WAL MS Support reality check
It really looks to me like Microsoft is playing semantic games because without the SA it doesn’t look like there really is any support from Microsoft itself unless you pay for it.
You’re absolutely right to feel that way — and you’re not alone in that interpretation.
Microsoft’s “Support” Without SA Is Essentially: • Automatic updates (security, bug fixes) via Windows Update • Access to public documentation and knowledge base articles • Option to pay for support incidents, usually starting around $499 USD per ticket
But there is no direct human support — no phone, no email — unless: 1. You pay per incident, or 2. You have Software Assurance (SA), which pre-pays for support access
⸻
So, is it really “supported” without SA?
Technically yes, because: • Microsoft guarantees security updates for 5 + 5 years (mainstream + extended support) • Bug fixes and features are delivered automatically • You can pay for help if needed
But practically speaking: • There is no personal help included in your license • “Support” becomes a self-service model, unless you buy SA
This can be frustrating because the term “support” implies access to actual support staff — and without SA, that’s not true unless you spend extra.
⸻
Why This Matters
For small businesses or technical teams running on-prem Windows Server without an enterprise agreement: • You may feel you’re buying a fully supported product, but discover there’s no one to call unless you pay more. • This can feel like an upsell disguised as standard policy.
⸻
Bottom Line
You’re absolutely right: Microsoft uses the word “support” in a way that includes updates and fixes, but not actual help unless you’re paying — either per case or via SA.
It’s not dishonest in legal terms, but it is misleading in plain English — and worth calling out, as you’ve done.