The February 2021 edition of Microsofts Product Terms Document will be the last.A little under two years ago we reviewed Microsofts new approach to licensing terms in our June 2019 blog here - now its being further revamped. As announced on the front page of the February PT document: Please note this is the last Product Terms Word document. Going forward, the terms will be published on the Product Terms site available at https://www.microsoft.com/licensing/terms/productoffering. Archived versions will continue to be available. For more details, go to https://www.microsoft.com/Licensing/product-licensing/products. What does it look like - the landing page as shown below:  So quite clear and compact, although you will need to be quite savvy with their license programs and models to get the most out of using it. ... and when put to the test?We decided to take on one of their more convoluted product licensing models - Power BI - and, well, it didn't seem any simpler. With prerequisites like "Power Automate per user with attended RPA plan, or Power Automate per flow plan" (ok...), and Extended Use Rights such as "Power Apps Portals that map to licensed Dynamics 365 application context and, Power Apps Portals that map to the same environment as the licensed Dynamics 365 application" (right...), the format might have changed but the content is still not that intuitive is it? So while access to dynamic and current licensing information is always a good thing, simpler licensing models and metrics would we think resonate much better with software customers in general. After all, we all want to be compliant, so why make it so hard we wonder - any thoughts / comments ?$$?
0 Comments
Vendor results can be a telling indicator of what might lie aheadWe regularly connect with the ITAM Review as a reliable source of information in the software domain and of interest this month is a comprehensive report from Rich Gibbons on the financial performance of some key software vendors - from the $5.6B loss of Google Cloud to the 29% rise in operating income (Q2) of Microsoft. In summary ...
Some marked differences in performance - particularly in the cloud space, with a watch and ready advice for some of the poorer performers - we all know where they head when times are tight ...
What do you need to do?All services, products, and offers in Open License program today will remain available until January 1, 2022. To plan for future purchases, ask the partner you’re currently buying software licenses from about your options. Your partner can help you decide the best steps for you, whether that’s new licenses or online services subscriptions. If you don't have one, you can Find a Microsoft partner. Are there any other options available?Yes - depending on what you want to purchase you can make use of the Open Value or the Open Value Subscription program:
Here's a reminder of the differences between the current programs:  So nothing alarming in this announcement, more just an evolution of a 20 year old program to align with Microsofts contemporary go to market structures. While 2022 might seem some time away you can be sure the changes will begin to emerge through 2021, so just something more to be aware of and prepare for in the ever changing world of software licensing!
New for 2020 - Microsoft to reduce Software Assurance BenefitsChanges to Microsoft's SA Benefits have been announced effective 1st February 2020 which will see the end of some of the most useful aspects of the program, in summary:
So time to review all of your enrollments and make sure you convert all of your SA Benefits to get full value out of your investment in these programs. As a refresher, take a look through the list below.  Check out this October announcement - It could save You Thousands!Microsoft recently announced a new SQL Server SA benefit that is well worth reviewing – it could either release some currently consumed cores or save you buying more for any clustered environments you have now or are planning. Starting Nov 1st, every Software Assurance customer of SQL Server will be able to use three enhanced benefits for any SQL Server release that is still supported by Microsoft:
So considering a typical architecture per diagram below the number of SQL Server core licenses required to operate this topology would be only 12 cores as opposed to 24 cores in the past:  Now the FAQ’s in the announcement included a specific question as to the versions that were covered and was answered in the affirmative by a Microsoft representative: Q1. Is this applicable to old SQL Server versions like 2014 & 2016? Answer for Q1: Yes. The benefit applies to all supported releases of SQL Server. Which raises the question – why do we once again see a potential conflict in the Product Terms which appear to qualify the benefit to SQL Server 2019 only: 4.2 SQL Server 2019 – Fail-over Rights For each of its Primary Workloads, Customer is entitled to:
We shall (again) seek clarification from Microsoft. In the meantime, check out more comprehensive information and examples in the accompanying Licensing Guide.
Lets Straighten out On-Premise Rights Included with M365A quick internet search is likely to find conflicting views on what on-premise rights you are granted with your M365 Subscription particularly in relation to server software. Many sites will state that you gain only user access rights with your USL licenses, ie. essentially a CAL license entitlement, and that you are still required to acquire the server licenses for the likes of Exchange and Sharepoint. Simply, that's not correct. Firstly though, be sure of the M365 Subscription you are dealing with as each will offer different content and scope. The CAL/ML equivalency table of the Product Terms provides a good overview to this:  Note for example that the common business E3 and E5 plans provide both Base and Additive access rights for Exchange and SharePoint Server. But what about the Server Licenses? A quick browse through the FAQ of the M365 Site provides the first hint that certain Server software is indeed included: 
While the respective sections covering the likes of Exchange or SharePoint Server software don't provide any clues, the Microsoft 365 section clearly articulates the entitlement (page 57 of the October 2019 document):  Assuming all of your users are properly licensed (and they should be) your on-premise Exchange, SharePoint and Skype for Business Server installations are covered! ... and that includes back-versions of course under the Universal License Terms part 3 - "Rights to Use Other Versions and Lower Editions". So no need to True-Up those on-premise Server licenses for Exchange or SharePoint, and who isn't keen for less overhead and more funds right?!
terms related to outsourcing rights and dedicated hosted cloud services Change 1-Oct.Microsoft’s off-premise outsourcing terms are changing October 1, 2019, evidently to clarify the distinction between on-premises/traditional outsourcing and cloud services, and create more consistent licensing terms across multitenant and dedicated hosted cloud services, the core of the changes being:
Now there’s one statement that seems to negate it all (page 3 of the FAQ) given all of the Listed Providers are currently in the Authorized Mobility Partner list which we’re seeking clarification from Microsoft for (italics added): Do the updates to the Outsourcing Software Management clause affect my rights to deploy licenses with an Authorized Mobility Partner? License Mobility through Software Assurance rights will be expanded to permit deployment of licenses with License Mobility coverage with Listed Providers’ dedicated hosted cloud services for those Listed Providers who are Authorized Mobility Partners. (and importantly) Rights to deploy licenses on Authorized Mobility Partners’ shared servers are not impacted by the outsourcing update. But that aside, lets dissect it all ...  Firstly, what exactly are “dedicated hosted cloud services”? Microsoft’s states this to be the “services offered by major public cloud providers typically with elastic, ondemand, pay-as-you-go resources, like their multitenant cloud services.” Multitenant cloud services? Wouldn’t that be the opposite of dedicated?? Well for the Listed Providers examples given are “Azure Dedicated Host, Amazon EC2 Dedicated Hosts, single tenant nodes from Google” – all dedicated – and “VMware Cloud on Amazon Web Services (AWS)” – so perhaps the/an exception being SDDC architecture. The first thing to note - the change won't impact the use of existing software versions under licenses purchased before October 1, 2019 so you can continue to deploy and use software under your existing licenses on servers dedicated to you, just not workloads under licenses acquired on or after October 1, 2019 (and don’t forget that just performing a Software Assurance renewal doesn't affect your perpetual use rights for existing versions). And secondly, rights to deploy licenses on Authorized Mobility Partners’ shared servers are not impacted by the outsourcing update. So what to be wary of …. as usual, the limitations:
Are there any alternatives? Well, besides any SPLA or otherwise ‘bundled’ licensing options available with the provider service, enter the Microsoft Azure Hybrid Benefit (!) where, solely with Azure Dedicated Host, there are exceptions (!!) if you happen to have current SA or equivalent subscription rights. And what might the Azure Hybrid Benefit provide:
Oh … and don’t forget – to make use of License Mobility through SA, you must ensure that you:
For more information check out the Microsoft Announcement and associated FAQ's
A New And WeLcome Direction in Consolidated, Direct, Licensing InformationMicrosoft announced the 1st June 2019 as the date at which the new 'Licensing Terms Site' will replace the current downloadable document versions of the Product Terms (PT) and Online Service Terms (OST) (although at date of this publication it is still stating "under construction and for preview use only.") Not only is this intended to consolidate the myriad of licensing documents and material rife across Microsoft sites, but according to the FAQ (available here) will also ease navigation through filters available by program and product, and also introduce a new 'compared-to' function which allows users to compare changes (albeit post 1st June 2019) to 'current' use rights going forward - a useful utility! So what does it look like? - the landing screen as below (see it for yourself here):  A quick test run found the site easily navigable, presenting targeted information based on your selection in the familiar format of the Product Terms structure. Of course it can't solve the 'knowledge complexity' invariably attached to licensing - you basically still need to know what you are looking for, and then be able to apply what you find to your own situation. A quick delve into the SQL Server section highlights the information then available by edition:  All in all though a timely advance in the overall licensing landscape that would be welcomed across other vendors with similarly broad and complex license terms and models, which makes us wonder ... ... is it too much to hope for a cross-industry standard?
Extended Support for SQL Server 2008 and 2008 R2 will end on July 9, 2019. |
 |  |
What will 'end of support' mean? ... it will mean the end of regular security updates, and with the extent of hacks and attacks going on at any time - and the (legitimately) tough regulatory position on data protection - that would be a concern to all.
Now there are of course some options available at this stage to address this exposure:
- If you are an Azure customer, Extended Security Updates will be available for free in Azure for 2008 and 2008 R2 versions of SQL Server and Windows Server to help secure your workloads for three more years after the end of support deadline.
- If you run on-premise installations, you will be able to purchase Extended Security Updates for three more years as long as you have Software Assurance or Subscription licenses under an Enterprise Agreement enrollment.
So if it's free for Azure customers, what does it cost if I'm not? ...
75 percent of the full license cost of the latest version of SQL Server or Windows Server, purchased annually to cover only the servers that require the updates.
Ouch.
But wait, there's more. If you happen to run any IBM software under Windows Server, and you also run those servers in a virtualised environment, you need to be aware of an often overlooked limitation under IBM's sub-capacity rules. And that relates to 'Eligible Technologies'.
A quick glance through the regularly updated table by our ILMT development friends could come as a bit of a shock if you happen to still be running Windows Server 2003 - it's no longer an eligible technology - take a look at the snippet below under VMware:
You can view the entire list here.
And if it's 'not eligible', what does that mean? Basically that you'll need to revert to manual counting for that environment, and for which IBM provides a particularly onerous method and template as an Excel workbook downloadable here.
So taking the Windows Server 2003 omission as an example it's fair to expect that we'll see Windows Server 2008 drop off in equally quick time. Not only then is there a compelling cost imperative due to Extended Support, but an equally expensive overhead with IBM sub-capacity tracking and reporting as well (remember - you need to generate your sub-cap domain usage quarterly).
Time to act!
Microsoft have an advisory page here that is worth checking which also provides links to their end of support resource center for further advice and assistance. And if you're looking for a better tool than perhaps a spreadsheet for you IBM sub-cap reporting we have just the ticket with our ComplianceWare application - we recommend you check it out here!
 |  |
Well the new edition of Windows Server is now imminent - Microsoft have announced its GA for the second part of 2018 - with innovations across four key areas being Hybrid cloud, Cyber-Security, Application Platform and Hyper-converged infrastructure, all built upon the popular, solid foundation of Windows Server 2016.
So what does that all mean?
Hybrid cloud brings the management of servers across on-premise and Azure together with the Server Manager first demonstrated at Ignite in September 2017.
| Code named Project Honolulu the console provides easy integration to Azure services (such as backup) without disrupting applications or infrastructure. Check more here. |  |
Cyber-Security takes on three themes of Protect, Detect and Respond, with the introduction of Shielded VM's to protect virtual machines from compromised or malicious administration, and Windows Defender Advanced Threat Protection.
The Application Platform has improvements targeted at developers across Windows Server containers (including Kubernetes under beta) and Windows Subsystem on Linux that allows Linux containers to be run side-by-side with Windows containers.
And the Hyper-converged cloud solutions are designed for flexibility and scale to offer high performance, manageability and security as a fully-deployed configuration, all administered through the Server Manager.
From a licensing perspective Windows Server 2019 will follow the current per-core metric, and include full support for System Server clients (also to release as a 2019 edition).
If you'd like to see more you can access the preview build via Microsoft's excellent Insiders program which just requires a simple registration - access it here or if you'd just like some more information you can just check out the Release Notes.
Hard to believe 2019 is not too far away already ...
How might it affect performance and licensing?
As the full implications emerge with the design of Intel's (and potentially others) x64 processor (see more at the Register here) we await with interest a response from software vendors as to how the corresponding issue of licensing will be answered and resolved.
Given patches are now being released (eg. AWS EC2 5th January, Azure the 10th January) the resultant performance impacts will become the subject of intense scrutiny. Why? well if, as reported, processing power diminishes anywhere from 5 to 30 percent how will customers be compensated?
Processor and Core based software has been dutifully acquired on the basis of the underlying performance of the chipsets on which the products are run (consider IBM's PVUs, Microsofts Core minimums etc). Now though, if that proves to be erroneous, surely a remedy must be made available to the customer who has paid for a defined - and benchmarked - level of processing power?
Take the scenario whereby a customers current 2,000 PVUs can no longer deliver the required throughput and needs a further 500 PVUs in order to deliver the same capability - you would be right to expect no additional charges to apply given there is no improvement in performance surely? And what about needing more hardware just to achieve the current level of demand, or a Cloud vendor purchasing an array of new servers in order to provision more vCPUs for their PaaS / SaaS customers just to meet the same CPU cycles ?
That all costs money, so ... Who Pays??
Which then presents an intriguing conundrum for the chip makers and the software vendors. Presumably there will be a vast re-benchmarking exercise (and consider chipsets produced in the last 10 years are potentially affected) the question then being, what is to be done on the basis of the results? Compensation? Free License Grants? Reduced Annual Maintenance fees??
So we expectantly await vendor responses once the focus on getting fixes out shifts to the underlying and associated commercial dilemma confronting the industry. What can you do in the meantime? Firstly, make sure you have current performance metrics that you can measure any degradation against, and then pose these questions to your vendor Account Manager, your Sales Rep, your Software Specialist - ask how any performance issues you experience might be remediated in the immediate term, and request an open and regular communication channel to stay informed as it all progresses ...
We firmly believe - if the projected performance impacts do transpire - this issue will prove to be one of the most perplexing problems to emerge in the IT industry in many years.
Watch this space for further updates as more unfolds.
While these three little snippets might not seem particularly sensational they are worth noting precisely for that reason - they are likely lurking in the background, ready to cost you money when you least need it!
| 1. IBM License Management Tool (ILMT) |  |
OK, so we all know that under the IBM sub-capacity rules we must produce a report from ILMT every quarter right? And we know that we must sign and date that record, and keep them all as an artefact that may be required during any audit too, right?
All good, then the tip:
All good, then the tip:
Make sure you have configured ILMT correctly and fully for VM Management.
What's so important about VM Management in ILMT? If not properly configured it will default to 120 PVUs per core, so you could be over-reporting without being aware. How can you tell if its configured? Firstly, it shows a status on the Dashboard, and secondly, if not configured servers will be displayed with a serial-like number beginning with 'TLM_VM' or similar.
If you need more information on how to configure just look here.
| 2. Microsoft Subscription Licensing. |  |
Microsoft in many ways have led the industry in a shift to SaaS offerings backed by subscription based licensing. While this may appear to have a favourable ROI initially, there are other Time-Value commercial components to consider.
Firstly, you need to be aware that your licensing is now not only visible but manageable real-time by Microsoft. So from a commercial perspective there is now no locked-in pricing for the typical 3 year term of an Enterprise Agreement, instead you will see price increases built-in year on year in your CPS. And more so, there is no 'True-Up' benefit whereby you would pay essentially half the cost in the year in which you deployed the product - you now 'reserve' the additional licenses you need to be drawn down, and you start paying from that month onwards.
The tip?
The tip?
Make sure you consider TVM with subscription changes in your ROI / Cost Comparisons.
And the last tip for 2017 ... a favourite topic here at Software Compliance ... processor to core conversion.
| 3. No 'unpacking' of Core Licenses So a quick tally of the number of core licenses across your Windows Server fleet divided by 16 gives you your number of 16 Pack licenses required right? |  |
Wrong! ... A license pack is applied to a server, so where you have say a 12 Core server you need to assign 6 x 2 Core packs - you can't assign 12 from your 16 Core pack, and then apply the other 4 elsewhere. A nasty - and potentially expensive error - if not properly considered in determining your conversion.
And so ends 2017 ... we look forward to a busy and productive 2018 for us all!
Gone are the more simplistic days of Microsoft Per Processor licensing when there was a basic assignment of a single license to a processor, unlimited use and access, all available across multiple editions of software. Indeed, Microsoft were touting per processor as a major point of difference looking back to even SQL Server 2008, going as far as to claim ‘thought leadership’ when it came to competitor licensing models aligned to multicore processors.
From 2016 though (and noting the GA of SQL Server 2017 from October 2017), following their conformance and gradual demise of the processor metric, there are now primarily three Per Core licensing models:
So let’s take a look at 2 more common server products afflicted by this change, SQL Server under (1) and Windows Server under (2) – and if you are intending to use Self-Hosting or SPLA rights note that there are further considerations not covered here, the context of this blog contained to licensing acquired under Microsoft’s Volume Licensing offerings (refer: Microsoft Commercial Licensing)
From 2016 though (and noting the GA of SQL Server 2017 from October 2017), following their conformance and gradual demise of the processor metric, there are now primarily three Per Core licensing models:
- The Per Core model used by SQL Server and BizTalk Server;
- The Per Core/CAL licensing model used by Windows Server (Standard and Datacenter edition) following the release of Windows Server 2016;
- The Management Servers (core-based) licensing model used by System Center (Standard and Datacenter edition) following the release of System Center 2016.
So let’s take a look at 2 more common server products afflicted by this change, SQL Server under (1) and Windows Server under (2) – and if you are intending to use Self-Hosting or SPLA rights note that there are further considerations not covered here, the context of this blog contained to licensing acquired under Microsoft’s Volume Licensing offerings (refer: Microsoft Commercial Licensing)
SQL Server 2016
With SQL Server 2016 Per Core licensing, each server running software or any of its components (such as Reporting Services or Integration Services) must be assigned an appropriate number of SQL Server 2016 core licenses. The number of core licenses needed depends on whether you are licensing the physical server or individual virtual operating system environments (OSEs), across either edition.
With SQL Server 2016 Per Core licensing, each server running software or any of its components (such as Reporting Services or Integration Services) must be assigned an appropriate number of SQL Server 2016 core licenses. The number of core licenses needed depends on whether you are licensing the physical server or individual virtual operating system environments (OSEs), across either edition.
Unlike the Server+CAL licensing model, the Per Core model allows access for an unlimited number of users or devices to connect from either inside or outside an organisation’s firewall. With the Per Core model, you do not need to purchase client access licenses (CALs) to access the SQL Server software.
When running SQL Server in a physical OSE, all physical cores on the server must be licensed, noting software partitioning does not reduce the number of core licenses required except when licensing individual virtual machines (VMs). A minimum of four core licenses are required for each physical processor on the server, with the use of hyper-threading not affecting the number of core licenses required when running in a physical OSE, only those licensed under individual virtual machines (which are still subject to the four core minimum).
So with the basics understood you’ll then want to familiarise with what you gain with the addition of a Software Assurance subscription…
Key SQL Server SA Benefits
- License Mobility: If you are deploying to a server farm with technology such as VMware’s vMotion you’ll need SA for license mobility, now extended to cloud providers that are Microsoft Authorised Mobility Partners;
- Unlimited VMs: don’t be mistaken by the ‘Enterprise’ license denotation – without SA you can only run up a maximum number of VMs (with unlimited vCores) equal to the number of core licenses assigned to the server, and without SA that means having to buy more licenses should you exceed the maximum;
- Failover Rights: A secondary server used for failover support does not need to be separately licensed for SQL Server as long as it is passive (ie. not serving data, such as reports to clients running active SQL Server workloads, nor performing any “work”, such as additional backups being made from secondary servers) and the primary SQL Server is covered with active SA, noting the licenses must cover the higher number of associated server cores in the HA coupling.
And be cautious – the components of a SQL Server license cannot be separated. While management tools and other software identified as additional or supplemental software such as product documentation, client connectivity tools, software add-ins, and Software Development Kits (SDKs) can generally be distributed and run on any number of devices for use with a licensed instance of SQL Server software, other licensed components such as the SQL Server Database Engine (DB), SQL Server Services for Windows, Master Data Services (MDS), Analysis Services (AS), Integration Services (IS), Reporting Services (RS), and Data Quality Services (DQS) will require licensing if deployed to other servers. You can find more details of the components at: SQL Server Software Components
And for Non-Production: Effective April 1, 2016, SQL Server Developer Edition became a free product, available for download from the Microsoft Dev Essentials program as a potential alternative to the likes of a Visual Studio subscription. SQL Server 2016 Developer Edition is a fully featured version of SQL Server software—including all of the features and capabilities of Enterprise Edition--licensed for development, test, and demonstration purposes only.
Windows Server 2016
For both Standard and Datacenter editions, the number of core licenses required equals the number of physical cores on the licensed server, subject to a minimum of 8 core licenses per physical processor and a minimum of 16 core licenses per server (sold in 2-Core and 16-Core packs).
For both Standard and Datacenter editions, the number of core licenses required equals the number of physical cores on the licensed server, subject to a minimum of 8 core licenses per physical processor and a minimum of 16 core licenses per server (sold in 2-Core and 16-Core packs).
Which means being very careful when you tally your overall requirement – make sure you account for the 16-Core per server minimum across any single CPU servers you might have in your inventory where you might otherwise under-allocate (where <16).
And the differences in the editions?
- Standard: When all cores on the server are licensed (subject to the minimums), you can deploy two OSEs or two Hyper-V containers and unlimited Windows Server containers.
- Datacenter: When all cores on the server are licensed (subject to the minimums) you can deploy unlimited OSEs, Hyper-V containers, and Windows Server containers.
(and if you're looking for a definition of containers, look no further - go here)
So, To Finish …
Bear in mind that in both cases you will still need to account for the CAL requirements if necessary (and remember to count all direct and indirect users/devices, ie. no multiplexing), typically via the likes of a Core CAL Suite or equivalent, which as an example provides the following licenses:
Noting that the likes of SQL Server CALs and Dynamics/CRM CALs must be acquired separately.
- Windows Server CAL
- SharePoint Server Standard CAL
- Exchange Server Standard CAL
- System Center Configuration Manager Client Management License
- System Center Endpoint Protection Client Management License
- Skype for Business Server Standard CAL
Noting that the likes of SQL Server CALs and Dynamics/CRM CALs must be acquired separately.
Microsoft have provided a very helpful Licensing Brief across Core Licensing that I would also recommend reading for more information.
Well the New Year is now in-play and completing a major Year-2 True-Up for a large Microsoft Enterprise Agreement provided a prompt to refresh on the Windows Server 2016 conversion prior to those nasty renewals that come around so soon.
Much like the SQL Server 2014 migration the Windows Server 2016 shift (which started from October 2016) presents an opportunity for customers with active SA to transition their processor based licenses to core based ensuring coverage is gained across the full physical cores in their environment.
Essentially, where you have a ‘server density’ of 8 cores or less per processor and 16 cores or less per server a full license grant is assumed – there is no need to record your environment as you’ll get the full complement of licenses by default.
If however your server density is higher there’s some work to be done! You’ll need to ensure your entire Windows Server landscape is inventoried and formally documented ready for the expiration of your current SA, at which point you’ll only pay the additional SA, not additional licenses. But if you are not prepared and time gets away on you there’s potentially significant cost down the track as those uncounted cores come to light (the dreaded audit perhaps), so it pays to get organised and active way before your renewal date.
And as a postscript - if you're using subscription licenses be aware that although you can vary down at anniversary, if you varied up at any time during the year - well that applies from the date of install.
Much like the SQL Server 2014 migration the Windows Server 2016 shift (which started from October 2016) presents an opportunity for customers with active SA to transition their processor based licenses to core based ensuring coverage is gained across the full physical cores in their environment.
Essentially, where you have a ‘server density’ of 8 cores or less per processor and 16 cores or less per server a full license grant is assumed – there is no need to record your environment as you’ll get the full complement of licenses by default.
If however your server density is higher there’s some work to be done! You’ll need to ensure your entire Windows Server landscape is inventoried and formally documented ready for the expiration of your current SA, at which point you’ll only pay the additional SA, not additional licenses. But if you are not prepared and time gets away on you there’s potentially significant cost down the track as those uncounted cores come to light (the dreaded audit perhaps), so it pays to get organised and active way before your renewal date.
And as a postscript - if you're using subscription licenses be aware that although you can vary down at anniversary, if you varied up at any time during the year - well that applies from the date of install.
Well it would seem the big change is the move to (physical) core based licensing for Windows Server 2016, now offered as just two major editions - Standard or Datacentre - with an 8 core license minimum per processor and 16 core license minimum per server (sold in 2-core packs), subject to the accompanying User or Device CALs of course.
What does it all mean? Well the price for 16 core licenses for Standard or Datacentre is being touted as the same as the current pricing for one 2-processor 2012 R2 Standard or Datacentre, but an additional 2-cores will increase the price of server licensing by 25%.
Properly converting your processor licenses to cores is an imperative - if you don't get the numbers right (particularly with VM's running on the Standard edition) you could face some significant costs down the track due to the 2 VM maximum (ie. all physical cores must be licensed again for any VM increment above each 2 VM maximum).
The good news - as with the SQL Server conversion if your SA is current the license grant will cover no less than you have now (ie. all physical cores), so get counting and make sure you have the right artefacts to validate your entitlement at renewal time!
What does it all mean? Well the price for 16 core licenses for Standard or Datacentre is being touted as the same as the current pricing for one 2-processor 2012 R2 Standard or Datacentre, but an additional 2-cores will increase the price of server licensing by 25%.
Properly converting your processor licenses to cores is an imperative - if you don't get the numbers right (particularly with VM's running on the Standard edition) you could face some significant costs down the track due to the 2 VM maximum (ie. all physical cores must be licensed again for any VM increment above each 2 VM maximum).
The good news - as with the SQL Server conversion if your SA is current the license grant will cover no less than you have now (ie. all physical cores), so get counting and make sure you have the right artefacts to validate your entitlement at renewal time!
The latest talk suggests another imminent update by Microsoft in its licensing domain, just where is yet to be seen. Of late though, the changes have been largely positive - certainly the conversion to the Product Use Terms as opposed to the Product Use Rights format (which had morphed into a near undecipherable amalgamation of the varied products and license models) was a welcome change. And the simplification across the server products - take SQLServer with its narrowed editions and rationalised licensing - may well signal a more plain, coherent licensing programme to be front of mind. With the recent release of the new Enterprise Agreement structure what else might be in store is hard to predict, but we're all for a simplified model - a gold medal to the vendor that gets there first!