New PowerApps and Flow Licensing coming October 1, 2019

[Pstork1]

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 This announcement was originally made at Inspire this year, but has undergone a number of significant changes.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/

[inverse70]

Hi All 

This is such a disaster we are now starting to deploy PowerApps and these changes have now put the brakes on our initiative. 

I do have a question if anyone could clarify. 

We have about 15 existing apps that use Azure SQL connectors, etc. I understand this will hold for 5 years before turning into premium. All my Office 365 user have access to these apps. So I have 5 years to use these apps before making any decision. Do I still need to pay on top of my Office 365 licenses for all my user to have access to these apps i.e. 40USD per user during the 5 years? Or does the Office 365 license cover user access for the next 5 years while the connector changes from standard to premium?

[Pstork1]

If the Apps fall under the exemption that grandfathers them in then you do not need premium licenses for any of your users to access and use those existing apps.

[dileeps]

For 5 year grandfathering question, you can find the information here https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/power-platform/admin/powerapps-flow-licensing-faq#how-does-the-chan...

Also most of these questions are covered in FAQ here https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/power-platform/admin/powerapps-flow-licensing-faq

[JohnP]

@dileeps 

That FAQ leaves a lot of questions to be answered as you can see in this thread. It seems MS screwed a lot of ISV's and Business App creators with this change. Lesson learned.

[dileeps]

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]

@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]

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

[dileeps]

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]

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]

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]

@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]

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]

---

@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]

---

@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.

[pulsebeat]

Maybe this should be another thread but....like most (all?) of you, I am forced to leave Powerapps (can't go from $0 to $300,000/year).  So what are the alternatives you are all looking at?    

[JohnP]

@pulsebeat 

We're still in denial. Flabbergasted. But clearly we have to look at alternatives down the road during the "grandfather period" which MS "graciously" offers us (terms still to be negotiated, thank you).

https://www.mendix.com/resources/gartner-2019-magic-quadrant-for-enterprise-low-code-application-pla...

[FredericForest]

Something that gets to me with this whole thing is that MS (or that part of MS at least) seems to be confusing PaaS and SaaS.

Sometimes, our business is willing to pay 10$/month/user for a fully-featured, top quality, key-in-hand piece of software that solves a non-mission-critical problem. We came accross Sql Database Modeler two weeks ago and it was just the case: It was a bit of unexpected spending, but we felt it was worth our money.

But PowerApps is a platform. You still have to build (and support/maintain) the **bleep** things. ^^ And no matter how talended I am, it's not going to be to the level of a real SaaS offering since, for one, I am not a team of full-time developper dedicated to a subject.

THAT, more than anything, is where I feel PowerApps (Dynamics flavoured) is going wrong : it's a middleware platform asking for a final product pricing scheme. No power user can convince their boss to grant them license money AND spend days building something. "Can't you find something on the market that does more or less what you want" I hear them say (real SaaS approach). "Can't you just do an Excel spreadsheet like we do for everything else?" (real platform approach).

We as professionals have often been the silent, under-the-radar evangilazors of MS solutions, but now we are cut out from our typical usecase and can't help propagate the solution.

The only opportunties left is when corporate buyers and sellers agree on a massive deployment and someone at IT realises "well, now that we're paying for this thing I've never heard about, i guess I need to find some use for it".

Because lets face it : despite its potential, PowerApps is still largely unheard of. For most folks, there are still quite a few steps in that AIDA model before a purchase. Now the whole buttom-up approach is dead, and the top-down one will fail to takeoff without strong community support from power users and consultants.

This is truly a sad and terrible mistake.

[OneThing]

---

@FredericForest wrote:

Something that gets to me with this whole thing is that MS (or that part of MS at least) seems to be confusing PaaS and SaaS.

Sometimes, our business is willing to pay 10$/month/user for a fully-featured, top quality, key-in-hand piece of software that solves a non-mission-critical problem. We came accross Sql Database Modeler two weeks ago and it was just the case: It was a bit of unexpected spending, but we felt it was worth our money.

But PowerApps is a platform. You still have to build (and support/maintain) the **bleep** things. ^^ And no matter how talended I am, it's not going to be to the level of a real SaaS offering since, for one, I am not a team of full-time developper dedicated to a subject.

THAT, more than anything, is where I feel PowerApps (Dynamics flavoured) is going wrong : it's a middleware platform asking for a final product pricing scheme. No power user can convince their boss to grant them license money AND spend days building something. "Can't you find something on the market that does more or less what you want" I hear them say (real SaaS approach). "Can't you just do an Excel spreadsheet like we do for everything else?" (real platform approach).

We as professionals have often been the silent, under-the-radar evangilazors of MS solutions, but now we are cut out from our typical usecase and can't help propagate the solution.

The only opportunties left is when corporate buyers and sellers agree on a massive deployment and someone at IT realises "well, now that we're paying for this thing I've never heard about, i guess I need to find some use for it".

Because lets face it : despite its potential, PowerApps is still largely unheard of. For most folks, there are still quite a few steps in that AIDA model before a purchase. Now the whole buttom-up approach is dead, and the top-down one will fail to takeoff without strong community support from power users and consultants.

This is truly a sad and terrible mistake.

---

I agree wholeheartedly. We use power apps for simple things such as Training booking calendars, HR Campaign Trackers and Photo ID badge creation. For the new licensing costs we can buy a dedicated, more feature rich Service to replace all of our in house built systems and still have enough money left over to have a company day out.

Can you imagine if Microsoft decided to licence VB, C or other Visual studio language components the same way? I know you've bought visual studio for all your developers and the hardware to run the apps and created the SQL databases, but now you will need to pay a monthly subscription to use the connection between these servers as well...

I'm more disappointed than anything else tbh, I've campaigned for powerapps use with great initial resistance, and now the company is bought in and starting to see some of the benefits, its being taken away due to crazy licencing costs.

[rorybi]

Hey @PaulD1 ,

Did you hear that there are grandfathering arrangemends for 5 years for existing apps and flows?

[rorybi]

Good comments Fred - I think that the licensing offered really is unfit for large organisations - they are going to have to do a lot better to deal with this audience.