yeah I am using vpshere 4.1 update 1
trying the other script
to tell you the truth I don't understand the results I might need to read this PDF for licensing
Here's a couple snips from our NON VDI vCenter Instances. Looks like we're ready for vSphere 5 
Holy MotherF$%^$#
We are currently using 4x vsphere 4 Standard licenses currently on 2 hosts with 144GB of Physical memory between them (96GB on one and 48Gb on the other)
According to this page - http://www.vmware.com/products/vsphere/pricing.html
By using existing 4 Standard licenses I would still need to purchase 12 Standard Licenses (because I will need growth budgeted) thats $15000 best case...$12k if I push hard
Assuming vmware gave me upgrade pricing for difference between Enterprise and Standard for my 4 vCPU's and didn't increase my S&S thats still going to hurt.
Standard to Enterprise Licenses
4x upgrade licenses = $7520
I also need at least 2 extra licenses to growth:
8x$2870+S&S = $28744
Total upgrade coverage = $36264...even with discounts that $30k...
Standard to Enterprise Plus
4xUpgrade licenses = $10000
4xEnterprise Plus = $17476
Best case I get a deal for 24k or so....
Thats to provide me features I do not use...and to allow me to upgrade to vsphere 5...which for me, really means vmfs 5 functionality increase (ie larger then 2TB volumes..)
I obviously use my environment to the extreme...which is what I paid for vmware for...if I wanted to kinda use it I would have been on hyper-V already since I already paid for the datacenter licenses for these servers...I would have saved myself 10k upfront.
I want the high density consolidation which obviously works very well with vmware...but now after you get me hooked on crack you jack the price...
Realistically speaking, I do not purchase hardware to scale out because every server I add, at a minimum adds $500/month to my datacenter costs (not withstanding the lease costs for the hardware). I therefore increase the RAM in my systems.
Obviously this means no revenue stream for vmware...I get it, I really do...
So..why not drop this stupid CPU count and go strictly with minimum host charge and then change me an incremental cost for vRAM increments (say 64GB)
At least then when I upgrade RAM, I can easily budget for the additional costs and you get a re-occuring revenue stream.
Hell, even if you said vRAM was sold in 64GB increments then I would only need to need to cover a couple increments of memory and since I would expect it to be closer to the $1000/64GB vs $3200, then I probably would not even squeek about $2k right now...
$12-30k...thats going to force me to move to Hyper-V...its not even in the same freaking ballpark pricewise...
If i'm reading this correctly we are using 714Gb of vRam and have 1686Gb remaining. We have Enterprise Plus across the board, which means we are ok, but i still think for the extra cost of Enterprise Plus the 48Gb limit is too low, should be at least 64Gb,
======pCpu Count: 54vRAM (GB): 1364======Resulting license options:Edition Entitlement Licenses------- ----------- --------Essentials/Essentials P... 1 pCpu + 24 GB vRAM 57 with 3 pCpu overheadEnterprise 1 pCpu + 32 GB vRAM 54 with 364 GB vRAM ov...Enterprise Plus 1 pCpu + 48 GB vRAM 54 with 1228 GB vRAM o...======The majority of our CPUs are now HP dual CPU blades with 96GB RAM. These have been replacing older 32GB machines, and we're looking to remove the last of these - so the CPU count will drop to 40. So we'll need to keep more Enterprise licences than we would have done or upgrade to Enterprise Plus, which we'll need to utilise all the extra physical RAM.
Bottom line is we're at best looking at a reducing on our planned savings or more likely an increase in costs
Fortunately, I guess, we were planning at costing Enterprise Plus to get some of the added features (host profiles and distributed switches really are needed now)
Paul
