If you have a multi-cpu machine you are able to increase productivity based on the number of CPUs you have doing the task. So, why shouldn’t you get a volume discount to allow for individual shortcomings and normal marketing practices of volume discounting to make multiple sales more attractive to customers? If you have multiple users on multiple machines using multiple copies of an OS the increase in productivity is a by-product of individual productivity to a certain degree rather than a linear increase. More OS instances thrown at a problem on more machines should equal more productivity, at least potentially, and therefore more value. The perceived value of software is in part based on how much it increases your productivity. I don’t understand why on earth software needs to cost more if you use more processors to power it in the first place… Server architechture as we know it, is going to be completely turned around. MS surely wants us to believe, that the only costs reduction from virtualisation should be from easier management, and less hardware costs. But theres still to much in this scheme, that goes directly against tomorrows use of virtualization. If we are looking at this licencing scheme with todays eyes, I think it makes some sense. If we end up having to pay for a full server licence for each entity, it will raise the bar too much on which applications to host on separate VMs. when doing the month end batch-job) Should I pay up a full licence? Surely not!ģ) One of the cool things about virtualisation, is that you can keep your tasks isolated in a VM (no matter how small the task may be), while still reaping the benefits of a consolidated server environment.
All users on Osnews will slam the report as being “biased”).Ģ) What happens when we start to add resources dynamically (f.ex.
(I predict that Gartner will come up with a best-practice report on virtualisation licencing management. Who cares what HW I am running my OS on, as long as I am only running one instance.īut as virtualisation techniques matures, I think that there will be some major problems with this model:ġ) The more fluid my architechture becomes, the harder it will be to track licence use. I think that this is fair enough.Īctually, I have always meant that SMP licencing was bloody unfair. If you are running several instances, you are essentially running several servers (despite the fact, that the servers are only running on one physical machine). So, as long as you are running one instance of the OS (like on dual cores) you are only paying for one licence. Virtual machines -> Treated as separate instances …but still I see some future problems with this model.ĭual core -> Treated as one CPU (one OS instance)
0 kommentar(er)
