XenServer Backup
-
@scottalanmiller So you need "assurances" (locks/verifications) somehow to avoid people abusing of your Free product. So you need time to develop them...
Can you develop how you imagine the ideal process?
-
@anonymous said:
@Dashrender said:
I disagree with the above, I don't think you should include backups in the XOA, you should get rid of the free XOA completely. Reduce the offerings down to install from source and the paid version.
From a business point of view this isn't a good idea at all. I bet many, many company's start with the free version (because why not, it's free) and end up upgrading for features and support. By removing it completely, many company's will never consider/try it.
I can see where and why that would be true, but I do wonder how often it is actually true. Companies choosing based on free rarely make a transition, in my experience. And those that do often do a "leap" where they evaluate things again and often go to sales people and ask what to buy instead of upgrading what they have. Then the sales people sell them whatever they sell without considering what they currently have.
Companies will to use free, limited products I think rarely turn into good customers. Just look at SW. Getting customers from there is really, really tough for vendors because the common factor is... they were all willing to use something based solely on the fact that it was free (and closed source.)
-
@olivier you know your business better then anyone here, but I am wondering if you ever considered something like the XenServer model? Everything is free, support cost money?
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
Weren't you the one who said that SMBs don't buy support, they buy software. If the vendor is lucky, the buyer will continue to buy support year after year. If not, the vendor got at least one purchase.
Yes, that was me. And in doing so was trying to point out that this is one of the misconceptions and failings of the SMB - not understanding that the two are different things. That's why they keep overspending on Windows and VMware, because they are confused about what they are paying for.
I understand that - but since you know that, wouldn't it make sense to play to the way they do things?
Sure we'd love to change them to view it the other way, but do you think that's practical?
-
@anonymous said:
@olivier you know your business better then anyone here, but I am wondering if you ever considered something like the XenServer model? Everything is free, support cost money?
They are basically doing this now, or am I missing something? You can deploy the entirety of XO without paying a single penny. It is the pre-built appliance and support that will cost anything.
-
@olivier said:
@scottalanmiller So you need "assurances" (locks/verifications) somehow to avoid people abusing of your Free product. So you need time to develop them...
Can you develop how you imagine the ideal process?
I don't know that there is an ideal process. If you want free and open source, there is always the risk that tons and tons of people will use it for free. But then again, is that bad? As long as you are not supporting them (causing additional cost) this is only bad if it costs you sales. And I think that big vendors (Red Hat, Canonical, Oracle, IBM, etc.) would tell you that their experience is that open source drives support sales rather than hindering it. Think of the free, open source usage as your best sales person, and your cheapest. What better way to get your product known!
-
@anonymous Nobody will pay just for support. Except huge companies, but our prices are flat. So not scalable at ALL. You need to put value in your product. Remember: a software itself is NOT a product.
XO : a software
XOA : a product (appliance + updater + support)The only solution is to scale prices. And even with that, we need to be bigger than we are currently.
-
@coliver said:
They are basically doing this now, or am I missing something? You can deploy the entirety of XO without paying a single penny. It is the pre-built appliance and support that will cost anything.
I am staying appliance (at every level) free, and just change for support. Just like XenServer.
-
@scottalanmiller We are not in US here. Investors don't believe in this. And a very few succeeded by doing that.
-
@coliver said:
@anonymous said:
@olivier you know your business better then anyone here, but I am wondering if you ever considered something like the XenServer model? Everything is free, support cost money?
They are basically doing this now, or am I missing something? You can deploy the entirety of XO without paying a single penny. It is the pre-built appliance and support that will cost anything.
It's just the confusion around the free XOA vs the other free option getting people confused that I think that he wants to eliminate.
-
@anonymous said:
@olivier you know your business better then anyone here, but I am wondering if you ever considered something like the XenServer model? Everything is free, support cost money?
Everything is free....
There are even VM's you can download from people in this community for a fully working solution...
-
@olivier said:
@anonymous Nobody will pay just for support.
Good ones sure do. It's the little failing ones that don't. They aren't a good market to target because... failing and small
-
@olivier said:
@scottalanmiller We are not in US here. Investors don't believe in this. And a very few succeeded by doing that.
Get better investors
-
@anonymous said:
@coliver said:
They are basically doing this now, or am I missing something? You can deploy the entirety of XO without paying a single penny. It is the pre-built appliance and support that will cost anything.
I am staying appliance (at every level) free, and just change for support. Just like XenServer.
XO is more akin to Xen and the Appliance is closer to XenServer. There are some functions in Xen that you need to dig into the XenServer CLI a bit to access (or use 3rd party addons).
-
@olivier said:
@scottalanmiller We are not in US here. Investors don't believe in this. And a very few succeeded by doing that.
OH, are you doing the startup mode where you are just heading to IPO and then selling and moving on? If those are the investors that you have, that would make sense. If they are in for the short term IPO and not the long term viability and profits, that would totally make sense.
When I was in Norway they were complaining about how poor the investors were in Europe and how little they understood business.
-
@olivier said:
@scottalanmiller We are not in US here. Investors don't believe in this. And a very few succeeded by doing that.
Basically you just said that your investors don't believe in making money.
-
@scottalanmiller Nope. But nobody here will bet a penny on you if you don't have any income in less than 1 year. Roughly, they understand Internet as a mean to sell shoes.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@olivier said:
@scottalanmiller We are not in US here. Investors don't believe in this. And a very few succeeded by doing that.
Basically you just said that your investors don't believe in making money.
I think what he said is he wouldn't have any investors if his company wasn't making money. Or at least a model to make money.
-
Sorry @olivier didn't mean to start all of this
-
@DustinB3403 This.
