home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!stanford.edu!unixhub!linac!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pitt.edu!gatech!rpi!usc!news.service.uci.edu!unogate!mvb.saic.com!macro32
- From: DWING@UH01.Colorado.EDU (Dan Wing)
- Newsgroups: vmsnet.internals
- Subject: Re: How to force a process into one CPU on a 6640?
- Message-ID: <01GTZCL7PXFM0000EP@VAXF.COLORADO.EDU>
- Date: 26 Jan 93 23:57:28 GMT
- Organization: Macro32<==>Vmsnet.Internals Gateway
- Lines: 28
- X-Gateway-Source-Info: Mailing List
-
- Tom O'Toole, ecf_stbo@jhuvms.hcf.jhu.edu, writes:
-
- >I'm curious if anyone has explored the license implications of this.
- [...]
- >Software license costs
- >with several vendors operating on this archaic 'tiered' approach are dwarfing
- >the actual hardware costs of this tentative upgrade.
-
- Interesting idea.
-
- However, some products aren't just detached processes sitting out there, but
- are activated all the time by users or as utilities (compilers, TELNET, etc.)
- I suppose you could write a front-end which would bind your process
- immediately prior to invoking the image, although that would become a pain
- in the ***, assuming your vendor's legal staff would allow such a move.
-
- Basically, the vendors are trying to charge you as if all of the users on
- your system were using the application, and base their fees on how many
- users could fit on that system. Personal and per-use licenses are the
- solution to this.
-
- We got about $4K short of completely paying for a uVAX 3100 by licensing it
- for various DEC products instead of putting them on our 6620. All of our
- programmers now use the 3100 instead of the 6620, which helps offload the
- work from the main production system, too.
-
- -Dan Wing, dwing@uh01.colorado.edu or wing_d@ucolmcc.bitnet (DGW11)
- Systems Administrator, University Hospital, Denver
-