1 75 76 77 78 79 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.
      • 1,140. Re: vSphere 5 Licensing
        rgard Novice

        LucasAlbers wrote:

         

        I so agree with this point...

        "It seems like a lot of us who have been pushing VMware all these years are now suffering a bit of head-trauma and loss of faith."

         

        We are thinking of making t-shirts for our vmware sales event that is coming up, here is what we have for ideas:

         

        1.)

        ESXI free or Die.

         

        2.)

        Xenserver is free.

         

        3.)

        No Vtaxation with out representation.

         

        4.)

        Vsphere 4 = customers

        Vsphere 5 = virtual customers.

         

        5.)

        (Crossed out vtax , the same as the crossed out "no smoking" signs.)

         

        6.)

        4.x till 2014/05/21, baby.

         

        I had already been thinking about making a basic T-Shirt for VMworld.  Check out my design for a No vTax shirt.

         

        http://goo.gl/iMbFM

        • 1,141. Re: vSphere 5 Licensing
          Rumple Master

          One interesting thing about Citrix and Microsoft product lines is that:

          SCVMM 2012 will have a pligin to manage Hyper-V AND Xenserver together (and I believe vmware)

          Xenserver is licensed per host and even with the top end license is $5 (or for is Cloud providers..$75/month/host…vmware cant’ touch that price)

          Hyper-V is a baremetal hypervisor which is separate from the Hyper-V role.

           

          So…vmware has significantly increased their pricing just before hyper-V 3.0 and Xenserver 6 along with a unified System Center Console that can manage both.

           

          Overall, increased competition has vmware going after higher profits from their larger customers and leaving the low/mid to flow to the competition…

          • 1,142. Re: vSphere 5 Licensing
            hjmiii Novice

            Mark Hodges wrote:

             

            Overall, increased competition has vmware going after higher profits from their larger customers and leaving the low/mid to flow to the competition…

            I don't buy this argument. I'm seeing just as many if not more of the large customers complaining about this because our Enterprise Plus licenses went from being unlimited to a paltry 48GB per socket. There are architectures out there for large scale deployments of Hyper-V and Xen, and especially when you're talking a 100%+ increase in the number of Enterprise plus licenses the agrument to convert gets really convincing.

            • 1,143. Re: vSphere 5 Licensing
              vmwareking Novice

              How dumb is this cat, hyper pee for the cloud yeah right u monkey. As if aws and rackspace will ever use hype pee..

               

              I do agree ms datacenter clients it might be a option!! That's it.

               

              Xenserver is a great alternative ready to go now.

               

              Sent from my iPhone

              • 1,144. Re: vSphere 5 Licensing
                Dracolith Enthusiast

                unsichtbare wrote:

                I would neither expect not tolerate Microsoft capping the amount of RAM (other than the supported 192 GB) nor limiting the number of applications I could run! Sure, the cost for W7E was greater than XPPRO, but it was not 64 times greater (because 16 GB is 64 times 256 MB)!

                Indeed.... between '01 and '09 there was approximately  25%  inflation in real terms.  So the price increase from  $99 to  $199  inflation adjusted

                is really a price increase from    $124  to $199,   an increase of 37%.

                For a 6400% increase in available RAM.  Also,  Windows XP Pro to 7  upgrade editions are available more cheaply than that.

                 

                All that inexpensiveness, and you don't even pay an annual fee to make sure you get upgrades at no additional charge.

                 

                If your organization subscribed to "Software Assurance to Microsoft",  there was not a $199

                "Windows 7 upgrade fee"  to go from 256MB of RAM to 16GB at all;  it was included, just like

                they had promised and just as you would have expected!.

                 

                Actually, there was a fee, but you already paid for it in the subscription.

                Just like many VMware customers already paid for the annual SnS,

                to protect their investment in vSphere4, and ensure entitlement to upgrades

                without having to fork over a huge wad of cash....

                 

                 

                And are now about to get pwn3d,  when VS5 release comes out,  if their current

                vRAM allocations would exceed the new "license limits".

                 

                 

                Yeah... SnS really lived up to its promise of investment protection.

                 

                IMO,    if a customer finds  the  vs5  licenses they are entitled to won't cover their

                environment or their planned environment,  they should be entitled to at the very

                least a refund of SnS,  since  it would mean VMware not living up to what they'd

                promised.

                • 1,145. Re: vSphere 5 Licensing
                  y_wisdom Novice

                  I am not sure who at VMware did the survey saying most customers use 96 GB RAM on their hosts and will not "impact" most customers with the new vSphere 5 license plan.

                   

                  We are a mid size to large customer with more than 160 hosts on ESX 4.1. of which more than 125 hosts have 192 GB of RAM which was our standard untill 2010. As of last month we changed to new standard,  288GB of RAM running on Dell Blades M-710HD (2 Proc x 6 cores). Most of our hosts runs on Enterprise license, so with the new license model we now have to buy 9 Enterprise License or 6 Enterprise Plus License for each M-710HD blades.

                   

                  So you do the math, we are screwed big time and are considering Xen or Hyper-V for all new installations. We are going to stay on vSphere 4.1 till our Hyper-V installation is stable and run in parallel with vSphere 4.1. We are not planning to migrate to Hyper-v.

                   

                  I am for an additional 10 to 15 % hike in License fee for vSphere 5, VMware needs to make money for all the new features.

                   

                  Very disappointed with VMware ! "Don't Kill The Goose That Lays The Golden Egg"

                  • 1,146. Re: vSphere 5 Licensing
                    Baddos Enthusiast

                    vmwareking wrote:

                     

                    How dumb is this cat, hyper pee for the cloud yeah right u monkey. As if aws and rackspace will ever use hype pee..

                     

                    I do agree ms datacenter clients it might be a option!! That's it.

                     

                    Xenserver is a great alternative ready to go now.

                     

                    Sent from my iPhone

                    They don't run vmware either so what is your point?

                     

                    Despite your name calling, hyper v is an alternative for the smb market that vmware is ignoring. The next version coming out soon will have a lot of new features and enhancements. VMware only has itself to blame for what will happen over the next 2 years if they stick with this license model.

                    • 1,147. Re: vSphere 5 Licensing
                      aroudnev Enthusiast

                      You did not got the point.

                       

                      Problem is not that people go and find out Hyper-V an excellent or XENT an excellent. Problem is that there are always an alternatives. While we was confident with VMware, we did not seach for them actively, believing that VMWare is good enough and Price is acceptable enough. I personally encourages few people here don't spend tiome with Hyper-V because it maybe could bring some benefits, but not enough to spend time vs work with VMware - we was 100% satisfied by combination of Free, Essential and Standard/Enterprise systems and licenses (and Free was important in our plans, too).

                       

                      Once we all lost this peace of mind and do not trust VMWare markening anymore (and we don't), we all started to look around - what else do we have on the market_. And for sure, for many, many installations there ARE good alternatives - GOOD ENOUGH. SO no matter how good VMWare is, this mistake cause many people to find a GOOD ENOUGH alternatives which is a clean loss for VMWare. And it can't be reverted, because it ALREADY HAPPENED.

                       

                      I personally don't trust to Hyper-V - it is Microsoft, which means a lot of negatives. First of all, if Vmware support clustered VMFS storage file system, Microsoft don't have anything even near such thing. There are many other drawbacks, too. But no matter how bad is it, some customers will find it GOOD ENOUGH and switch over. And this switching over was triggeded by dumb marketing in VMware with this dumb new licensing.

                      • 1,148. Re: vSphere 5 Licensing
                        y_wisdom Novice

                        Can't we give our opinions ?

                         

                        You must be a VMware employee and worried about your job if customer switch to a different Hypervisor !

                        • 1,149. Re: vSphere 5 Licensing
                          DSeaman Hot Shot

                          I have a reliable contact that provided me with some possible licensing modifications that will be announced next week. Changes include increased vRAM entitlements, and a cap on vRAM licensing per VM to help control costs for large VMs. Of course these are just internal rumors and are subject to change until formally announced, so use a pinch of salt for the time being.

                           

                          http://derek858.blogspot.com/2011/07/impending-vmware-vsphere-50-license.html

                           

                          But the good news is that it seems the uproar is being heard at VMware, and some changes are likely.

                          • 1,150. Re: vSphere 5 Licensing
                            scowse Enthusiast

                            I agree about the trust-challenged relationship with M$ but in spite of this i have used their OS for 20+ years

                             

                            I think the feedback here on VMTN may crystalise Vmwares thinking regarding the fact that M$ doe not need to make any/much money from its hypervisor because it gets to make the money from its guest licenses. Vmware has no such luxury and it should be worried that a well resourced company like M$, in spite of its short comings, can put a huge effort into (eventually) offering a free hypervisor with the same features as vmware and expect no return other than the guest license fees.

                             

                            Remember Netscape?

                             

                            Vmware should be very afraid and back-peddle as fast as it can. Sacking Paul M$ would be a good start!

                            • 1,151. Re: vSphere 5 Licensing
                              hmtk1976 Enthusiast

                              I agree.  The major advantage VMware has is VMFS.  All the other features are nice to have but in my case are far less important.

                              • 1,152. Re: vSphere 5 Licensing
                                hmtk1976 Enthusiast

                                DSeaman wrote:

                                 

                                I have a reliable contact that provided me with some possible licensing modifications that will be announced next week. Changes include increased vRAM entitlements, and a cap on vRAM licensing per VM to help control costs for large VMs. Of course these are just internal rumors and are subject to change until formally announced, so use a pinch of salt for the time being.

                                 

                                http://derek858.blogspot.com/2011/07/impending-vmware-vsphere-50-license.html

                                 

                                But the good news is that it seems the uproar is being heard at VMware, and some changes are likely.

                                 

                                 

                                If true still not good enough.

                                 

                                1. Standard gets no increase in vRAM (or maybe 32 GB per CPU if they follow Essentials licensing) .  Enterprise Plus still gets too little.  From unlimited to 96 GB is lame.  Enterprise has become a useless product - if price is important you buy Standard and if you need more features you buy Enterprise Plus.

                                 

                                2. Still lame.  What's 192 GB over a 6 CPU cluster?  And no word (yet) whether the vRAM pool on Essentials upgradeable.

                                 

                                3. Good for extremely large VMs but machines with say 32 - 64 GB RAM will still fill you vRAM pool quickly.  Mostly a cosmetic change to get rid of comments like "you need 22 Enterprise Plus for a 1 TB VM".  Those with more reasonable but still memory intensive VMs continue to get shafted.

                                 

                                 

                                They should simply have increased prices somewhat to account for inflation and extra features and changes in CPU licensing.  Dramatically increasing the price of what is quickly becoming a commodity product is stupid.

                                • 1,153. Re: vSphere 5 Licensing
                                  hellraiser Enthusiast

                                  Any more news re: potential licencing changes?

                                   

                                  JD

                                  1 75 76 77 78 79 Previous Next