1. WLK Partner Survey
January – February 2007

2. Lab Size Number of client in lab Number of concurrent submissions
Small = 1-5
Medium = 6-25
Large = 25+
Number of concurrent submissions
Small = 1-3
Medium = 4-10
Large = 10+
One of the primary objectives of this survey was to determine what portion of our user base is working in small labs. This is actually the one area where we got a bit of a surprise. One measure of small labs is the number of clients you’re running. It turns out almost half of our partners are running fewer than six clients. That is clearly a small lab. Also, we actually have only a small number of partners running more than 25 clients. Another way to answer this question might be to look at the number of concurrent submissions. It turns out that number almost exactly correlates to number of clients clients = 1-3 submissions; 6-25 clients = 4-10 submissions; 25+ clients = 10+ submissions.
So now we have a pretty good picture of the distribution of our user base, that begs two questions. One, do these groups have different levels of satisfaction with the DTM? Two, do these groups have different feature needs?
200 partners surveyed between January 12 February via Connect

3. Partner Satisfaction
220 DTM users surveyed between January 12 and February via Connect
Partners were asked to rate their level of satisfaction in each area.
1 = dissatisfied or disagree
2 = somewhat dissatisfied or disagree
3 = neutral
4 = somewhat satisfied or agree
5 = satisfied or agree
Let’s start at the far right with overall sat. Clearly small partners are less satisfied than large partners and the difference, more than half a point is significant. In fact, as you look across this whole chart you see that partner satisfaction climbs in almost every case as lab size increases. There is only one exception, that is the second from the left, DTM UI and workflow. However, in that case, satisfaction is still lowest among small partners. Clearly we have an issue to address. The question is how. That brings us to feature requests.

4. Feature Requests
200 DTM users surveyed between January 12 and February via Connect
Question: What is the one thing Microsoft could do with the DTM that would have the most impact in the Longhorn Server timeframe.
Green bars: Also a top feature request from internal Windows team during the RC1 post-mortem review
We asked you, if we could do only one thing to improve the DTM, what would have the most impact. The top response was, improve DTM stability and reliability.
There is one interesting thing to note before we move forward. Look at some of the features on the far right, enabling controller on a client OS, automating configuration tasks, enabling selectable content. These were features aimed specifically at small labs, small labs were half of the respondents and these items still fell to the bottom. So, let’s take a look at feature requests by lab size.

5. Feature Requests
Look at the first four things in each chart. They’re exactly the same. This is great news because it means the things we do to ease pain in small labs will help larger labs and vice-versa.
220 DTM users surveyed between January 12 and February via Connect
Question: What is the one thing Microsoft could do with the DTM that would have the most impact in the Longhorn Server timeframe.