The one change I would make to your quadrent model is that the Upper-right quadrent also includes PowerApps. Its using PowerApps and Flow as a development tool in Dynamics Apps that is really being pushed in the new licensing. At least that's the way I see it.
On the off chance that someone with decision power actually monitors these forums, I'll keep on brainstorming with whomever is interested to do so in a positive and optimistic manner (the weekend helped ^^). I know the chance of something happening are slim, but I still have a hard time of letting go 2 years of personal investment at this point.
Here's a quick round of feedback on the different ideas that you commented on. I'm focusing on the ones I actually care about :
1 : Pay As You Go. Yeah, the team said this model is "unpreditable", but that's quite unfortunate because it's just an unfounded opinion. Time and again, we're proving in Azure that this model works. The trick is to start small (very low inital comitment) and fair pricing (rather than milking the cow right away). It creates a habit in the decision maker that, over time, makes using the solution a second nature (leading to big bucks). Logic Apps, Azure Data Factory, Databricks and Azure SQL DB all work wonderfully this ways.
3 : Lower price-point : I beg to disagree saying the 10$/month for Power BI has always been an add-on. An add-on to what exactly ? I've made multiple large entreprise deployments where Power BI was the ONLY Office 365 service (leading to tricky discussion with IT over AAD along the way). Shall we remember people what happen to the 36$/month price-point to PowerBI during it's initial launch..?
4 : Super-seeded licence : still my favorite at this point.
5 : Premium-like capacity : if they make it like Power BI (which first created demand by a low price point), it's indeed not going to do any good. If they create "micro capacities" like Azure SQL DB (first price : 10$/month !) that could totally work. Remember that in our scenario, PowerApps is only used as front-end. The back-end is doing the heavy lifting after all.
Before I close, a word on CDS...
I know Dynamics people love CDS. But we don't. I really tried : I looked at it, watched the trainning available on Pluralsight and Linkedin Learning, watched the videos and news from the Business Application Summit, etc. It's nothing personal, but it's like asking a .net guy to only do regular canvas components (aka : just not gonna happen). CDS is in a continum from no-code to low-code as data storage where we have Excel < SPO < CDS < Azure SQL DB. So it has a part to play, but not the main one for me.
Why can't I use CDS ? The list goes on but it involves strong T-SQL Procedures support (transactions, complex querying, error handling, dynamic SQL, etc), performance tuning due to indexing, doing our own data model (really ain't that long, I promise), etc.
If CDS were free and SQL paid, I'd still use SQL. If they prevent us from using SQL by forcing CDS, I'm just going to leave. AKA : CDS is not happening for us, comes hell or high waters. Sorry folks.
I honestly don't see how making the SQL connector Premium pushes anyone toward CDS, a Premium feature on its own. If anything, it is pushing everyone further up the funnel back in to Excel and SPO, which will paint a huge target on the SPO and OneDrive products, because I think a fair assumption is that rather than pay the ridiculously-inflated fees for the SQL connection, seeded PowerApps devotees will just start putting their sensitive data in SharePoint.
I'd give CDS a shot if it were part of the seeded license, but it's not, so this new license model offers me no more opportunity or incentive to move to it.
Its not so much that it pushes people toward CDS, but it levels the playing field between SQL and CDS. It used to be that SQL was standard and CDS was premium. Now they are both premium.
I agree that what will happen is more people will try to use SharePoint as a relational database, which it isn't. I do think there is still a lot of value for the seeded license users. The question will be whether we can get people to take a serious look at all the good things that are left before they toss out the idea of using PowerApps at all.
@Pstork1 : " The question will be whether we can get people to take a serious look at all the good things that are left before they toss out the idea of using PowerApps at all."
It's the (very serious) risk being taken at the moment...
The other one is limiting PowerApps to very simple scenario (damaging the branding) because constrainted by SPO...
... or doing crazy-big apps to stuff everything in it (and pray for good coders).
@Pstork1 "I do think there is still a lot of value for the seeded license users."
I definitely agree, and it's why I'm not walking away from PowerApps just yet. Honestly, the only thing upsetting to me about what they are doing here is the Premiumization of the SQL and BlobStorage connectors. Everything else I can work with, but the cost of this simple change completely overshadows everything else.
@FredericForest "... or doing crazy-big apps to stuff everything in it (and pray for good coders)."
Agreed. As a rule, I've always tried to split my PowerApps up into focused apps. But if I were to go on to the Per-App-Per-User plan (which I obviously won't be, but for the sake of this discussion let's say I were open to the idea), it would definitely drive me to pack as much into a single app as I possibly can.
@Pstork1 Yes, there are still valuable ways for seeded users to use PowerApps. I'll continue to use it in the ways I have.. (I created a cool interface for searching really big sharepoint lists AND I made an app that makes sharepoint links look REALLY PRETTY! Yay!)
However, back to my earlier thoughts and agreements, PowerApps is still a wasted opportunity. Can I make something mildly useful or pretty? Sure. Can I do anything with PowerApps that is really going to change and impact my company? No. Do I think that the PowerApps team was striving to build a set of tools for me to make sharepoint sites look pretty? No.
@FredericForest Welcome to the group of upset people. It turns out that on the otherside of shock and stupor, it's just a continuing road of frustration and exit lanes to get off this road.
@microsoft CDS can't replace SQL for my business, even if I'm a fan of CDS. Sorry. I think that my business should have access to a seeded plan via Office 365 (like they do), and my company should be able to pay a per-gateway fee for each on-premise gateway we want to run for SQL connectivity. *shrug*
@The PowerApps Team - Lots of love. I imagine that there are a lot of mixed feelings and frustrations of a whole different nature for you guys.
I agree with everything you said except one thing. I still think that it can do significant things for an organization. I do agree that it is going to be a much smaller potential than it was, but I still think its more than just a pretty interface.
@Pstork1 On the topic of using Powerapps in significant ways, what ideas do you have that don't include treating Sharepoint lists like relational databases? Or - is the significant contribution of PowerApps that it allows you to treat Sharepoint lists as relational database tables? Maybe that's the big ticket here, and we should be happier about that.
I can't say I disagree that this will push us to use SharePoint more like an RDMS. But although most things tend to require that not everything does. The ability to do an easy mobile app, leverage MS Forms, launch Flows for Approvals and processing. Those also add a lot of value.
Continue your learning in our online communities.
Features releasing from October 2019 through March 2020
Coming to a city near you
Fill out a quick form to claim your user group badge now!
Connect, share, and learn with your peers year-round
Register by September 5 to save $200