Here are a few catches

• You have a 3 year contract for the licenses; if your need for licenses goes down, you are stuck with the extra licenses
• If you add people and licenses, you need to purchase licenses with pro-rated SA
• Only 20% of businesses use the value-add features: training, tutorials, etc.
• If you skip a version, you skip and lose any savings
• Most businesses replace desktops, laptops, and servers more frequently than they upgrade operating systems

With these considerations in mind, the SA program works best when:

• You upgrade your software every three years, even if you lag behind the timing
• Your licensing needs -- employees and machines -- are fairly stable; you don't expect significant reductions
• You don't skip versions or releases

• The SA program works well for server-based software, such as SQL Server and MS Exchange, which you keep and maintain over time, even as you change the underlying hardware.
• For Office and productivity applications, the cost/benefit assessment depends on the factors discussed, above.
• For servers, SA works best if you buy your operating system separately from your servers
• For PCs and Laptops, SA is only worthwhile if you upgrade your operating system more frequently than you replace your hardware

With a small assessment effort, you can easily decide whether to commit to the SA program, and if it will provide sufficient savings to warrant the risks and limitations.

When you make a 3 year commitment to any vendor, you are committing to that vendor's strategy and product direction, even if you are not fully aware of what that means. The new concept among software vendors is the "ecosystem" -- a collection of servers, services, and applications that integrate and work together seamlessly.

With Microsoft, the ecosystem starts with MS Exchange, Sharepoint, Windows Server, and the Office applications. Ecosystems are designed to foster organic growth. Capabilities are evolving in ways that guide (and sometimes require) customers to expand the number of Microsoft systems they run. Ecosystems can provide great levels of integration; However, they can also be a technology and financial trap.

If you can have more email, calendar, and communication features with Google Apps Premier Edition for 50%-75% LESS than an in-house Exchange environment, do you want to be locked into Microsoft's ecosystem? With the emergence of cloud- based solutions and programming-less integration, do you need to commit to one vendor's integration solution?

There is no evidence that integration Exchange, Sharepoint, and Office applications is any less expensive than using Google Apps for Email, Calendar, and Sites when you consider the total cost of ownership.

Why not look before you leap? Why put your vendor's strategy before yours? Why not consider alternatives before spending the money?

Last month, we launched a new web site. Your feedback is always welcome.

Interested in past issues? Click here for the archives.