New PowerApps and Flow Licensing coming October 1,... - Page 8

Pstork1 · ‎08-30-2019

If you haven't seen the announcement yet about the Licensing changes that are coming to PowerApps and Flow starting on October 1, 2019 you really need to read the following Blog. This announcement was originally made at Inspire this year, but has undergone a number of significant changes. Make sure you read this and understand what it means to you and your organization.

https://powerapps.microsoft.com/en-us/blog/new-licensing-options-for-powerapps-and-flow/

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
If I have answered your question, please mark your post as Solved.
If you like my response, please give it a Thumbs Up.

dileeps · ‎09-10-2019

FAQ covers all the common questions and principles, however not every possible permutation/combination. If there are specific questions you have, do let us knw, we can answer it and also add it to FAQ

JohnP · ‎09-10-2019

@dileeps

Read this thread! Lot's of specific questions and concerns - you will see migration from PowerApps! The "grandfather period" is pointless for potential devs/users; if MS sticks to this model PowerApps is dead as a platform for developing Business Apps from an ISV point of view (and for developing internal Business Apps based on anything else than SharePoint lists).

We were told in june to split up our app into more focused apps (from 1 to 7-8) and to move from SharePoint lists to CDS or SQL so we are basically screwed right now. Monthly costs for us and our customers will quadruple unless we can find creative ways to circumvent the new licensing.

dileeps · ‎09-10-2019

This requirement for 30 user minimum is removed and is not longer enforced

dileeps · ‎09-10-2019

For Question 1, it is max of 2 app per user per business process.

The way number of passes (thats what we call them :)) would be determined would be based on how many (and what type) of apps your users who do not have a licensed access. So if your users use only specific apps and not everything, then the number of passes are based on what they will use.

Later this month, we will also try to do a deepdive webinar on how this will technically look in the product

dileeps · ‎09-10-2019

Sure i will try to go through and anwer any unanswered question.

For your specific question around 7-8 apps, i will suggest to check if most of the apps are accessed by all users or only certain population (thats typically reason for breakup). If yes, then per app model is really for 2 apps/user/business process and if distinct users are using different apps, then you might still be able to use per app license model.

Eickhel · ‎09-10-2019

I think it would be easier if MS would re-think their "standard to premium" connector changes.

That would solve almost 70% of complaints.

JohnP · ‎09-10-2019

@dileeps

The "per app" plan where you can have 2 apps whithin a "business process" is really vague. What does it mean and how is it enforced/policed?

If we have 7-8 apps it's really difficult to know which user needs which app. So either they get a "per app" license which is 10 USD per app or they pay 40 USD to use all apps. On average I think they will need the "per user" license which will increase the cost of our smallest customer from 0 USD to 48.000 USD per year (100 users). Right now they have a E3/E5 license which have zero cost.

wjhepworth · ‎09-10-2019

As clear evidence of this, I already brought this up with my leadership and the decision came down to a) stop PowerApps development, b) investigate other options, c) determine which apps to refactor and which to just retire. Now, to be fair, we are a company of only 300 employees but laying a $40/app/user/month for just PowerApps. Then we also pay for the other Microsoft services such as Azure etc. Had we known these prices to begin with we would have simply done our apps in Node.js / Angular or React.

Microsoft is truly hurting themselves with this approach for several reasons. First, much of PowerApps is still being refined and essential features are still not complete. Case in point, examine the connectors and see which support delegation (a key enterprise feature). Only SQL Server is a credibly complete connector -- though does not support triggers -- and certainly shouldn't be considered premium. All otherconnectors are missing key operands. Consider also the PDF viewer which is a no-brainer requirement of most business applications. Even something this critical is still listed as an experimental feature and requires access in a completely unsecure approach (although I and others have finally figured out how to do it securely). Point is, Microsoft really should understand PowerApps / Flow position and realize these products are still fighting for segment and not dominating. Ther are alternatives and they are more robust than PowerApps. Not sure Microsoft is reading the market correctly and my bet is that you are not. As a Microsoft fan, I hope I am wrong.

NEPatton · ‎09-10-2019

@wjhepworth wrote:
< the decision came down to a) stop PowerApps development, b) investigate other options >

Solid decision making based on the evidence. Good leadership. You guys are not alone.

JohnP · ‎09-10-2019

@wjhepworth wrote:
Microsoft is truly hurting themselves with this approach for several reasons. First, much of PowerApps is still being refined and essential features are still not complete.

Agreed. PowerApps has such potential. I think MS realized it and got greedy.