Microsoft Action Pack – Too much? Too little?

re: Microsoft Action Pack – Too much? Too little?

Michael D. Alligood — Mon, 15 Jan 2007 03:46:26 GMT

Nothing was addressed in this post about what started this all; "No Downgrade rights".

The issue that we will be in violation when we renew our subscribtion if we do not uninstall Windows XP, Office 2003, and others was not covered. That is what everyone was buzzing about yesterday. Not this stuff you posted.

The thing that upsets me the MOST; why, being a MAPS subscriber, did I hear about this first from your blog??? That is just tacky. If I saw this on anyone elses blog I would have dismissed it.

re: Microsoft Action Pack – Too much? Too little?

Bob Muir — Mon, 15 Jan 2007 04:01:43 GMT

Good points Eric. When you compare the cost of the servers alone against SA versions (to stay current), the Action Pack is still a bargain for running our businesses.

I think many folks are just used to upgrading when they have both the time and resources at the same time. It's annoying to have a plan and then have an expensive flaw in our plan pointed out.

We really do need to have previous versions of the stuff available to stay compatible with our clients. Is the answer to use our TechNet products for this?

I use TechNet+ for my testing/compatibility/VM training and I'm afraid to look at the EULA to see if it's the same as Action Pack with regards to throwing away the old version when the new one comes out.

P.s. Is it really too much trouble for someone to verify the validity of "Partners"? Seeing obvous non-partners stealing MS software with no repercussions is really annoying.

re: Microsoft Action Pack – Too much? Too little?

Bob Muir — Mon, 15 Jan 2007 05:44:00 GMT

Eric, I've been reading through the AP licensing information and it seems to me that the same strict reading that says we have to throw away XP and upgrade to Vista when our annual renewal comes up also would seem to say that we're not allowed to send or receive external email on our Action Pack SBS and Exchange Server.

<i>"The software included with the subscription can be used for internal business use, testing, evaluation, demonstration, training, and education only. For example, you can use the Action Pack software to host your company's intranet, but it cannot be used to host a commercial website. This is considered a production environment that is outside the scope of the software's intended purpose. "</i>

Yes? If so, then the Action Pack sure isn't much use for "running my business on it" and I take back my "bargain" statement earlier.

Well I used to want to be completely legal. Who opened this can of worms anyway?

re: Microsoft Action Pack – Too much? Too little?

David Schrag — Mon, 15 Jan 2007 12:31:07 GMT

I plead guilty to the counts of shotgun e-mailing, making demanding statements, and assuming that issues that are not being responded to are in fact being ignored. In my defense:

-- I would not use shotgun e-mails if I knew exactly whom I should aim at. But the org chart at Microsoft is an impenetrable mess. This MAPS issue affects the partner program in general, the small business channel in particular, licensing, maybe sales, maybe marketing. There is a MAPS team, but nobody really knows who they are or what decision-making authority they have. So I blast out an e-mail to people I know -- at least I know them in the sense that they have personally handed me a business card with their e-mail address on them -- in the hope that at least one of them will be both sympathetic and influential. So until you suggest a better and more specific way of submitting our input and feedback to you (plural), I'll keep shotgunning when I think the issue is important enough.

-- I think there is a place for emphatic statements, if used selectively. For example, I would never say that software in the Action Pack "must" be delivered to partners before it gets released to the public, although it would be nice. And when I say the policy of terminating licenses to previous versions "must" be reversed, what I mean is that it must be reversed if you want the program to meet its original goals; not that it must be reversed or else I'm going to fly to Redmond and go medieval on someone.

-- Why shouldn't we assume that if we don't get a response to an issue we raise that no one is listening and that nothing is being done? Which is more logical for me to expect -- that I will or will not have any influence on the decisions of a multibillion dollar company? I can understand that you want to keep actions against pirates quiet; you don't want to tip them off. But we are your partners. If you are doing something on our behalf, even if you are just *considering* doing something on our behalf, it makes sense to let us know about it. If you decide not to do it later on and have a good reason for it, we'll understand. Furthermore, we know that Microsoft -- and you in particular -- often *do* reply with status updates, so it's reasonable for us to assume in the absence of a reply that the issue is not a priority for you.

As for the recent Action Pack issues, there are parallels here with the licensing policies and programs that I've railed against in the past, such as the Small Business Desktop SKU. We are saying to ourselves "wait a minute, we had this great thing going with Microsoft and now they're messing with it for no good reason." If we can't understand the logic of your decisions we get frustrated and angry, and that's when the e-mail shotguns come out.

So what's next? Exactly how and with whom should we continue this conversation?

re: Microsoft Action Pack – Too much? Too little?

Ori Kitai — Mon, 15 Jan 2007 16:44:10 GMT

First, as I wrote in the MSSMALLBIZ community, my problems with the MAP is the time MS sends us the softwares. As a consultant and an OEM system builder, my costemers are not, usualy, "one man shop" and thus want that I'll know everything there is to know about a new product and have tested it for some time - mostly, because thay will have to by the "top of the line" from time to time. I don't htink that this is something so dificult fo MS to achive (send the RTM disk to the MAP sbscribers and delay for one month the release for the general pepole - for example, or let us download the CDs - second example).

second, I don't expect MS to send me the most "top of the line" product (like Vista Ultimate). Do to the fact the Word from Office SBE is the same as Word in Office Pro, I think that MS dosn't have to send the Pro edition.

Sorry for any grammer/spelling mistakes (there isn't a speller on my server machine).

re: Microsoft Action Pack – Too much? Too little?

Bill — Mon, 15 Jan 2007 18:45:21 GMT

Eric

This is probalbly a real dumb question but for those who want to have downgrade rights would PA be an option?

-bill

re: Microsoft Action Pack – Too much? Too little?

John Riley — Mon, 15 Jan 2007 21:09:32 GMT

As a 1 person shop, with family assistance, I went into the business knowing that it would be my business model and was comfortable with it. I do have very personalized clients and enjoy the interaction with them. As most anyone, I would like to make more money adn realize growth is the only way to do so. I have considered additional employees, but rememberingthe issues with them in my previous endeavors, decided that it won't work for me. Knowing all of this, I chose to be a Registered Partner adn have no issues with Microsoft keeping certain benefits for higher participants.

The enclusion of Enterprise "Anything" software is of NO value to me. As a one person shop, I have no interest in any enterprise businesses, so to include them in the Action Pack is useless to me. However, the exclusion of certain software is detrimental. I do have client who wish to be included in the cutting edge of software technology. These would benefit from me knowing all about that software and how to help them include it into their business. A point would be MapPoint 2006, which is not in the Action Pack. I have some 10 clients who deliver goods within the Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex and have difficulty collecting data without a program setup to do that, MapPoint. I can at this time, only assit them with the current version and cannot help them with the new GPS enhanced version as I don't have access to software to learn upon. I didn't see any beta testing for it either.

I would guess the point of all of this, is that Microsoft's various teams don't think Small Business, but think on the retail or enterprise level. Unluckily, it appears that the MAPS team has to fight each of the teams to be allowed to include software that is really needed by the SMB partners. I hope that one of the higher executives will finally address it.

re: Microsoft Action Pack – Too much? Too little?

Greg C — Mon, 15 Jan 2007 21:45:36 GMT

Losing XP Pro will be a big hit for me too.

The vast majority of small business owners I talk to are planning on staying with XP for the forseeable future.

But I DO have clients who want me to know about Vista.

Which do I choose?

I don't suspect that many pirates are buying action packs; the pirates are downloading cracked copies from file sharing sites.

And yes, I know...I can BUY single copies of Vista (or XP) or technet or something else. I bought the VS.NET special edition a couple years ago, I would not _expect_ development tools to be in the MAP. I WOULD expect the current desktop OSes to be available for me.

I would be more than happy to e-mail the MAPs team, SBS team, or whoever is the appropriate group to contact with a convincing argument about my business needs :)

-Greg C

re: Microsoft Action Pack – Too much? Too little?

Ken McDermott — Mon, 15 Jan 2007 23:40:52 GMT

The only real problem with the current Action Pack (from my perspective) is the requirement to upgrade _everything_ to the latest version when the subscription is renewed. Of course I'm upgrading at least a couple of machines to Vista, but I also need a couple of machines running XP Pro and IE6 because some LOB apps don't support Vista or IE7. (And Vista doesn't have drivers to support all my current hardware.) As I've suggested elsewhere, allow MAPS subscribers to _continue_ to use software from their MAPS for a reasonable period. I would prefer as long as Microsoft officially supports the product, but 2-3 years would also work. This would not be downgrade rights, but "grandfathering" existing use.

Thanks for listening (reading?)

What? I need to uninstall Office 2003 and Windows XP as soon as I get my January Action Pack kit?

Microsoft Small Business Community Blog — Wed, 17 Jan 2007 19:05:15 GMT

Since my Do I have Downgrade Rights for my software that comes in Action Pack? post last week, there

re: Microsoft Action Pack – Too much? Too little?

Chris — Thu, 18 Jan 2007 19:05:31 GMT

Am I reading this correctly? After a certain period of time, we are forced to upgrade to the latest product or our current, non upgraded software ceases to function? Please elaberate. Thanks.

re: Microsoft Action Pack – Too much? Too little?

UK User — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 02:07:03 GMT

You would think that as partners showing customers what Vista can do for them, that MS would have thrown in at LEAST one activation of Vista Ultimate !!!!

re: Microsoft Action Pack – Too much? Too little?

Bill G (not him) — Sun, 28 Jan 2007 02:30:17 GMT

I'm a one person shop.. I support small businesses and home users.

Regarding the last posting about ultimate. I agree with that and would like to see it go further. Instead of 10 licenses of Vista Business - why not 10 licenses of Vista in any combination of version. I'd like to be able to see and show the differences in the versions, including the home editions...

It seems like a fair compromise to include downgrade rights for each item for one year (for those that had the previous version as a continued action pack subscriber). I understand Microsoft's desire to have us promoting new software/operating systems -- it's also not very convenient to force upgrades - especially when there are higher hardware requirements.

Also, I have to say that it's rather disturbing that customers have Vista before I do as a registered partner, having subscribed to the action pack for years. I have not yet received my january update. This launch is *huge* - we should have been working with the rtm code for a long time..

re: Microsoft Action Pack – Too much? Too little?

Paul Power — Tue, 30 Jan 2007 07:33:03 GMT

My gripe is that to be a Small Business Specialist you MUST subscribe to Action Pack. Why not let us choose either it or Technet or MSDN. Surely we should be able to use either????

I just don't understand that.

re: Microsoft Action Pack – Too much? Too little?

Pete R — Thu, 01 Feb 2007 06:51:57 GMT

Got my MAPS today. Pretty annoyed that Vista is an UPGRADE version, not standalone, which requires an installed OS to upgrade FROM. I'm sorry, but that's just plain dumb.

Here's what I would like to see in some future iteration of MAPS:

- A MAPS subscription is based upon "points", i.e. let's say a subscription is 500 points.

- A MAPS subscriber logs into his/her account and sets up their subscription; the full range of MS business software is available, with each title or license worth a certain number of points, i.e. let's say a Vista license is 20 points per, a Win2K3 server license is 50 points, something like that.

Doing something like this would allow for situations like the gentleman here who needed MapPoint, or for the one man shows who are never going to install Exchange or SBS.

I also agree that the downgrade rights should be granted, so long as no more than 10 total desktop OS licenses are currently in use. I can't upgrade to Vista (well, I would have preferred to do a clean install anyway) because none of my clients are running it, and none have any plans to do so. XP and Office 2003 are more than enough for their needs, and they need more compelling reasons than some eye candy (that would be turned off on their shared video memory systems anyway) to shell out for an OS upgrade.

re: Microsoft Action Pack – Too much? Too little?

David — Tue, 06 Feb 2007 03:39:35 GMT

Hi All,

a question on action packs, if I am a 3 man company, do I need three action packs or do I have three licenses for running the business with OS and office applications.

Thanks

David

re: Microsoft Action Pack – Too much? Too little?

Steve G — Tue, 06 Feb 2007 11:53:06 GMT

I'm a little confused about the MAPS upgrade media we have been shipped (here in the UK at least). Can someone from MS tell me which of these scenarios is allowed?

1. PC that came with OEM WinXP - using the MAPS media to upgrade to Vista

2. PC that came with OEM WinXP - using the MAPS media to install Vista alongside & dual booting

3. PC that came with OEM WinXP - using the MAPS media to upgrade to Vista. When the MAPS subscription expires, reverting back to the old OEM copy of WinXP.

4. Bare metal PC that had the previous MAPS full edition of WinXP installed - using the MAPS media to upgrade to Vista

5. Bare metal PC - using the previous MAPS media to first install WinXP, then using the new MAPS media to upgrade to Vista

6. Using the workaround to install Vista upgrade bare-metal (http://www.digg.com/software/Workaround_Discovered_For_Clean_Install_With_Vista_Upgrade_DVDs)

7. PC with last year's MAPS Office 2003 installed (but no OEM or retail copy of office before that) - using the MAPS media to upgrade this to Office 2007

re: Microsoft Action Pack – Too much? Too little?

Boog — Sat, 10 Feb 2007 08:06:58 GMT

I just got my January 2007 Action Pack update. As has been noted it had 10 copies of Vista Biz and Office 2007. In a few weeks it will be time to renew. Based on what I am seeing the price is now $699! If that is the case I won't be renewing. I am a 1 man shop running a couple servers and a few laptops. With Exchange 2007 requiring 64 bit I can't see any reason to upgrade. My 32 bit R2 versions of Win 2K3 are running just fine. I have more clients asking for Linux servers these days anyway. I got lucky to get the Vista and Office 2007 right before my subscription runs out. I am impressed with Vista but I can't see many people upgrading until they buy new machines.

re: Microsoft Action Pack – Too much? Too little?

mssmallbiz — Tue, 13 Feb 2007 10:37:22 GMT

@ Boog - The renewal price is $299 on Action Pack, not $699. Are you located outside the US? Remember that if your Action Pack subscription expires (you don't renew), you must unistall all of the included software and destroy the included media. Action Pack is a subscription only and not perpetual licenses.

re: Microsoft Action Pack – Too much? Too little?

Fred — Fri, 16 Feb 2007 02:59:59 GMT

Not including VISTA Ultimate is just stupid.

Don't you want people to know ALL features of the new software?

re: Microsoft Action Pack – Too much? Too little?

Vojin — Tue, 03 Apr 2007 09:43:32 GMT

So I cannot use Exchange Server to send e-mails outside my organization, right?

re: Microsoft Action Pack – Too much? Too little?

mssmallbiz — Wed, 04 Apr 2007 17:22:44 GMT

@ Vojin - Yes, you most certainly can install the Exchange Server within your business and use it to send email outside of your buisness. The limitation is that it has to be installed in your business for your business use, which this certainly falls under.

re: Microsoft Action Pack – Too much? Too little?

DAVE — Mon, 20 Aug 2007 13:58:21 GMT

We have an action pack which expires in october 2007. We will be purchasing a new one when this expires. Will the software that we've installed from our old action pack run out, and need updating with the new pack details? We only get 10 lisences with most of the cd's, but we have 17 employees.

re: Microsoft Action Pack – Too much? Too little?

mssmallbiz — Mon, 20 Aug 2007 18:29:51 GMT

@ Dave - Action Pack is a subscription, which you can renew each year. As such, the licenses included are not cumulative. This meanse that in October when you renew your Action Pack again, you will still have 10 licenses for the included products, not 20 (10+10). Partners who need more licenses than are included in Action Pack have several options: 1) Purchase the needed licenses separately, 2) Become a Certified Partner which provides more licenses, 3) Become a Gold Certified Partner which provides the most licenses.

re: Microsoft Action Pack – Too much? Too little?

Dallas Freeman — Tue, 28 Aug 2007 10:03:40 GMT

Why is the action pack so expensive in Australia as compared to anywhere else?

re: Microsoft Action Pack – Too much? Too little?

Grant C — Sun, 14 Oct 2007 05:42:44 GMT

Hi MS, how about a reply to Pete R about a points system. That sounds like a great idea.

I am a one man business, with just a server and several PC's. Yet I pay the same amount ($869 in NZ) as large companies with many staff. A lot of the server gets thrown in the corner, along with all the glossy stuff.

Also, it used to be cheaper to renew each year, but now we pay the full price every year. That change certainly sucks.

re: Microsoft Action Pack – Too much? Too little?

mssmallbiz — Sun, 14 Oct 2007 09:02:56 GMT

@ Grant - At the current time, to the best of my knowledge, we are not considering a points system for Action Pack.

Vista upgrade licensing issues with MAP

woody — Fri, 09 Nov 2007 21:14:26 GMT

I also have a question about MAP. We have subscribed to MAP. However, we are not going to be addressing VISTA. It is to buggy and problematic. We recently got a new PC with Vista Home Premium. It does not play well with our network. I may have to upgrade it via one of the upgrades that came with MAP, so it would be the only vista in the system. Question,

since Vista can be killed by MS at any time, since the activation is not just a one time item (which is why I am not pushing Vista), what happens if I do the following:

I install the upgrade to Vista Business on a machine that has a legal and registered copy of Vista Home Premium.

Once that is done, there really is no going back. While we intend to renew the MAP, what happens if we don't? Will the upgrade be tagged as a pirated version by ms and fail to work thereafter?

If so, how the hell am I supposed to recover from that without losing all my programs and work?

What about Vista from the MSDN suite?

I'd like to be able to play with Vista, and get used to it, because I have customers who have it, because MS forces it down thier throat by prohibiting the OEMS to ship XP.

I need answers to these questions before I go and install vista upgrade.

My current solution, was to get 2 more disks, install windows 2000 on one, and put all 3 disks in my system. I can then boot vista by changing the boot order, or I can boot windows 2000 which I do. (the main problem with Vista is that you normally cannot run as administrator, and since I have to use a VPN to a remote office, and maintain the server there, drive mapping and server login are much more functional and stable if the login account on both machines is administrator, with the same password. Which is how I run 2000.