ESXi and Xen Orchestra - Licensing models that are eerily similar
-
So this thought came up as I was reading another topic, the licensing model of ESXi is pay per feature (and you get support for it to match), XO is identical to this.
Pay for X features, get only those features and support to match. Maybe that was the goal, but it seems completely counter intuitive as many people are dumping ESXi due to the licensing model that they use. . .
-
XO isn't really pay for feature (other than vSAN) though, right? They are pay for support only.
People are dumping ESXi because of the high cost of the license, on top of which they have to buy support. Now VMWare might be hiding the first year of support in the cost of the first year license, but there is a fee there either way.
-
@dashrender Oh it absolutely is pay per feature, as you go up in the pricing model you get more features.
-
@dustinb3403 said in ESXi and Xen Orchestra - Licensing models that are eerily similar:
@dashrender Oh it absolutely is pay per feature, as you go up in the pricing model you get more features.
XOA is pay per feature/support
XO is free
-
@donaldlandru said in ESXi and Xen Orchestra - Licensing models that are eerily similar:
@dustinb3403 said in ESXi and Xen Orchestra - Licensing models that are eerily similar:
@dashrender Oh it absolutely is pay per feature, as you go up in the pricing model you get more features.
XOA is pay per feature/support
XO is free
Semantics..... but yes. XOA is the paid solution. XO is the community edition.
In context of the conversation and subject matter though it is easily concluded I was / am discussing XOA. .
-
@dustinb3403 said in ESXi and Xen Orchestra - Licensing models that are eerily similar:
@dashrender Oh it absolutely is pay per feature, as you go up in the pricing model you get more features.
oh yeah - I forgot they had graduated levels, and there are feature differences.
-
-
@danp said in ESXi and Xen Orchestra - Licensing models that are eerily similar:
No wonder storm troopers can't shoot for shit, they have baseball bats. ..
-
@dustinb3403 said in ESXi and Xen Orchestra - Licensing models that are eerily similar:
So this thought came up as I was reading another topic, the licensing model of ESXi is pay per feature (and you get support for it to match), XO is identical to this.
Pay for X features, get only those features and support to match. Maybe that was the goal, but it seems completely counter intuitive as many people are dumping ESXi due to the licensing model that they use. . .
OK so back to what I think you're posting about. EXSi got away with this model when it had little to no competition (though I'm sure KVM was already out), but that model has been supplanted by the free feature model of Hyper-V, XS, KVM that we have today.
Now sure, many people have huge investments or need for ESXi, so they stick with it. But XOA doesn't have a bunch of old clients from that no competition time frame that will make customers still with them even though it would be better to leave for better pricing, etc. So XOA isn't in the same boat as EXSi. Instead they are in the boat competing against the solutions that exist for the likes of Hyper-V and KVM, and, well any other solution that exists for XS.
-
@dashrender Does any other solution for XS exist that mimics this pricing? Anything at all? Does Unitrends do this? Or any other off brand backup appliance?
Granted XOA/XO aren't just a backup appliance, but a SPOG so the tool is different. I just don't see how the pricing model could fit at all.
-
@dashrender said in ESXi and Xen Orchestra - Licensing models that are eerily similar:
People are dumping ESXi because of the high cost of the license, on top of which they have to buy support.
The only real ESXi tiers have bundled support. The lone tier without support is Essentials which is crazy.
-
@dashrender said in ESXi and Xen Orchestra - Licensing models that are eerily similar:
@dustinb3403 said in ESXi and Xen Orchestra - Licensing models that are eerily similar:
So this thought came up as I was reading another topic, the licensing model of ESXi is pay per feature (and you get support for it to match), XO is identical to this.
Pay for X features, get only those features and support to match. Maybe that was the goal, but it seems completely counter intuitive as many people are dumping ESXi due to the licensing model that they use. . .
OK so back to what I think you're posting about. EXSi got away with this model when it had little to no competition (though I'm sure KVM was already out), but that model has been supplanted by the free feature model of Hyper-V, XS, KVM that we have today.
Now sure, many people have huge investments or need for ESXi, so they stick with it. But XOA doesn't have a bunch of old clients from that no competition time frame that will make customers still with them even though it would be better to leave for better pricing, etc. So XOA isn't in the same boat as EXSi. Instead they are in the boat competing against the solutions that exist for the likes of Hyper-V and KVM, and, well any other solution that exists for XS.
ESXi continues to get away with it because most businesses need (or require) support. They will pay for it regardless of it there are free options or not. A lot of us don't want to pay for support that we know that we will never need. But most businesses will pay for support no matter what. VMware isn't too affected or concerned about players in the free space because there is no money there.
-
@scottalanmiller said in ESXi and Xen Orchestra - Licensing models that are eerily similar:
ESXi continues to get away with it because most businesses need (or require) support. They will pay for it regardless of it there are free options or not. A lot of us don't want to pay for support that we know that we will never need. But most businesses will pay for support no matter what. VMware isn't too affected or concerned about players in the free space because there is no money there.
This. VMWare is a great product with great value for the price. I do not think I have ever said otherwise myself.
What I do say a lot is that the SMB does not typically need this. SME and SMB that are moving out of SMB all together will find great value to VMWare solutions.
-
@jaredbusch said in ESXi and Xen Orchestra - Licensing models that are eerily similar:
@scottalanmiller said in ESXi and Xen Orchestra - Licensing models that are eerily similar:
ESXi continues to get away with it because most businesses need (or require) support. They will pay for it regardless of it there are free options or not. A lot of us don't want to pay for support that we know that we will never need. But most businesses will pay for support no matter what. VMware isn't too affected or concerned about players in the free space because there is no money there.
This. VMWare is a great product with great value for the price. I do not think I have ever said otherwise myself.
What I do say a lot is that the SMB does not typically need this. SME and SMB that are moving out of SMB all together will find great value to VMWare solutions.
Here Here.
-
The big difference with XO is that XO offers a 100% free, 100% open source version, then they also offer ESXi-styled XOA releases. You have your choice of which approach you want. ESXi doesn't have anything open source like that. So the XOA releases might be ESXi-like, but the overall structure is not.
-
@danp said in ESXi and Xen Orchestra - Licensing models that are eerily similar:
Wait is that horse really dead?
Hard to tell with legos.
-
@brrabill just people who like beating horses.
-
@scottalanmiller said in ESXi and Xen Orchestra - Licensing models that are eerily similar:
@brrabill just people who like beating horses.
Well that's just cruel.
