[NTLUG:Discuss] Non-subscription enterprise licenses?

[Chris Cox]

On Wed, 2009-10-07 at 00:39 -0500, David Stanaway wrote:
> I am shocked to discover that windows is going to be cheaper than Linux
> for a vendor supported platform for an app I need to run. Please say it
> isn't so!

Please look at:
http://www.ntlug.org/BP-ccox/GetTheFacts

btw, Microsoft Premier Support pricing is over $200/hour.. I didn't
list that when I did the write up above (volume: $4000/full day and
$6000/full 2 days).  You have to purchase hourly support in blocks
of 40, 120, 200 or 400 depending on variation.

> 
> I am looking at an app that runs on 'doze server platform, RHEL, SUSE
> and Solaris.  I am sure it would install fine on CentOS, but then if I
> have any support issues it is going to bite me.
> 
> Very frustrated, I don't need any web support or OS support on the
> system, I just want a legal entitlement to run the OS, and be able to
> manually keep it up to date.

FOSS does cost time and money.  Certainly you can do your own thing..
use Debian, Ubuntu, etc.  These are all viable options.  And it CAN
be fun.. but also a potential headache.  As good as Debian packages
are, they DO make mistakes and produce what I like to call
"dpackage hell".


> 
> The things that frustrate me are having to pay per VM, not per physical
> host (Or 5 pack), and having to keep the subscription indefinitely.

No cost for initial eval and updates (60 days).  That might just be
good enough to run for quite some time.

If you just have to have a long term support thing, look to Ubuntu LTS
(next version coming up is scheduled to be an LTS) or you can look at
things like CentOS (essentially robbing Red Hat).

I know that SUSE doesn't count VMs against you. 

http://www.novell.com/products/server/policy.html

SUSE updates cost $349/yr or $940 for 3 years.

Red Hat an arbitrarily limited platform that costs similarly, but
if you want more apples to apples, their RHEL Advanced platform
runs $1499/yr (which is rather shameful).  In both case I'm
talking about "basic" support (access to updates).

For Windows 2008, prices range from a one time $1029 to $3999. The
latter being the most similar to the Linux distros above, however
sill missing a plethora of applications.  The latter does come with
25 CALs (allows Windows to serve 25 clients legally).  CALs can
be purchased in bundles of 5 for $199.. .but not all CALs are
equal... so you'll have to research the type and quantity of
CALs needed.  It can get VERY expensive.

My own experience is that Windows Server platforms have a lifetime
of between 6 and 8 years.  Which is probably why both Red Hat
and Novell support their distros for about 7 years.

Why Windows for 6 - 8 years?  Well, Microsoft applies a LOT of
pressure on the server side.  Application revisions will force
you to move forward, etc.  Like any software company, they
need revenue... it's just the way software is.  If you don't
upgrade, they don't make money.  So at first the arm twisting
is pretty easy... then it gets harder... then eventually they
point a bazooka at your head!!

Oh.. and as ALWAYS, talk to your vendor about licensing costs and
concerns.  You might be amazed at how much you'll actually pay
when it's all said and done (even M$ will discount).


> 
> I have been aching to try and get some commercial Linux into my 'shop',
> but if the cost is going to be almost the same if not more than just
> throwing more true-up bucks at Microsoft, then it will be a hard sell.

There are NO apps with Microsoft.  There are few CALs if any provided.
There are lots of hidden costs with Microsoft.  It isn't an apples
to apples comparison.

You get an entire platform stack+ with a Linux distro and that's one
of the major points.  You don't want to know how much M$ Server plus,
Office, plus Exchange, plus SQL Server, plus Terminal Server, etc is.

With Linux you will have fewer machines doing more than twice the work
of any M$ version....

One idea might be to put up an enterprise server (you can probably get
a longer than 60day extension if needed for updates, etc.).  Let the
beauty of what it provides get entrenched, then the Microsoft-ish
bill won't appear all that bad.  It will certainly be thousands of
dollars less over 6 - 8 years than a comparable M$ platform... even
with the apparent high cost of enterprise support subscriptions.


> 
> Have people had any luck twisting their vendors arms to support their
> product on a CentOS install when they only officially support true red RHEL?

Probably not.  But you don't have to tell them.
Though you may want to know the right answers to what you should
say if you cat /etc/*elease and such.