Microsoft Licensing is getting out of hand

Why do we let a giant like Microsoft get away with outrageous prices and crazy use-licenses!!!  We, as an industry, have accepted Microsoft so much, that no matter what they did, we accept it as “the bible” of technology usage.  If Microsoft came out in 2010 and said that office 2011 will cost $749 and you can only use it if a Microsoft agent comes into your office and visually inspects your PC for installation, the industry would say….”Well, if Microsoft says it…. I guess that’s what everyone else is doing…”.  Let’s do it.

We really need to take a stand all.  There are other offerings other than Microsoft.  Yes, they make great productivity software, and their OS’s are ok (not great, but just alright).  But, their licensing plans and costs are getting way out of hand.  A couple of cases:

When I first found out about Microsoft’s crazy licensing, I was a newbie Network Administrator many years ago.  I wanted to get Exchange 5.5 installed to replace my user’s POP3 clients from an ISP.  The cost of the server was as follows:

$5000.00 Hardware
$700 Windows NT 4.0 Server
$1200 Exchange 5.5 Server

(This is only guesstimating… I don’t recall exact numbers).  Okay, so adding that up, my costs would have been $7100.00.  Oh, but wait… I just spent $7100.00, but we can’t use it yet…. It’s just going to look pretty in the server room floor doing nothing.  What?!?  Why not??  Well, now you have to buy User CALS.  One for Windows NT and one for Exchange, before you can use it.

Well, that was hard to swallow, but we, as an industry, has gotten used to it.  Then, just yesterday, I found out another piece of Microsoft licensing that really ticked me off, and I almost feel to the floor, because people are accepting it!!

I’m at a VMWare seminar, seeing what the latest improvements are to virtualization.  I’ve always liked the idea that if I’m overrunning my hardware, I can move an OS (virtual image file) from one server, to another.  VMWare calls it (VMotion).  Well, Microsoft won’t have that!  In order to allow yourself to move a Server OS from one server to another, you need another Server license.  Thats right!  2 server licenses even though, you are only using 1!!

I’m not talking about the OEM licenses that lives and dies with the hardware.  These are standard licenses that you purchase with whatever plan you are on (Open, Volume, Select, etc).  So, if I want the ability to move an OS Server (which I have already licensed) from one hardware to another, then I need to double my license expenditures.

Sure, those who knows the licenses know the caveats…. you can only move a server from one hardware to another without a license if:

1).  It’s after 90-days
2).  It’s due to a hardware failure

But still….. Microsoft wants to cash in on this “virtualization” technology.  I can, right now, install a Server OS on server 2, move files from server 1 to server 2, and then remove Server 1 OS, and still be legal.  I suppose that during those first few hours of transferring files, I’m not legal, but, seriously, what audit would turn that up?

But, not with virtualization.  What’s the difference?  Sure, it’s easier to move server OS’s in virtualization, which may allow me to do it more.  But double-licensing me, just prevents me from buying more Windows servers, Microsoft.

It’s because, we, as an industry, allow it.  We accept it.  Most of what Microsoft offers (and I say “MOST” heavily) can be replaced with Linux, Unix, Mac, or some other application (such as OpenOffice, web applications, servers, etc).  I asked a couple of IT managers why they don’t move away from Microsoft on some of their software.  Their excuse was because it’s easy.  We’ve already learned it.  No more re-training the employees.

C’mon…. you had to learn WordPerfect, and then relearn with Word.  You had to learn Unix and then relearn with DOS and then relearn with Windows.  You had to learn Lotus 1-2-3 and then relearn with Excel.

It can be done, but we, as an industry, keep allowing Microsoft to take advantage of us.  It’s really starting to make me sick.

I’m not a Microsoft hater.  Those of you that know me, knows I act like it… but I do give Microsoft where credit is due.  I just don’t think EVERYTHING Microsoft does should be used.  Use the right tool for the right job.  And for heaven’s sake…. we MUST do somethign about this licensing plan!  You can make a career out of it, and still not know everything!

Principles of Innovation

A few years ago, I participated in a “life-management” program.  Basically, it was a self-improvement program sponsored by my previous company.  The program failed, but not because of it’s content.

I was going through my desk drawers at home, looking for scissors, and found my notes about how to encourage and promote innovation in your team.

1. One conversation at a time – If your team is brainstorming, make sure each individual is heard fully, and without interruption.
2. Stay focused on the topic – It’s important to stay on topic.  Going off on small tangents is a part of brainstorming, but make sure you don’t start talking about your neighbor’s new car.
3. Encourage wild ideas – Sounds silly, after following principle #2.  What this means, is NEVER…. NEVER, EVER discourage an idea, no matter how wild it is.  Usually, that wild idea will spawn a good but more realistic idea.  Plus, discouragement is a negative emotion, and you don’t want any negative feelings in your team.
4. Defer Judgement – Make sure you wait until AFTER everything is said.  Even then, you may want to let it sink before passing judgement on the idea.
5. Build on the ideas of others – Based on Principle #3, keep spawning off ideas from other ideas, adding more value.  One smart person can come up with a good idea.  But two or three of them starts building true innovation
6. Vote on Ideas – Have your team place the top ideas on a board.  Give them each 3 post-its.  Have them place their post-its on the ideas they like most (can’t be their own).  Use the top votes to choose the best idea.

And finally, one of the most brilliant and important principles that I can remember:

FAIL OFTEN TO SUCCEED FASTER

We all fail.  No matter what the goal is, we learn from our mistakes in order to get better.  That last principle basically states… “Don’t be afraid to fail….it’s a part of succeeding.  The more you fail, the faster you’ll learn and succeed”.

Good Luck!!  I hope this helps you!

I’m not crazy if I use the term “router-on-a-stick”

If many of you have watched Jeff Dunham’s shows, you’ll no doubt be familiar with José, the Jalepeño on a stick.  (Jeff Dunham is a hilarious ventriliquist).  So, don’t think I’m nuts or crazy if I use the term “router-on-a-stick”.  It’s not a reference to José or being silly.

Why do I bring this up?  Well, I was talking to a technician, trying to get him to understand VLAN’s, and that you actually have to have a router (Layer3 device) in order for the two VLAN’s to communicate.  He asked, “I have 20 VLANS!  I can’t have that many interfaces on my small 1800 router!”.

Hence, the coined term, Router on a stick.  Basically, you use a single cabled interface (the stick if you straighten out the cable — sorry for the visual), and turn it into multiple logical interfaces.  You can then assign virtual IP addresses on each virtual interface, and route between them, still only using the 1 physical interface.

I was then asked, most appropriately, “How do you get multiple VLAN’s over a single cable?”.  Ahhh…. now you are talking about trunking.

VLAN’s are nothing more than the exact piece of data (the frame in this case, since we are talking Layer2), with 1 ity-bity-tiny difference…. a VLAN tag.  A frame that is tagged in a certain VLAN cannot cross another VLAN boundry.  So, you create a trunk interface, to pass all the frames in certain VLANs, or all of them.

Trunking can be done in two ways…. ISL (blehhh… don’t use it) and 802.1q.  If you build a trunk between the switch interface and the router, you can then pass all the trunk data to the router, and have the newly created logical interfaces receive the packet and send it on for routing.

No doubt, I have left gaps in my explanation.  I did this because I only wanted to give you an overview, and the definitions.  I didn’t get into detail, because many others have done this (and probably a better job than me).  Cisco also has a quick document written up.  http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk389/tk815/technologies_configuration_example09186a00800949fd.shtml

Good Luck, and don’t hesitate to ask questions, or correct me areas where I may be mistaken (I do that from time to time )