MicrosoftIf SA is required, it's not free. This is a terrible concession.
With proper licensing application and strategy, SA is inviteable, especially for workloads in clusters, it is even required.
We do not have to agree, but in my licensing world most Microsoft Volume Licensing agreements have compulsory SA or SA equivalency rights and as such I dare to call it free of charge.
Surely, one will not benefit when using traditional licensing with OEM, and miss attaching VL Open Value SA within 90 days after OEM licensing purchase. Just for example.
We just received one more of many good financial justifications for active SA on Windows Server or Windows Server CSP Subscription.
Proper licensing is the licensing model that makes the most sense for the customer. SA is optional for a reason. Not every organization can afford to renew their software stack annually. Some work on longer cycles, including extended support cycles, where not getting SA is much cheaper. It seems many MVPs only consider large organizations with unlimited budgets and forget that the majority of organizations that exist are small to mid and have to make pragmatic licensing decisions. When Microsoft moves a feature from being available to everybody on all licensing plans to a model only available to customers who are on a more premium licensing plan, that is a net negative to the community. Carrying their water and trying to justify a bad decision isn't a good look for the MVP community. MVPs should not simply evangelize Microsoft, they should also advocate for customers. That not only benefits the customer, but Microsoft too.
Thanks for your feedback.
I have to spin off from the topic by just a bit.
No one holds you off from using WSUS now or in forseeable future.
I do not evangelize these decisions, see my comments above. Even I applauded to the deprecation as it was long overdue. Many sharing this stance.
My opinion is mine and I do not speak for or in interest of Microsoft, neither is my opinion necessarily aligned or endorsed with or by Microsoft.
As a MVP: I care for the community, just right now, helping them with Microsoft Products, issues and questions, even with unpopular decisions.
As a Consultant: it's my goal to give the best advice for the business requirements of customers.
Not every customers requires SA same not everyone requires Netflix or even Netflix Premium. But you have to see there are benefits and use cases.
The, my, point is that I know very well what actually happens with customers that do not adopt Software Assurance. They are often treating IT very traditionally.
Worst case, these customer run IT for the sake of there's no Plan B but using it. This does affect business processes, costs, overhead and efficiency. Everyone is unhappy.
Nothing generally speaking, but often enough seen, customers sitting on old pile of tech debts, blocking security goals, required features and enabling users to get the best out of IT (business processes and development).
This is linked to aged infrastructure and processes by low understanding of products, proper planning, licensing and user adoption. Only few exception apply, like really LTSC use cases.
LTSC is not a vehicle to lock IT up for everyone for the next 10 plus years and secure the status quo like Smaug.
Then, ineviteably at or after End of Support, these same customers debating why upgrade and transition are extremely costly and frustrating. Monolitic infra upgrades, wink wink.
That they feel unhappy as they think everything is running fine as it is (at least for security that's a no no)
I do not consult to modernize for the sake of doing so, but to give them back control, scheduleable time and costs on what's running, transformed and what could be killed forever. WSUS is one of these.
10 years ever been an age in IT. No documentation will survive that long being updated in most of cases. Workers in IT come and go.
Different frameworks and data protection rules makes security and patch management and compliance mandantory, at any time.
So if one runs this IT stuff, one is responsible.
Workloads can live in network based isolation forever, but then orgs also have to deal with the cons.
Like effectively all stored certificate cannot reach any OSCP etc. Some are not even updated.
To come to and end, practically, have you ever had a problem while in extended Microsoft support and tried to open a business support request?
Ever faced a blocker on unsupported hardware?
These insights would be interesting to me what the outcome was and how much time and extra cost it incurred on top of all.
Business is about Business and warning money and reducing cost without killing Innovation. IT is a tool and driver. Every tool requires to be serviced. That's what we are debating here. Changing how we service, if we really want to fulfill data protection requirements.
"Even I applauded to the deprecation as it was long overdue." - Karl-WE
No, WSUS being updated is what is long overdue. The need for this feature still exists. You applaud Microsoft as they retire a useful feature and replace it with a less functional, more costly replacement. This rubs the community negatively.
The deprecation of WSUS means that the simple, yet necessary, fixes WSUS needs will never be implemented. Cheering Microsoft as they make sys admin jobs more difficult is unwelcome.
