
The Higher Education Cooperative Purchase Consortium
|
|
|
Tuesday, April 23, 2002
|
|
Issue 2, Volume 20
|
|
|
|
|  |
 |
 |
Change in Microsoft's Licensing Prices Attracts Some Colleges and Worries Others
A Balanced Article from The Chronicle of Higher Education
by Florence Olsen
Buy or lease? That's the difficult
choice facing campus software managers when they license products from the
Microsoft Corporation.
On the one hand, colleges can continue to buy Microsoft's products as they have
in the past, with licenses that permit the software to be used in perpetuity. Or colleges can elect to cut costs and
bureaucratic problems by leasing software for everyone on the campus--and run
the risk that Microsoft could later decide to eliminate those savings by
increasing the annual charges.
Although the company, which dominates the desktop software market, has offered
leases for its products since 1998, recent changes in its terms for both leases
and purchases seem designed to encourage leases, and some institutions say they
are being pressured into leasing programs from which there is no way out. The
leasing program's new prohibition on colleges' providing Microsoft operating
system upgrades to faculty members for their home computers is also unpopular.
But officials at some of the same colleges also say they like the fact that
leasing makes it easier for them to budget for software as an annual operating
expense rather than as a one-time capital cost.
Microsoft's emphasis on leases is part of an industry trend. Adobe Systems, Apple Computer, Blackboard,
Macromedia, WebCT, and other desktop-software companies each offer some form of
leasing as well as traditional licensing. That serves to drive campus-computing
officials crazy, because each company's license arrangements are filled with
different legal minutiae.
"Software licensing all around is a nightmare for those of us managing
these programs," says Teri O'Rourke, associate director of systems and
operations at Southern Oregon University.
Because colleges write bigger checks to Microsoft than to any other
desktop-software company, officials say, their frustrations with Microsoft are
greater. That is especially the case, they say, when the company changes its
licensing programs.
Annual or Perpetual?
Under Microsoft's primary leasing program, called Campus Agreement 3.0, a
college can purchase campuswide licenses for current versions of the company's
operating system and office-productivity software. The college must make annual
payments to Microsoft, but the company charges far less per employee for a
lease than it does per computer for a traditional license.
Colleges can still buy software the traditional way, with so-called perpetual
licenses that give the purchaser the right to run the software indefinitely.
Microsoft has two programs for such purchases, called Academic Open 6.0, for
purchases in small quantities; and Academic Select 6.0, for volume purchases of
perpetual licenses.
Many colleges still purchase their software through one of those programs.
However, many campus officials say, Microsoft has made the traditional licenses
less attractive--and leases more attractive--by imposing a steep fee for
upgrading desktop software purchased through the perpetual-license programs,
equal to 29 percent of the price of an institution's traditional volume
licenses.
Upgrades are included in the price for Campus Agreement 3.0, Microsoft's
primary leasing program. Campus Agreement is Microsoft's fastest-growing
licensing program for higher education, says Andrea Tanner, license-compliance
manager for the company's education group. About 30 percent of Microsoft's
higher-education customers, she says, have switched from perpetual licensing
since the company introduced its first software-leasing plan in October 1998.
Microsoft prefers the leasing model because revenues from leasing are highly
predictable, says Sean Robert Gallagher, an analyst with Eduventures, a
consulting group specializing in education businesses. With traditional
licensing, the company has no control over how often institutions upgrade their
software.
Software leasing is gaining acceptance with colleges because most institutions
can realize 40-to-60-percent savings over a two-to-three-year period compared
with buying traditional volume licenses for Microsoft products, says Larry Toy,
president and chief executive officer of the Foundation for California
Community Colleges. The foundation administers collegebuys.org, a nationwide
purchasing cooperative.
Benefits of Leasing
Besides savings, campus software managers say leasing offers other benefits.
For one thing, it eliminates the prospect of copyright infringement by faculty
or staff members who copy Microsoft software, because the lease specifically
gives them the right to make such copies. Traditional licenses provide no
protection against illegal copying, as Creighton University--which has
purchased only traditional licenses to Microsoft products--learned recently, when
Microsoft asked that the university submit an inventory of its Microsoft
software licenses.
The company apparently suspected that Creighton had been running Microsoft
programs on more machines than it had paid for. Creighton officials say they
believe they are in compliance with its license agreement.
A campuswide license for upgrades also eliminates many user-support head-aches
for technology managers. Their job is made easier, for example, if every
department on campus is using the same version of Microsoft software. That is
more easily accomplished through a central leasing arrangement than through
departments' buying individual licenses to any programs they choose.
For officials of Oakland University, such intangible benefits led them to switch
to a lease. Maintaining a complex billing system and keeping track of legal
software copies under a traditional licensing arrangement were consuming too
much of administrators' time, says Theresa Rowe, director of information
systems. "The risk was so great for not managing [licenses]
correctly," she says.
Moreover, Ms. Rowe says, departments at the Michigan college often delayed
upgrades when their budgets got tight, which in turn had consequences for the
help desk and other services for which the university's central computing group
was responsible. Administrative and academic systems projects were being held
up because the desktop software in some departments was not up to date.
This year, Oakland included $68,000 in its central budget to pay for a
one-year's lease for a selection of Microsoft products. If leasing works out,
Ms. Rowe says, the university will continue in the Microsoft program and pay
for it out of the central budget. "I'm not saying I'm thrilled with it, or
that I'm going to want to do it forever, but we're definitely willing to try it
right now," she says.
What If You Want Out?
Indeed, many academic officials have reservations about leasing software. Some
cite the difficulty of extricating themselves should they want to. "You
really can't get out of it easily," says Mary E. Toll, manager of
classroom and computer-lab engineering at the University of Notre Dame. If a
college decides not to renew its leasing agreement with Microsoft, it must buy
full-price licenses for all of the software involved if it wants to continue
using the software, a potentially big one-time expense. For products it doesn't
license, the college must remove every piece of Microsoft software that it had
installed under the lease agreement.
That's the scenario worrying Conrad Dietz, vice president for information
technology at Creighton. If he signed a lease with Microsoft, and a budget
crunch later on forced him to consider backing out, "we would have to take
every single product off every single computer," he says. "We would
be left with nothing."
Mr. Dietz says that Microsoft has been pressuring the university to lease
software for the whole institution, but that so far he has resisted. Microsoft
could not be reached for comment. Creighton spends $70,000 to $80,000 a year on
the company's products. A site license would cost $30,000 to $40,000 more,
which is money that the university doesn't have, he says. "We try not to buy
anything we don't use."
By contrast, Notre Dame leased most of its Microsoft software last year, and a
decision to renew the annual lease, beginning July 1, appears inevitable, says
Ms. Toll.
Notre Dame, which has seen its Microsoft licensing costs increase from about
$330,000 to more than $400,000 in the past three years, is still seeking ways
to reduce its costs "drastically," she says. There seem to be few
easy ways to do so.
But Ms. Toll says she is not entirely comfortable knowing that after an
institution enters Microsoft's leasing program, it no longer owns the licenses
to use the products. "You're pretty much trapped," with no way of
predicting how changes in the leasing program could drive up the university's software
costs, she says.
She likes the fact that leasing agreements "make it easier to move forward
with technology changes." But she cites another common complaint about the
terms of the leases: a new prohibition on colleges' providing upgrades of
Microsoft operating systems to faculty members for their home computers.
Work-at-home rights to two popular Microsoft products, FrontPage Web
page-design tools and Visual Studio programming tools, also were dropped.
Counterproductive Rules?
The new work-at-home rules have put Notre Dame in the awkward position of
having to ask students and faculty and staff members to buy full-priced
licenses for software that is already running on their home machines--or else
take the software off their computers. Ms. Toll finds that aspect of the new
leasing agreement draconian. "Microsoft has to realize that no matter how
much we communicate," she says, "it's not going to happen. It's just
not going to."
The cutbacks on work-at-home rights are counterproductive, says Dr. Toy, of the
Foundation for California Community Colleges. "Faculty members do most of
their work at home--it's not a 9-to-5 job."
He and other higher-education officials have talked with Microsoft about
restoring some of the work-at-home rights that were eliminated in Campus
Agreement 3.0. "We've gotten some indications that they're considering that,"
he says.
Microsoft says it is listening to the feedback. "We're always open to
that," says Ms. Tanner, the compliance manager.
"We've been very open to suggestions regarding work-at-home rights, and
how they're utilized in the campus environment, to get a better understanding
of their value."
Some academic officials say the new licensing choices have forced them to think
about substitutes for Microsoft's desktop products. But they also say a
practical alternative doesn't exist for them at the moment. "I want
Microsoft to always feel like the fish can get off the hook," says Larry
W. Bryant, director of academic computing at the U.S. Air Force Academy. But unless the Air Force changes its standard
from Microsoft Windows, he adds, "the Air Force Academy is going to stay
with that same standard."
Nearly every college is in a similar situation. Asked by Unix users for an
alternative to Microsoft Office, says Ms. Toll, Notre Dame installed Sun
Microsystems' StarOffice, only to learn that many users decided that they
didn't like it.
"The reality," she says, "is that most people in the world use
Microsoft Office, and if you're a faculty member collaborating with someone,
you've got to be able to get their documents."
________________________________________________________________
Copyright 2002, The Chronicle of Higher Education. Reprinted with permission.
This article may not be posted, published, or distributed without permission
from The Chronicle. From The Chronicle of Higher Education issue
dated April 19, 2002
[PRINTER FRIENDLY VERSION]
|
|
|  |
 |
 |
| |