface this question with the fact that I am by no means a
licensing expert, I'm just asking in relevance to the information I've found
thus far.

I'm working at a new company that has no real licensing structure, the
previous guy would just run to office depot or some other retailer when a
computer was needed and buy whatever was on sale. The problem is this put a
number of XP home or media center and the newest ones have Vista home. All of
those products do not allow connections to a domain which I'm trying to
deploy.

I thought this would be a good case for volume licensing, I was vaguely
familiar with it, so I decided to look up more detailed information. What I
found was confusing and left me feeling it was a rip off more than a way to
save businesses money and streamline the IT process. So I'm hoping someone
here better experienced in volume license program can help set me straight.

First, I thought that when you bought volume license, you were buying a
complete install of Windows. It appears that is incorrect and it is in fact
just an upgrade. I had one reseller telling me it was illegal to sell a
computer without an OS, which I felt was just odd since I was able to find
multiple large scale retailers selling blank PC's, legality of a blank PC
aside, this did at least point me to one point of truth in that VLK's are
upgrade only, requiring a previous OEM or full Windows to install.

Ok, so now that I made it that far, I inquired as to what constituted a
valid version of windows, and was told only business edition versions
(basically XP Pro and Vista Business) qualify for the Vista VLK upgrade.
Which leads me to my basic question, how is this a value and why would anyone
buy this?

XP is being phased out slowly, none of the current machines I have qualify,
and hence my ultimate solution would have been to buy machines pre-loaded
with Vista business, in order to be able to use a Vista business VLK. Well if
I'm already buying Vista business, why the hell would I buy it again since
I'll need new machines with Vista anyway? Especially since once I buy all
that I need to then buy permission for the computer and the server to talk
(CAL).

Next, another thought I had as to how this might be a value, is that OEM is
tied to the computer it's put on, I thought that meant the business VLK would
allow me to decommission old machines as they age, and replace them with new
ones on the same VLK, esentially transferring the now unused license. But
again I was hit with more information that VLK's are 1 and done just like
OEM, use it on a machine and you can no longer use it again.

So ultimately it looks like my best option is to just buy new machines with
Vista business and to hell with even touching volume licenses, but my
curiousity won't let me drop it. Obviously people are buying VLK's, so where
am I going wrong in the value field?

I appreciate anyone's input on this, Thanks

The value really is in the upgrade rights and streamlined management it
offers businesses. You don't have to activate volume license versions of
Windows since you are licensed in good faith that you will not misuse the
software. I personally believe its not for everyone, but for large corporate
roll outs of hundreds or thousands of machines, its a great value.

If you are small business with a max 20 employees, buying a machine
preloaded with Windows Vista Business is probably more sensible although
Microsoft offers licensing programs for Companies with as little as 5
machines.
--
Andre
Blog: http://adacosta.spaces.live.com
My Vista Quickstart Guide:
http://adacosta.spaces.live.com/blog...3DB!9709.entry
"Troy Crovetto" <TroyCrovetto@xxxxxx> wrote in message
news:9CF72430-593F-4131-A2BD-FF6A46965FA6@xxxxxx

Hello Troy,
Here is the Licensing website which contains a number of papers and
webcasts helping explain some of the licensing.
http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/default.mspx

There are links for how to contact Licensing Specialists to answer some of
these questions.

There are some misconceptions in your posting, that would best be answered
by one of the licensing specialists from the link above.
I am not sure the retailers have told you all the right answers.


Thanks,
Darrell Gorter[MSFT]

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights
--------------------
|> Thread-Topic: Volume License (How is this a good value?)
|> thread-index: AcgmVlSPJJffU/BtRIy5h/uZytGOeg==
|> X-WBNR-Posting-Host: 68.15.163.81
|> From: =?Utf-8?B?VHJveSBDcm92ZXR0bw==?=
<TroyCrovetto@xxxxxx>
|> Subject: Volume License (How is this a good value?)
|> Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 16:36:00 -0800
|> Lines: 52
|> Message-ID: <9CF72430-593F-4131-A2BD-FF6A46965FA6@xxxxxx>
|> MIME-Version: 1.0
|> Content-Type: text/plain;
|> charset="Utf-8"
|> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
|> X-Newsreader: Microsoft CDO for Windows 2000
|> Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message
|> Importance: normal
|> Priority: normal
|> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.2992
|> Newsgroups: microsoft.public.windows.vista.general
|> Path: TK2MSFTNGHUB02.phx.gbl
|> Xref: TK2MSFTNGHUB02.phx.gbl
microsoft.public.windows.vista.general:204762
|> NNTP-Posting-Host: tk2msftibfm01.phx.gbl 10.40.244.149
|> X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.public.windows.vista.general
|>
|> I want to preface this question with the fact that I am by no means a
|> licensing expert, I'm just asking in relevance to the information I've
found
|> thus far.
|>
|> I'm working at a new company that has no real licensing structure, the
|> previous guy would just run to office depot or some other retailer when
a
|> computer was needed and buy whatever was on sale. The problem is this
put a
|> number of XP home or media center and the newest ones have Vista home.
All of
|> those products do not allow connections to a domain which I'm trying to
|> deploy.
|>
|> I thought this would be a good case for volume licensing, I was vaguely
|> familiar with it, so I decided to look up more detailed information.
What I
|> found was confusing and left me feeling it was a rip off more than a way
to
|> save businesses money and streamline the IT process. So I'm hoping
someone
|> here better experienced in volume license program can help set me
straight.
|>
|> First, I thought that when you bought volume license, you were buying a
|> complete install of Windows. It appears that is incorrect and it is in
fact
|> just an upgrade. I had one reseller telling me it was illegal to sell a
|> computer without an OS, which I felt was just odd since I was able to
find
|> multiple large scale retailers selling blank PC's, legality of a blank
PC
|> aside, this did at least point me to one point of truth in that VLK's
are
|> upgrade only, requiring a previous OEM or full Windows to install.
|>
|> Ok, so now that I made it that far, I inquired as to what constituted a
|> valid version of windows, and was told only business edition versions
|> (basically XP Pro and Vista Business) qualify for the Vista VLK upgrade.
|> Which leads me to my basic question, how is this a value and why would
anyone
|> buy this?
|>
|> XP is being phased out slowly, none of the current machines I have
qualify,
|> and hence my ultimate solution would have been to buy machines
pre-loaded
|> with Vista business, in order to be able to use a Vista business VLK.
Well if
|> I'm already buying Vista business, why the hell would I buy it again
since
|> I'll need new machines with Vista anyway? Especially since once I buy
all
|> that I need to then buy permission for the computer and the server to
talk
|> (CAL).
|>
|> Next, another thought I had as to how this might be a value, is that OEM
is
|> tied to the computer it's put on, I thought that meant the business VLK
would
|> allow me to decommission old machines as they age, and replace them with
new
|> ones on the same VLK, esentially transferring the now unused license.
But
|> again I was hit with more information that VLK's are 1 and done just
like
|> OEM, use it on a machine and you can no longer use it again.
|>
|> So ultimately it looks like my best option is to just buy new machines
with
|> Vista business and to hell with even touching volume licenses, but my
|> curiousity won't let me drop it. Obviously people are buying VLK's, so
where
|> am I going wrong in the value field?
|>
|> I appreciate anyone's input on this, Thanks
|>

"Andre Da Costa[ActiveWin]" <andred25@xxxxxx> wrote:
That's correct for older Windows versions, but not for Vista. Two weeks or
so before it was released to volume customers Microsoft dropped the
bombshell that *everybody* had to activate, explicitly including customers
who hold volume license agreements. (No apologies for blindsiding the large
enterprises who are most affected by this.)

Microsoft's own publications about Vista issued prior to RTM carried
references to volume licenseees not having to activate.

Microsoft has explicitly stated that all future software products will also
fall under this change in policy. The sales team assigned to my account
told me that the change was instituted "to help the customer." That's a
direct quote, and the MS droid wasn't even smiling.

The one sort-of workaround for this is that if you have 25 real machines
(virtual machines don't count) that are running the volume version of Vista
Business or Enterprise and all of them are on (or can attach to via VPN) the
same internal network, the customer can set up a key management server (KMS)
that will perform the activation. For everyone else, you've got to play the
"ET Phone Home" game just like retail customers, although using a single
product ID ("Multiple Activation Key, or MAK) on all the machines.

Joe Morris

The point is, mass activation is not complex, once you have designated KMS
server setup in your organization you are good to go.
--
Andre
Blog: http://adacosta.spaces.live.com
My Vista Quickstart Guide:
http://adacosta.spaces.live.com/blog...3DB!9709.entry
"Joe Morris" <j.c.morris@xxxxxx> wrote in message
news:VSt_i.22708$CI1.6024@xxxxxx

Thanks for the responses. My situation is about 35 users, some with an extra
laptop, so depending on if we get home use rights for those laptops the
license situation would call for 35-40 licenses.

I visited that site, the scary thing seems to be that Microsoft doesn't
directly interact on licensing, they point you to their resellers, and the
one I'm talking to is from that list. The same one that told me it is illegal
inside the US to sell a computer with no OS on it. So not sure what to make
of that.

It almost seems like they want to keep the details somewhat murky, so that
at anytime they can pop up, say you're in non-compliance, and either fine you
and/or make you buy all new software.

Anyway, I see some of the benefits like a single key, so you could do
imaging and things like that and use the same key over and over (until you
burn all the activations with vista). Also seems that you get previous
version rights as well, so you can keep the people that prefer earlier
versions happy as well.

I guess I'm still stuck on the fact that they want you to purchase the
software twice. Seems that by limiting the upgrade options to XP Pro, and
Vista business, that limits your options for purchasing computer to Vista
business machines since many XP Pro machines might not have the power to use
Vista's new features.

So if I was buying say 1000 machines and wanted to do volume licensing, I'd
buy 1000 machines with OEM vista business already installed, then pay for
another copy of Vista business upgrade under the VL program. That's where it
doesn't seem to make sense for businesses. They really need some kind of
business volume licensing where you get full version licenses and then it's
easy to justify. That's my main sticking point. Even if it cost more (and it
rightfully should if it's full version), the clearing of the confusion about
upgrades would be worth it.

There's always software assurance, but with the distance between OS upgrades
these days, that hardly seems worth it. I doubt we'll see another era like
95,98,ME, and 2000 in quick sucession to make SA worth it where you get lots
of updates.

""Darrell Gorter[MSFT]"" wrote:

> The same oneWhat I make of that is that particular resellers' rep is either completely
stupid, or (and most likely) a totally dishonest rep that is there to get
the sale no matter what it means.

Either way, it would be best to go to a different reseller.