Mar 11 2024 06:00 AM
Hi,
We're developing a model driven app containing both core and custom tables, however, we're struggling to understand the licensing that our customers need.
The confusion we have is over whether we can license our customers with a Power Apps Premium license or whether they need a Dynamics Sales Enterprise license.
Our model driven app consists of approximately 120 custom tables, and 19 core tables with some customizations. From the Sales Hub we include Campaign, Campaign Response, Lead & Marketing list.
From the document we have read it appears to us that we need a single Dynamics Sales license to perform the install, and then each customer can have a Power Apps Premium license, as this provides CRUD access to the custom tables and the core tables included in our App. Is this understanding correct?
From the sales license document it appears that a sales license is only required on the qualify lead operation which we do not make use of. Is this correct?
We have had numerous conversations where some people have said all customers need a Dynamics Sales license because we've got Lead in our model driven app, and then others have said that the Power Apps Premium license will cover leads.
We need to make sure that the licensing guidance we give to our customers is correct, without them finding out under a Microsoft audit that the initial guidance was wrong.
Any clarification would be much appreciated.
Regards,
S. Tooley
Technical Architect
Time for Advice Ltd.
Mar 12 2024 04:21 PM
@Simon_Tooley_T4A You may take a look at this post for some guidance:
Mar 13 2024 02:28 AM
Mar 13 2024 09:28 AM
@Simon_Tooley_T4A You are correct regards to having to purchase at least 1x D365 Sales license, to get the default installation / core tables setup for you.
Some core tables are considered restricted tables, which would require a D365 license to be able to perform CRUD actions on it. List of restricted tables: Restricted tables requiring Dynamics 365 licenses - Power Apps | Microsoft Learn
As far as I know, none of the mentioned core tables are restricted, thus a Power Apps license is sufficient to be able to perform the CRUD actions. Lead is definitely not a restricted table, so no D365 Sales license required for that.
So I would agree with you setup and point of view, Power Apps should be sufficient.
Cheers,
Martijn
Mar 13 2024 09:32 AM
@MartijnElfers Thanks for your input Martijn.
We've had a conversation with as Microsoft employee who has tried to convince us that we need D365 Sales licenses because we had Lead in our Model Driven app, which doesn't tie up with anything in the Microsoft licensing documentation.
Regards,
Simon
Mar 14 2024 02:59 AM
@Simon_Tooley_T4A Not the first time a Microsoft employee would share incorrect licensing information But does make it difficult who to trust.
While I'm not a Microsoft employee, I am 100% sure that Lead is not a restricted table, thus am also 99% sure users don't need a D365 Sales license to work on that table.
Apr 03 2024 09:31 AM
Apr 03 2024 01:14 PM
@Simon_Tooley_T4A You can try posting in our Partner benefits discussion board on anything around Licensing.
Apr 04 2024 12:20 AM
@Simon_Tooley_T4A Microsoft Learn page also mentions that regarding Accounts/Contacts tables: Manage your accounts and contacts | Microsoft Learn, or basically any core D365 table.
But that does not mean that D365 Sales license is the only license that can be used for CRUD actions.
Yes, you need a Sales license to get these core tables active. But other licenses also have rights to perform CRUD actions to these tables as well. This is where licensing rules come to play 🙂
Apr 10 2024 05:19 AM
@Simon_Tooley_T4A Microsoft recently added new documentation on the restrictions around using Dynamics 365 Sales related features. However, they have since then been deleted, so obviously the communication wasn't very helpful in clarifying things. You can find some notes on the topic from this blog post (including a link to an MS Learn page that no longer exists): Dynamics 365 rights in Power Apps Subscriptions: Changes on the horizon?