1 19 20 21 22 23 Previous Next 1,981 Replies Latest reply on Aug 21, 2012 2:40 PM by scowse Go to original post Branched to a new discussion.
      • 300. Re: vSphere 5 Licensing
        dales123 Enthusiast

        Wow what a stinker, Up to this point I've been very happy with all the versions of vc and vsphere I've worked with, I'm a VCP3 and have whole heartedly supported vmware as they are streets ahead of the competition.....


        This however is extremely bad for them, I'm working on a virtualisation project for a rapidly growing company with offsite replication, and up until yesturday I knew exactly which hypervisor I was going to deploy... Not now though. I'm going to have to seriously consider the Hyper-V and xen as alternatives because I see the new licencing model as restrictive to the companys growth. Whilst the company is enjoying rapid growth that does not give me any entitlement to throw cash around like confetti and vmware appear to think that it is exactly like that.


        Sorry guys I love your products and I hope you revert this licencing model PDQ but I cannot waste money on licencing when other products can do 90% of what yours can and this is the chance they need to catch up. If you dont sort this out then you will not be "the Cloud" provider that you announced you wanted to be.



        • 301. Re: vSphere 5 Licensing
          sergeadam Enthusiast

          Frankly, NO.


          Most SME are not. IF we have failover, it's likely a 2-3 host cluster with some extra capacity. Usually not enough capacity. And memory overcommitment.


          The conversation with the C level usually goes like this:


          Me: I need a SAN and 3 servers to virtualize

          C: Do we really need 3 servers

          Me: well, no. We actually need 2. I need the additional one for a hot stanby.

          C: what happens if we go with 2?

          Me: If we lose one of the 2, VMs migrate to the remaining one, and everything works slower until the failed machine is back up.

          C: How often do servers go dwon?

          Me; Not that often

          C: Go with 2 then. 

          • 302. Re: vSphere 5 Licensing
            Frank.Heidbuchel Novice

            hahaha that sounds just like a conversation with my C-level

            no i know it's everywhere the same...

            • 303. Re: vSphere 5 Licensing
              DarkOneX Novice


              Who really has a 2 CPU system with only 72Gb installed in it these days? I mean really. Heck, even 18 months ago, I don't think we had any dual CPU boxes with this little RAM in them.


              Heh, you'd be surprised we have many dual, quad, octo core machines with less than 32GB even 16GB in them!

              • 304. Re: vSphere 5 Licensing
                GVD Novice

                Hey jontackabury, you're making a mistake in looking at Essentials and Essentials Plus.

                If you only have 2 servers with each 1 CPU & 32 GB RAM, than Essentials entitles you to use it fully.


                The Essentials kit gives you 6 CPU licenses (to be used at a maximum of 2 per server) and a vRAM pool of 144GB (6x 24GB). As such, you have absolutely nothing to worry about for now. It's not because you don't have a CPU to match the extra memory to that you can't use the license!


                Essentials at most allows for 3 servers with each 2 CPUs and 48 GB RAM. (boils down to 6 CPUs with each 24 GB RAM)


                Essentials & E+ are also a kit, not single license costs. To license you servers with Essentials, you just buy one kit, not one per server. This comes down to 450 euros for Essentials (without SnS) and 4000 euros (+ support contract cost) for Essentials Plus.

                • 305. Re: Start new threads?
                  rjb2 Enthusiast

                  There is a classic business book on pricing strategy and the lifecycle of a product. When I heard about VMWare's change, this immediately came to mind. Some of the ideas are presented at this link http://www.imakenews.com/strategicpricing/e_article000586549.cfm?x=b11,bbH759jg,w and may help to explain VMWare's position.


                  Here is an excerpt: My first thought was that this was "harvest" phase, but perhaps "retrenchment" is more accurate; the cloud is the focus.


                  "Market Decline

                  Reduced buyer demand and excess capacity characterize this phase. If costs are largely variable or if capital can be easily reallocated to more promising markets, prices need fall only slightly to induce some firms to cut capacity. If costs are largely fixed and sunk, average costs soar due to reduced capacity utilization, while price competition increases as firms attempt to increase their capacity utilization by capturing a larger share of a declining market. Three options are available to deal with this challenge: retrench to one’s strongest product lines and price to defend one’s share in them, harvest one’s entire business by pricing for maximum cash flow, or consolidate one’s position by price-cutting to drive out weak competitors and capture their markets.



                  A retrenchment strategy involves either partial or complete capitulation of some market segments to refocus resources on others where the firm has a stronger position. The firm deliberately forgoes market share but positions itself to be more profitable with the share it retains. Retrenchment is a carefully planned and executed strategy to put the firm in a more viable competitive position, not an immediate necessity to stave off collapse.




                  A harvesting strategy is a phased withdrawal from an industry. It begins like retrenchment with abandonment of the weakest links, but the goal of harvesting is a departure rather than a reallocation of resources. The harvesting firm does not price to defend its remaining market share but rather to maximize its income. The harvesting firm may make short-term investments in the industry to keep its position from deteriorating too rapidly, but it avoids fundamental long-term investments, preferring instead to treat its competitive position in the declining market as a “cash cow” for funding more promising ventures in other markets. ....."



                  • 306. Re: vSphere 5 Licensing
                    MB01 Lurker

                    This is a bit too much. Typical EMC fashion. We are\were building a second data center based on VMware and now have to reconsider this. I have to add an additional $500k to a budget for this, for this year, when budgets are already approved.  I would like to have VMWare come in and explain that to my CTO\CFO because I do not stand a chance. I already have a call into my local rep


                    We have been architecting this based on what we knew today, who imagined a change like this!

                    This is painful...


                    Do I still take my team to VMWorld? or do I invest the money in researching alternatives.  We have fully loaded UCS chassis with ram maxed out...$$$$


                    I hope this is revoked or I may have a lot of rework to do...


                    My $0.02

                    • 307. Re: vSphere 5 Licensing
                      jontackabury Novice

                      @GVD: Please forgive my confusion, but what does the doc mean when it says "24GB (144GB max)"? Does that mean I can only allocate 24GB to my VMs per host, or can I allocate 144GB per host?

                      • 308. Re: vSphere 5 Licensing
                        tietzjd25 Enthusiast

                        Jon Tackabury wrote:


                        @GVD: Please forgive my confusion, but what does the doc mean when it says "24GB (144GB max)"? Does that mean I can only allocate 24GB to my VMs per host, or can I allocate 144GB per host?

                        You can allocate 144GB of memory vs all 3 hosts.  So if you have 3 hosts 48 GB of memory, if you have 2 hosts you can have 72 GB of memory and if have single host you can have up to 144 GB of memory allocated.

                        • 309. Re: vSphere 5 Licensing
                          jontackabury Novice

                          I see, they really should remove that 24GB thing from the docs, very mis-leading. Thanks for the clarification. Glad to hear it's not going to be as crazy-expensive as I once thought, still disappointed that when we expand it's going to cost us even more.

                          • 310. Re: vSphere 5 Licensing
                            sergeadam Enthusiast

                            It means the Essential kits allow you 24GB per CPU and comes with a 6 CPU limit (6*24).

                            • 311. Re: vSphere 5 Licensing
                              Baddos Enthusiast

                              Jon Tackabury wrote:


                              I just wanted to throw my opinion in as a small VMware ESXi user. We currently have 2 servers with 1 CPU each and 32GB of RAM in each host. We run 6 VMs (4 on one host, 2 on the other). Currently we are using ESXi (free) and have been trying out the Essentials kits to allow use to use VCB to make our backups easier to manage. This was going to cost us around $1k-$2k total for both hosts. If we upgrade to VMware vSphere 5, ESXi only allows for 8GB RAM, which is crazy. The next level up only allows for 24GB RAM, so we'd be forced to spend $6k total for both hosts to be allowed to use all 32GB of our RAM. That's almost as much as I paid for the hardware! VMware, you've gone off the deep on this one. We don't have high requirements, and don't need many of the features that come with the higher versions of vSphere so we're looking at Hyper-V now as a replacement. Instead of VMware getting $2k from us, they tried to get $6k and now they're not going to get anything.

                              If I'm reading their pricing pdf correctly, you can get the essentials kit for $495 that would cover your exact situation. The kit covers 6 sockets with 24gx6 vRAM and vCenter which you currently don't have. Talk to your sales rep to get an accurate quote for sure.

                              • 312. Re: vSphere 5 Licensing
                                aarondovetail Enthusiast

                                Previously with Essentials you could have up to 768GB of RAM total (256 per host). Now with vSphere 5 you can only have 144....

                                • 313. Re: vSphere 5 Licensing
                                  CCJNL Enthusiast

                                  Some new info out about how VDI licensing will work.



                                  • 314. Re: vSphere 5 Licensing
                                    GVD Novice

                                    For Essentials, 24GB is the amount of RAM that is 'tied' to a sinlge CPU license. However, the Essentials pack is a kit, not a single license. The kit includes 6 CPU licenses, that can be used for instance across 3 servers, meaning that 3 servers with 2 CPUs and 48 GB RAM each are possible.


                                    These are resources at your disposal across both your two servers that you currently own. You have 2 servers with each 1 CPU and 32 GB RAM. This is fine and falls within licensing terms. You could add another identical servers and still fall within licensing terms. However you cannot upgrade these three servers to double CPU and 64 GB RAM (32GB / CPU in this case). Or rather you can, but that would mean that you could not allocate all your RAM (hard limit! only 6x 24 GB RAM is assignable at any time).

                                    1 19 20 21 22 23 Previous Next