隨著科技快速的進步以及網際網路的雲端趨勢，傳統透過永久授權(perpetual license)取得軟體所有權已逐步被訂閱型軟體服務模式取代，也就是軟體即服務(Software as a Service, SaaS)的觀念。不少研究指出SaaS有許多優勢，包括降低企業系統建置的成本、透過雲端更新讓軟體業者可以迅速地提供最新服務等，身為世界知名軟體龍頭的微軟自然也隨之與時俱進推出Windows即服務(Windows as a Service,WaaS)，透過雲端服務，每個月定期自動做累積性的安全性更新安裝包(Package)，確保安全性、每年兩次的功能性更新讓使用者隨時可以享有最新技術。但兩個系統的使用者滿意度，尚未有深入的分析調查，故本研究針對微軟目前兩個使用率最高的作業系統Windows® 7/10的用戶調查，探討微軟於Windows® 10導入WaaS前後的服務品質與系統易用性。
本研究架構主要是評估SaaS概念並以微軟雲端服務為例，選擇A公司使用者為調查族群，透過網路發放問卷，探討SaaS服務品質、使用者滿意度與SUS系統易用性。研究分析結果顯示，Windows® 10整體滿意度比Windows® 7高，而SaaS-Qual服務品質的功能性與關係性構面與使用者滿意度有顯著相關性，其次，不同性別對於使用者滿意度與SUS易用性評估看法則有顯著性差異。使用者滿意度方面男性普遍高於女性族群，而SUS易用性評估的部分則是男性認為Windows® 10操作易用性比Windows® 7滿意，女性則是認為Windows® 7操作易用性比Windows® 10滿意。
本研究針對WaaS的服務品質六大構面以及系統易用性提供改善方向的建議，做為未來相關廠商或是軟體開發者欲在Windows®平台開發或是設計客製化SaaS服務行為的一個參考設計方向。

With the fast progress of technology and the trend of internet cloud computing, the subscription-based service model - Software as a Service (SaaS) takes replace of traditional perpetual license business models increasingly. Researches indicate that SaaS has many advantages for both software suppliers and users. Microsoft also announced Windows® 10 with Windows as a Service (WaaS). However, the customer satisification between this two operation systems remains absent.
The goal of this study is to investigate the service quality and system usability of between Windows® 7 and Windows® 10 with WaaS. Previous Windows® versions usually need many files to update system. It costs plenty of time and effort. On Windows® 10 platform, WaaS model can automatically update and upgrade twice a year through cloud service to ensure system security and support latest software solutions.
Employees in company A are chosen as online questionnaire survey groups for understanding SaaS service quality, user satisfaction, and SUS usability. Results reveal that users feel significantly satisfied on Windows® 10 than Windows® 7 platform. Features and rapport of SaaS-Qual service quality dimensions are significantly correlated with user satisfaction. Furthermore, the perspective of user satisfaction and SUS usability evaluation is significantly different from different genders.
This study provides suggestions to improve six dimensions of WaaS service quality and system usability for further Windows developers or customized software suppliers.

論文摘要---------------------------------------------------------I
ABSTRACT------------------------------------------------------III
誌謝-----------------------------------------------------------IV
目錄------------------------------------------------------------V
圖目錄--------------------------------------------------------VII
表目錄-------------------------------------------------------VIII
第壹章 緒論----------------------------------------------------1
1.1 研究背景---------------------------------------------------1
1.2 研究動機---------------------------------------------------3
1.3 研究目的---------------------------------------------------4
1.4 本文架構---------------------------------------------------4
第貳章 文獻回顧------------------------------------------------6
2.1 軟體服務模式-----------------------------------------------6
2.1.1 傳統軟體模式-----------------------------------------6
2.1.2 雲端運算服務-----------------------------------------7
2.1.3 軟體即服務(Software as a Service)--------------------9
2.1.4 Windows即服務(Windows as a Service)-----------------11
2.2 服務品質---------------------------------------------------15
2.2.1 服務品質定義----------------------------------------15
2.2.2 服務品質量表----------------------------------------17
第參章 研究方法-----------------------------------------------21
3.1 服務品質評估-----------------------------------------------21
3.1.1 信度分析-----------------------------------------------21
3.1.2 逐步迴歸分析--------------------------------------------21
3.1.3 F檢定--------------------------------------------------22
3.2 服務品質改善建議-------------------------------------------23
3.2.1 SaaS-Qual量表------------------------------------------23
3.2.2 SUS系統易用性量表---------------------------------------24
3.3 資料分析方法-----------------------------------------------25
第肆章 研究結果-----------------------------------------------27
4.1 信度分析--------------------------------------------------27
4.2 敘述性統計分析--------------------------------------------28
4.3 逐步迴歸分析----------------------------------------------38
4.4 F檢定分析-------------------------------------------------39
4.5 結果結論--------------------------------------------------45
第伍章 結論與建議---------------------------------------------50
5.1 研究討論--------------------------------------------------50
5.2 未來發展方向----------------------------------------------50
參考文獻-------------------------------------------------------52
附錄1 問卷-----------------------------------------------------56

1. Sadooghi I, Martin JH, Li T, Brandstatter K, Maheshwari K, de Lacerda Ruivo TPP, Garzoglio G, Timm S, Zhao Y, Raicu I, Understanding the performance and potential of cloud computing for scientific applications. IEEE Transactions on Cloud Computing, 2015. 5(2): p. 358-371.
2. Yang C, Huang Q, Li Z, Liu K, Hu F., Big Data and cloud computing: innovation opportunities and challenges. International Journal of Digital Earth, 2017. 10(1): p. 13-53.
3. Yin, S. and O. Kaynak, Big data for modern industry: challenges and trends. Proceedings of the IEEE, 2015. 103(2): p. 143-146.
4. Hwang K, Bai X, Shi Y, Li M, Chen W-G, Wu Y., Cloud performance modeling with benchmark evaluation of elastic scaling strategies. IEEE Transactions on parallel and distributed systems, 2015. 27(1): p. 130-143.
5. Kaur, B., Software As A Service: A Brief Study. International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology, 2015. 2: p. 2395-0056.
6. Choudhary, V. and Z. Zhang, Research note—patching the cloud: the impact of saas on patching strategy and the timing of software release. Information Systems Research, 2015. 26(4): p. 845-858.
7. Choudhary, V.J.J.o.M.I.S., Comparison of software quality under perpetual licensing and software as a service. 2007. 24(2): p. 141-165.
8. Liu Z, Wang S, Sun Q, Zou H, Yang F., Cost-aware cloud service request scheduling for SaaS providers. The Computer Journal, 2013. 57(2): p. 291-301.
9. Marston S, Li Z, Bandyopadhyay S, Zhang J, Ghalsasi A., Cloud computing—The business perspective. Decision support systems, 2011. 51(1): p. 176-189.
10. Mell, P. and T. Grance, Effectively and securely using the cloud computing paradigm. NIST, Information Technology Laboratory, 2009. 2(8): p. 304-311.
11. Sen, J., Security and privacy issues in cloud computing, in Cloud Technology: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications. 2015, IGI Global. p. 1585-1630.
12. Villegas D, Bobroff N, Rodero I, Delgado J, Liu Y, Devarakonda A, Fong L, Sadjadi SM, Parashar MJJoC, Sciences S., Cloud federation in a layered service model. 2012. 78(5): p. 1330-1344.
13. Jula, A., E. Sundararajan, and Z.J.E.s.w.a. Othman, Cloud computing service composition: A systematic literature review. 2014. 41(8): p. 3809-3824.
14. Bhardwaj S, Jain L, Jain S., Cloud computing: A study of infrastructure as a service (IAAS). 2010. 2(1): p. 60-63.
15. Pahl, C., Containerization and the paas cloud. IEEE Cloud Computing, 2015. 2(3): p. 24-31.
16. Safari, F., N. Safari, and A. Hasanzadeh, The adoption of software-as-a-service (SaaS): ranking the determinants. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 2015. 28(3): p. 400-422.
17. Goode S, Lin C, Tsai JC, Jiang JJ., Rethinking the role of security in client satisfaction with Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) providers. Decision Support Systems, 2015. 70: p. 73-85.
18. Krebs, R., C. Momm, and S. Kounev, Architectural Concerns in Multi-tenant SaaS Applications. Closer, 2012. 12: p. 426-431.
19. Kabbedijk J, Bezemer C-P, Jansen S, Zaidman A., Defining multi-tenancy: A systematic mapping study on the academic and the industrial perspective. Journal of Systems and Software, 2015. 100: p. 139-148.
20. Puthal D, Sahoo B, Mishra S, Swain S., Cloud computing features, issues, and challenges: a big picture. in 2015 International Conference on Computational Intelligence and Networks. 2015. IEEE.
21. Souri, A., P. Asghari, and R. Rezaei, Software as a service based CRM providers in the cloud computing: Challenges and technical issues. Journal of Service Science Research, 2017. 9(2): p. 219-237.
22. Schneider, S. and A. Sunyaev, Determinant factors of cloud-sourcing decisions: reflecting on the IT outsourcing literature in the era of cloud computing. Journal of Information Technology, 2016. 31(1): p. 1-31.
23. Lassila, A.J.I.I.J.o.W.I., Taking a service-oriented perspective on software business: How to move from product business to online service business. 2006. 4(1): p. 70-82.
24. Seethamraju, R., Adoption of Software as a Service (SaaS) Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Systems in Small and Medium Sized Enterprises (SMEs). Information Systems Frontiers, 2015. 17(3): p. 475-492.
25. Chong, F., G. Carraro, and R.J.M.L. Wolter, Microsoft Corporation, Multi-tenant data architecture. 2006: p. 14-30.
26. Cho, V. and A. Chan, An integrative framework of comparing SaaS adoption for core and non-core business operations: An empirical study on Hong Kong industries. Information systems frontiers, 2015. 17(3): p. 629-644.
27. Niccolai, J., Gates Memo Puts Services at the Heart of Microsoft. Network World, 2005.
28. Miyachi, C., What is “Cloud”? It is time to update the NIST definition? IEEE Cloud Computing, 2018(3): p. 6-11.
29. Armbrust M, Fox A, Griffith R, Joseph AD, Katz R, Konwinski A, Lee G, Patterson D, Rabkin A, Stoica I, Zaharia M., A view of cloud computing. 2010. 53(4): p. 50-58.
30. Research, A.M., www.alliedmarketresearch.com.
31. Vajjhala, N.R. and E. Ramollari, Big data using cloud computing-opportunities for small and medium-sized enterprises. European Journal of Economics and Business Studies, 2016. 2(1): p. 129-137.
32. Moyo, M. and M. Loock. Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises’ Understanding of Security Evaluation of Cloud-Based Business Intelligence Systems and Its Challenges. in International Information Security Conference. 2018. Springer.
33. Rodrigues, J., P. Ruivo, and T.J.P.T. Oliveira, Software as a Service Value and Firm Performance-a literature review synthesis in Small and Medium Enterprises. 2014. 16: p. 206-211.
34. Rafique, A., D. Van Landuyt, and W. Joosen, Persist: Policy-based data management middleware for multi-tenant saas leveraging federated cloud storage. Journal of Grid Computing, 2018. 16(2): p. 165-194.
35. Jede, A. and F. Teuteberg, Understanding socio-technical impacts arising from Software-as-a-Service usage in companies. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 2016. 58(3): p. 161-176.
36. CNBC, www.cnbc.com.
37. Microsoft, https://docs.microsoft.com/zh-tw/windows/deployment/update/ windows-as-a-service.
38. Pizam, A., V. Shapoval, and T. Ellis, Customer satisfaction and its measurement in hospitality enterprises: a revisit and update. International journal of contemporary hospitality management, 2016. 28(1): p. 2-35.
39. Gong, T. and Y. Yi, The effect of service quality on customer satisfaction, loyalty, and happiness in five Asian countries. Psychology & Marketing, 2018. 35(6): p. 427-442.
40. Izogo, E.E. and I.-E. Ogba, Service quality, customer satisfaction and loyalty in automobile repair services sector. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 2015. 32(3): p. 250-269.
41. Sivadas, E. and J.L. Baker-Prewitt, An examination of the relationship between service quality, customer satisfaction, and store loyalty. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 2000. 28(2): p. 73-82.
42. Chumpitaz, R. and N.G. Paparoidamis, Service quality and marketing performance in business-to-business markets: exploring the mediating role of client satisfaction. Managing Service Quality: An International Journal, 2004. 14(2/3): p. 235-248.
43. Pantouvakis, A., The moderating role of nationality on the satisfaction loyalty link: evidence from the tourism industry. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 2013. 24(9-10): p. 1174-1187.
44. Spreng, R.A. and R.D. Mackoy, An empirical examination of a model of perceived service quality and satisfaction. Journal of retailing, 1996. 72(2): p. 201-214.
45. Parasuraman, A., V.A. Zeithaml, and L.L. Berry, A conceptual model of service quality and its implications for future research. Journal of marketing, 1985. 49(4): p. 41-50.
46. Yousapronpaiboon, K., SERVQUAL: Measuring higher education service quality in Thailand. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2014. 116: p. 1088-1095.
47. Saini, S. and R. Singh, Service Quality Assessment of Utility Company in Haryana using SERVQUAL Model. Asian Journal of Management, 2018. 9(1): p. 702-708.
48. Gupta, A., J.C. McDaniel, and S. Kanthi Herath, Quality management in service firms: sustaining structures of total quality service. Managing Service Quality: An International Journal, 2005. 15(4): p. 389-402.
49. Matthews, B.L., Hospice Informal Caregivers' Perception of a Good Death Experience: A SERVQUAL Analysis. Services Marketing Quarterly, 2018. 39(1): p. 64-77.
50. Zeithaml, V.A., A. Parasuraman, and A. Malhotra, Service quality delivery through web sites: a critical review of extant knowledge. Journal of the academy of marketing science, 2002. 30(4): p. 362-375.
51. Nemati B, Gazor H, MirAshrafi S, Ameleh K., Analyzing e-service quality in service-based website by E-SERVQUAL. 2002. 2(2): p. 727-734.
52. Kalia, P. E-SERVQUAL and electronic retailing, 2013: p. 84-87.
53. Zavareh FB, Ariff MSM, Jusoh A, Zakuan N, Bahari AZ, Ashourian M., E-service quality dimensions and their effects on e-customer satisfaction in internet banking services. 2012. 40: p. 441-445.
54. Akinci, S., E. Atilgan-Inan, and S.J.J.o.B.R. Aksoy, Re-assessment of ES-Qual and E-RecS-Qual in a pure service setting. 2010. 63(3): p. 232-240.
55. Huang, E.Y., S.-W. Lin, and Y.-C. Fan, MS-QUAL: Mobile service quality measurement. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 2015. 14(2): p. 126-142.
56. Benlian A, Koufaris M, Hess T., Service quality in software-as-a-service: Developing the SaaS-Qual measure and examining its role in usage continuance. Journal of management information systems, 2011. 28(3): p. 85-126.
57. Chou T-H., Exploring Relationship Quality of User's Cloud Service: The Case Study of SaaS CRM. Journal of Organizational and End User Computing, 2019. 31(3): p. 17-36.
58. Brooke, J., SUS-A quick and dirty usability scale. Usability evaluation in industry, 1996. 189(194): p. 4-7.
59. Harrati N, Bouchrika I, Tari A, Ladjailia A., Exploring user satisfaction for e-learning systems via usage-based metrics and system usability scale analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 2016. 61: p. 463-471.