1 88 89 90 91 92 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.
      • 1,335. Re: vSphere 5 Licensing
        DSeaman Hot Shot

        VMware also made some changes (or clarified some issues) for VDI users that have vSphere 4.0 and want to upgrade to vSphere 5.0. They've waived the vRAM entitlement limits in certian configurations (in addition to the vSphere Desktop SKU that was widely known) and for vSphere 4.x licenses purchased before Sept 30, 2011. You can check out the details and restrictions here:

         

        http://derek858.blogspot.com/2011/08/vsphere-5-vdi-licensing-redux.html

         

        I think this is a great move, and will allow existing VDI deployments to migrate to vSphere 5.0 for little to no additional cost, regardless of vRAM usage.

        • 1,336. Re: vSphere 5 Licensing
          LockAze Novice

          DSeaman wrote:

           

          VMware also made some changes (or clarified some issues) for VDI users that have vSphere 4.0 and want to upgrade to vSphere 5.0. They've waived the vRAM entitlement limits in certian configurations (in addition to the vSphere Desktop SKU that was widely known) and for vSphere 4.x licenses purchased before Sept 30, 2011. You can check out the details and restrictions here:

           

          http://derek858.blogspot.com/2011/08/vsphere-5-vdi-licensing-redux.html

           

          I think this is a great move, and will allow existing VDI deployments to migrate to vSphere 5.0 for little to no additional cost, regardless of vRAM usage.

          Yes, great. You now can move over to vSphere 5 and knowingly be screwed when you have to upgrade... Awsome... Thanks but no thanks.

          • 1,337. Re: vSphere 5 Licensing
            depping Champion
            User ModeratorsVMware Employees

            DSeaman wrote:

             

            I've posted a blog about the vRAM revision, and also compare it to the new vSphere 5.0 VSPP vRAM model that is migrating AWAY from the allocated vRAM model that we are now stuck with, and on to a reserved vRAM model that makes more sense to me.

             

            http://derek858.blogspot.com/2011/08/vmware-changes-vsphere-50-licensing.html

             

            In fact VMware makes a strong case why allocated vRAM does not make sense and why basing it on reserved pRAM is more appropriate. I agree..just too bad we can't use the same, more logical IMHO, model.

             

            Reserved RAM works for VSPP customers as they use reservations in their model. Most customers I know don't use reservations at all so this model would not work.

             

            Duncan

            Yellow-Bricks.com

            • 1,338. Re: vSphere 5 Licensing
              hmtk1976 Enthusiast

              DSeaman wrote:

               

              VMware also made some changes (or clarified some issues) for VDI users that have vSphere 4.0 and want to upgrade to vSphere 5.0. They've waived the vRAM entitlement limits in certian configurations (in addition to the vSphere Desktop SKU that was widely known) and for vSphere 4.x licenses purchased before Sept 30, 2011. You can check out the details and restrictions here:

               

              http://derek858.blogspot.com/2011/08/vsphere-5-vdi-licensing-redux.html

               

              I think this is a great move, and will allow existing VDI deployments to migrate to vSphere 5.0 for little to no additional cost, regardless of vRAM usage.

               

              I'm sorry but I call this bullshit.

               

              For those having View in production NOW this entire scheme sucks and blows at the same time.  We "just" need another vCenter to manage our VDI machines.  Oh fun, everything's working with my current vCenter so now I have to pry View loose just for same harebrained licensing scheme? You call this not unreasonable, I call this a dealbreaker.  Besides the cost of another vCenter, perhaps a Windows license and backup agent for the VM it's another machine that uses resources for the simple stupid reason that some sales guys at VMware live in another world.  Not to speak of extra work, downtime, ...

               

              Existing customers are still shafted with the licensing.  There's no possibility of trading licenses.  Our View environment is running on vSphere Enterprise licenses.  Why not trade those licenses to an equal value of the vSphere Desktop SKU?  That would have been easy and fairly painless.

               

              These guys are clueless and unless Citrix and Microsoft do something equally stupid with their upcoming virtualization products they've lost me as a customer.

              • 1,339. Re: vSphere 5 Licensing
                depping Champion
                User ModeratorsVMware Employees

                hmtk1976 talk to your VMware Sales representative and express your concerns.

                 

                Duncan

                Yellow-Bricks.com

                vSphere 5 Clustering Deepdive - eBook | Paper

                • 1,340. Re: vSphere 5 Licensing
                  hmtk1976 Enthusiast

                  Apparently VMware isn't listening so why bother.  They've lost all credibility so do you really believe they'll announce another  change in licensing?

                  • 1,341. Re: vSphere 5 Licensing
                    hellraiser Enthusiast

                    Surely the point of SnS is to be able to upgrade to the next version totally free of charge?  Therefore having to pay any additional cost is effectively paying twice?

                     

                    It seems some people have been blinded by the strategy VMware has used - they sell a product which already carries a premium pricetag. There is *no* justification for increasing that price by several orders of magnitude. They are posting record profits, they are in no form of financial trouble, yet they want to fleece both new and existing customers purely in the name of greed. This is exactly the kind of thing I would expect from a company run by EMC.

                     

                    Look at Xen - that is completely free for the standard edition. Even the platinum edition is priced on a per-host basis, so just buy the most powerful host you can and put that on, job done - most of the features of vSphere for a fraction of the cost.

                     

                    How about Hyper-V?  Most people use datacentre licences for the Windows VMs on their ESX clusters, this way you get the hypervisor for free, with no limitations on future RAM usage. Again, why pay over the odds for a product which is "upgraded" by making you pay more for RAM that you use, even to the point of charging you for RAM that doesn't exist if you overcommit! I'm all for virtualisation, but generating bills for something that doesn't exist is pushing it a little too far. As for the cloud, you can stick that load of pretentious crap where the sun doesn't shine - I don't run a cloud, I run an internal corporate infrastructure and have no need to split costs between departments; if I did, I'd use Citrix....

                     

                    Sorry VMware, I don't care if your record profits aren't as high as you would like them to be. I'll continue with the licences I have thanks, and any future hypervisor builds will be made on a platform which I can rely on, not one that arbitrarily increases in price because I build another VM, or because the suits at EMC want to buy extra holiday homes.

                     

                    JD

                    • 1,343. Re: vSphere 5 Licensing
                      depping Champion
                      VMware EmployeesUser Moderators

                      Justin Devereaux wrote:

                       

                      Sorry VMware, I don't care if your record profits aren't as high as you would like them to be. I'll continue with the licences I have thanks, and any future hypervisor builds will be made on a platform which I can rely on, not one that arbitrarily increases in price because I build another VM, or because the suits at EMC want to buy extra holiday homes.

                       

                      JD

                       

                      Don't want to cause a shit storm here, but surely "reliable" is not only measured by the price of a license. I would hope that the product itself and the features it offers has got something to do with it.

                       

                      Duncan

                      Yellow-Bricks.com

                      vSphere 5 Clustering Deepdive - eBook | Paper

                      • 1,344. Re: vSphere 5 Licensing
                        hmtk1976 Enthusiast

                        No they did not listen.  RAM still is tied to the vSphere edition you buy. If you've got an environment with Standard, Enterprise and Enterprise Plus licenses you've got THREE vRAM pools.  This takes away a lot of flexibility.  They should have simply gone for a per CPU license without vRAM/pRAM and make you pay for the features and pay SnS.  For vRAM/pRAM they should have offered blocks of RAM that can be used without being limited to a single edition.  SnS for RAM blocks would have been idiotic (but that's a word that comes to mind easily when thinking of VMware these days) because RAM usage will always increase which would mean that you'd have to keep on buying RAM blocks and pay SnS for them.  This would make it extremely expensive a few years from now.  VMware doesn't even offer a roadmap of how licensing will evolve.  Will we get more vRAM/pRAM with the next revision of vSphere in the current licensing scheme?  What about the next major release?  No news whatsoever.  They just hit is with a really big sledgehamme a few weeks ago and now they expect us to be happy they're only using a baseball bat now.

                         

                        Now they're also saying how wonderful that 96 GB cap is so 1 TB RAM VM's are not not nearly as expensive but they're just taking one extreme example to make their point.  There are loads of VM's between 4 and 96 GB whose RAM will count fully.  Say I've got a Proliant DL360 G7 with 384 GB RAM.  Without memory overcommitment I can easily run 24 16 GB VM's.  I'd need 4 Enterprise Plus or 12 Standard licenses to run those VM's.  I think this is more realistic than the silly 1 TB VM that has now become magically cheaper.

                        • 1,345. Re: vSphere 5 Licensing
                          hmtk1976 Enthusiast

                          Duncan wrote:

                           

                          Justin Devereaux wrote:

                           

                          Sorry VMware, I don't care if your record profits aren't as high as you would like them to be. I'll continue with the licences I have thanks, and any future hypervisor builds will be made on a platform which I can rely on, not one that arbitrarily increases in price because I build another VM, or because the suits at EMC want to buy extra holiday homes.

                           

                          JD

                           

                          Don't want to cause a shit storm here, but surely "reliable" is not only measured by the price of a license. I would hope that the product itself and the features it offers has got something to do with it.

                           

                          Duncan

                          Yellow-Bricks.com

                          vSphere 5 Clustering Deepdive - eBook | Paper

                           

                          I think Justin means that VMware isn't a reliable partner anymore.  The licensing change in vSphere 4 left existing Enterprise users in the cold by introducing Enterprise Plus.  Now this.

                           

                          VMware should remember VHS - Betamax.  Only one example where the best technology didn't come out the winner.

                          • 1,346. Re: vSphere 5 Licensing
                            depping Champion
                            VMware EmployeesUser Moderators

                            hmtk1976 wrote:

                             

                            No they did not listen.  RAM still is tied to the vSphere edition you buy. If you've got an environment with Standard, Enterprise and Enterprise Plus licenses you've got THREE vRAM pools.  This takes away a lot of flexibility.  They should have simply gone for a per CPU license without vRAM/pRAM and make you pay for the features and pay SnS.  For vRAM/pRAM they should have offered blocks of RAM that can be used without being limited to a single edition.  SnS for RAM blocks would have been idiotic (but that's a word that comes to mind easily when thinking of VMware these days) because RAM usage will always increase which would mean that you'd have to keep on buying RAM blocks and pay SnS for them.  This would make it extremely expensive a few years from now.  VMware doesn't even offer a roadmap of how licensing will evolve.  Will we get more vRAM/pRAM with the next revision of vSphere in the current licensing scheme?  What about the next major release?  No news whatsoever.  They just hit is with a really big sledgehamme a few weeks ago and now they expect us to be happy they're only using a baseball bat now.

                             

                            Now they're also saying how wonderful that 96 GB cap is so 1 TB RAM VM's are not not nearly as expensive but they're just taking one extreme example to make their point.  There are loads of VM's between 4 and 96 GB whose RAM will count fully.  Say I've got a Proliant DL360 G7 with 384 GB RAM.  Without memory overcommitment I can easily run 24 16 GB VM's.  I'd need 4 Enterprise Plus or 12 Standard licenses to run those VM's.  I think this is more realistic than the silly 1 TB VM that has now become magically cheaper.

                             

                            Have you ever seen any vendor offering a roadmap of how licensing will evolve? The changes made were caused by the loud voice of the community / customers. Saying that VMware doesn't listen is just not right. I can understand your frustration but you also need to keep in mind that there are two sides to this. Lets be honest, removing pRAM / vRAM / Cores would mean the price of the license would need to go up, that would have resulted in a similar response as the above.

                             

                            You can tweak the numbers to always make it sound bad, and yes you can tweak the numbers to make it sound great. There are also loads of VMs between 2G  and 4GB of memory, which would be roughly 45 VMs on a single host, which is 9 times more than most enterprises run today.

                             

                            Duncan

                            Yellow-Bricks.com

                            vSphere 5 Clustering Deepdive - eBook | Paper

                            • 1,347. Re: vSphere 5 Licensing
                              hmtk1976 Enthusiast

                              Most vendors don't need a roadmap of licensing but we've seen that VMware drastically changes licensing with new product releases so yes, a roadmap would be a good idea.  Especially when they want us to pay through the nose for something that's changing as rapidly as RAM usage.

                               

                              IMO the cost for the per socket license should have gone down and RAM blocks introduced like I said in my previous post.

                               

                              Sure there are load of VM's with relatively little RAM but in the next few years many of them will be replaced by VM's with 4+ GB RAM.  VMware seems to think only of now and not of the future.

                               

                              Let's just agree to disagree because I think our viewpoints differ too much.

                              • 1,348. Re: vSphere 5 Licensing
                                datacenterngp Lurker

                                even if I have 6 or 12 core cpu, my license cost remains same and it discourages me to go for higher core in my data center. It also makes me difficult to sell the IaaS to the customer with better core.

                                • 1,349. Re: vSphere 5 Licensing
                                  mrudloff Hot Shot

                                  Whether vmware pulled that stunt of changing "their mind" now or not, on purpose, is one thing. Another thing is confidence ... We did hear that some big customer of vmware simply lost the confidence in vmware, wondering if they do that in the future again .... so personally I heard that this was enough for people to move towards Hyper-V ... or at least starting to look into it,.

                                  1 88 89 90 91 92 Previous Next