Change to vSphere 5 Licensing Policy -

[weinstein5]

Looks like VMware has heard the grumbling about the changes to vSphere Licensing - I have not done the math but seems like it will address some of the concerns we all have had

http://www.crn.com/news/data-center/231300048/vmware-changing-vsphere-5-licensing-to-allow-monster-vms.htm

[mikelane]

Thanks for posting that link Weinstein5, much appreciated :smileyhappy:

[GaryHertz]

Cost to license server with 2 sockets and 192GB of memory under new plan.

Licenses X Cost = Total, Cost/GB

Standard

6 x $995 =  $5970, $31.09

Enterprise

3 x $2875 = $8625, $44.92

Enterprise Plus

2 x $3495 = $6990, $36.40

Leaving the whole 4.1 versus 5.0 debate out off it, can someone explain how this makes sense from a cost/features perspective?  Standard might be cost effective if you have modest needs but you pay dearly when your needs grow.  Enterprise makes no sense in almost any senario.

The 96GB per guest limit would would not benifit many customers.  The whole 1TB per guest is pretty much a marketing scheme which the original licensing made laughable.  The 96GB now puts that back on the table but it is still marketing more than a real need.

[goppi]

Beside cosmetic changes IMHO it does not cure the stuctural probelm

of the new license model. Esp. the fact that growing inside the

Essential path is still dramatically limited compared to the

old model lowers our potential to offer these solutions to

our customers.

As we are not entitled to sell the Enterprise line and Essential

no longer matches in most cases, it seems we have to

look for a new virtualization partner.

Additionally I'm a bit sceptical if we could from now on

expect VMware to act in a predictable manner so we

are able to make solid long term suggestions to our

customers.

A disappointed, loyal consultant

[MKguy]

While the changes are certainly a step forward, they don't address many key-problems in the slightest:

• concerning Moores law and the expected increases in RAM density
• no decoupling capacity from features
• you pay a full license including SNS for something you actually don't need
• valuable memory overcommit features still increase licensing costs
• pretty much all existing customers with valid SNS get less than what they were  entitled to before (even if VMware claims those were restrictions, they  were very large compared to the entitlements we get now and Enterprise+  had only an irrelevant pCPU core restriction on paper)

And then there are other moves like allowing Metro-VMotion only with Enterprise+ licenses.

Seriously? It wasn't even considered or mentioned in any feature comparison or something.

Hooray for VMware listening to its customers! Or maybe not.

[MindTheGreg]

MKguy wrote:

• concerning Moores law and the expected increases in RAM density
  

They keep moving their licensing allowance up a notch on each release to keep up with Moore's Law. If they didn't change the vSphere 4 per core licensing, we would have the same issue. Maybe it's forced obsolescence for older releases.

[GaryHertz]

Greg wrote:

MKguy wrote:

• concerning Moores law and the expected increases in RAM density
  

They keep moving their licensing allowance up a notch on each release to keep up with Moore's Law. If they didn't change the vSphere 4 per core licensing, we would have the same issue. Maybe it's forced obsolescence for older releases.

They have never licensed per core.  It is per socket.  Until 5.0 they have had core restrictions which go against Moore's Law.  When they went from 3.5 to 4.0 they added Enterprise Plus and charged customers that where at the top tier to upgrade to stay at the top tier.  With 5.0 they did away with core restriction but limited vRAM so severely that they have in effect decreased cores per socket more than in 4.1.  Please give me an example where a change to licensing has benefited the customer.

[MindTheGreg]

Gary H wrote:

They have never licensed per core.  It is per socket.  Until 5.0 they have had core restrictions which go against Moore's Law.  When they went from 3.5 to 4.0 they added Enterprise Plus and charged customers that where at the top tier to upgrade to stay at the top tier.  With 5.0 they did away with core restriction but limited vRAM so severely that they have in effect decreased cores per socket more than in 4.1.  Please give me an example where a change to licensing has benefited the customer.

I agree with you. If these license changes are true then even VMware is acknowledging that their licesing is wrong. I was just pointing out that a Moore's Law problem existed in vSphere 4.