Discussion on:
View:
Show:
We bought a $25,000 server and because it was a quad processor, Oracle quoted us $160,000 to license it. I wonder what the hardware companies think about a licensing system that punishes companies for getting the best and fastest servers on the market?? This ridiculous scheme needs to stop!!! At this point we are no longer going to use Oracle.
"This ridiculous scheme needs to stop!!! At this point we are no longer going to use Oracle."
For anyone ambitious readers... DO it! Make a product comparable to Oracle's so we don't have to deal with this nightmare anymore!
homepage.
For anyone ambitious readers... DO it! Make a product comparable to Oracle's so we don't have to deal with this nightmare anymore!
homepage.
Does anyone know how many unlimited users you actually get for SQL-Server or DB per processor. I assume that when the number of users brings the processor to it knees then you need another processor and thereby another license. Can someone help me?
There are other factors that you should consider. Probably the most important factor is the type of activity (queries, inserts, updates, etc.) that will be occuring. We have afew users and programs that access our database and have never had a problem until recently when one user decided to run 5 complex queies at the same time. This broth our server down to a crawl.
My company has a hosted web site running on Cold Fusion. We have been experiencing problems with the site for over a month and have considered bringing it in house. The backend is a Sql database so we would need 2 servers, one for web and one for Sql. The licensing price for the servers (W2K) and Sql exceed $5,000. In addition we would have to buy the hardware. This is too much for a small company that wants a web presence. I am currently looking at a Linux solution with a 3rd party database which could be implemented for less than $1,000 in software.
We are a small quasi-govt organization (~40m, 200 users) and the big boys software is just beyond our reach.
One has to be careful when considering less costly tools such as MySQL or Postgres, as they are not as feature-rich, getting expertise may be difficult and support can cost you (although not as much as say Oracle).
I am still in the midst of my decision over an enterprise db, and it is one of the most difficult decisions I've ever faced in this business.
One has to be careful when considering less costly tools such as MySQL or Postgres, as they are not as feature-rich, getting expertise may be difficult and support can cost you (although not as much as say Oracle).
I am still in the midst of my decision over an enterprise db, and it is one of the most difficult decisions I've ever faced in this business.
I work for a small company. We are also getting fed up with the outlandish and comlex pricing schemes for Windows software. The thing I hate the most is when they don't put a price on a product and the sales people ask you what you have budgeted forthe project before they will quote you a price. I recently dealt with a company for a firewall that charged based on the processor power and memory of all of the systems it would be protecting. We are also starting to take a more searious look at Linux. We have started to use some Windows versions of products that were orriginaly put out on Linux are are extreemly happy with the results.
Hello guys and gals! have you had it like I have? You might think the IT Software industry is just a cover for an illicit operation, after all.....they are acting like those low life drug dealers we read and hear about these days, like Tobacco Companies, Columbia Drug Cartels, etc. Hey, I just want to buy the damn thing, for me to use, yes, just one user. So tell me Oracle, what's the big deal? Minimum of 11 users for my dear old Dual P166 Server? TheFreeTrader
is it true that 10 is max CALs for SQL?
I understood there was no maximum, and the break even point came around 20-30 CALs
BTW, the situation is much more complex than you say:
The SELECT versions (I think) do not come with a starter pack of 10 CALs. This CAL situation applies to Windows Server as well as apps like SQL Server.
We are just upgrading our 15 user WinFRAME (purchased in 1998 for $7000). We have been quoted $3000 to upgrade to Metaframe. But I understand that is just the beginning: We aslo need a copy of windows 2000 Server, and Windows 2000 Server Terminal Server extension, and a Windows 2000 CAL for each device which does not already have a Windows 2000 CAL, and a Windows 2000 Terminal Services CAL for each attacheddevice. I am finding it very difficult finding out just what is required here. Microsoft start from the premise that Citrix is not Windows, so they want to make it as complex, and expensive as possible.
I understood there was no maximum, and the break even point came around 20-30 CALs
BTW, the situation is much more complex than you say:
The SELECT versions (I think) do not come with a starter pack of 10 CALs. This CAL situation applies to Windows Server as well as apps like SQL Server.
We are just upgrading our 15 user WinFRAME (purchased in 1998 for $7000). We have been quoted $3000 to upgrade to Metaframe. But I understand that is just the beginning: We aslo need a copy of windows 2000 Server, and Windows 2000 Server Terminal Server extension, and a Windows 2000 CAL for each device which does not already have a Windows 2000 CAL, and a Windows 2000 Terminal Services CAL for each attacheddevice. I am finding it very difficult finding out just what is required here. Microsoft start from the premise that Citrix is not Windows, so they want to make it as complex, and expensive as possible.
Not to be disrespectfull of any of the companies and products listed in this article, but aren't we forgetting a couple of options? If we are talking about a savvy admin, and he spends the neccesary time to learn, he could go spend $27.95 at Walmartfor the software required, and set up as many Linux/Apache Servers as his company can afford to purchase. The only limitation that I can see would be the inability to host most Windows applications, but for virtually anything else, it's a perfect alternative. Linux now has all of the hardware and software support neccesary to be a major player, and it is. It's not so in print because there is no money in supporting it. Apache Server can hold it's own against anything, even if it is just a little bit behind in a thing or two. Lets see, fast, powerful, stable...inexpensive, no licensing hassles...hmmm. Simple! Just do the math! It's not for everyone, but it could be.
I/We here at my company recently went through a review of our licensing. When we were reviewing our SQL licences and found that you can not get sql7 anymore......
There was something that we read that if you are going to have your sql db connected to the net, that you need a internet connector license, and this is in addition to the per processor and cal's.
Does anyone know if we just misread this wrong and it is only per processor and cal and it does not matter whether or not it is connected to the net?
There was something that we read that if you are going to have your sql db connected to the net, that you need a internet connector license, and this is in addition to the per processor and cal's.
Does anyone know if we just misread this wrong and it is only per processor and cal and it does not matter whether or not it is connected to the net?
- Keyboard Shortcuts:
- Prev
- Next
- Toggle
