Of course, they fail to mention that, at least at one time, you could not purchase Software Assurance after the fact. If you owned copies of Windows XP, you had to purchase an "upgrade" license if you owned OEM licenses and those had to have SA purchased with them to get SA benefits. If you let SA lapse, you add SA again later. It is like this on the server side too. I'm assuming since Vista is out, you'll need to purchase desktop OS upgrades to get the SA license because SA includes the upgrades.

Of course this article is crap as they don't mention what software assurance has to be added to in order to receive the benefit. Is it Desktop OS licenses that need SA or server CAL's?

Either way, it is another massive attempt by MS to force you into their camp and on their latest OS's (particularly the desktop) to take advantage of other technology that they have that should be independent.

Sure, this may save companies money but how much more on licensing and SA will they spending that they don't need?