Forum Home
Press F1
 
Thread ID: 50406 2004-10-19 22:27:00 Give with One Hand Ect. drb1 (4492) Press F1
Post ID Timestamp Content User
282779 2004-10-19 22:27:00 www.theinquirer.net drb1 (4492)
282780 2004-10-19 22:49:00 And the Registers Spin (www.theregister.co.uk) on the same subject.

Cheers Murray P 		Murray P (44)
282781 2004-10-19 23:01:00 Murray,

What has allways puzzeled me on this, is why the market allowed M/S and the others in tow, to charge extra licences fees per prossesor.

The S/w for multi prossesor machines all-ready had a premium before this "Extra" charge.

Multi prossesor machines are still only 1 complete machine. Fairly only needing 1 complete licence.

D. 		drb1 (4492)
282782 2004-10-19 23:15:00 > Multi prossesor machines are still only 1 complete
> machine. Fairly only needing 1 complete licence.
>
> D.

Not so when you consider mini's and mainframes that a lot of this software runs on. You could be feeding data to hundreds or thousands of people at terminals off the one (big) box with multiple cores/ and/or processors. Most of MS's software does not scale to that size so is not affected.

I'd be a bit scratchy if I had a (non-server) workstation or home machine that ran 2 CPU's or multi core chips and got whacked for extra fee's though, and that's where your more likely to see MS software running. So from that perspective, it's a good move from MS, good for normal users and good for MS because they want to move into the big time stuff and embarrassing the blokes in that space already gets them attention (if they were already there, you can bet they would not be doing this ;)

Cheers Murray P 		Murray P (44)
282783 2004-10-19 23:39:00 good for normal users and good for MS
> because they want to move into the big time stuff and
> embarrassing the blokes in that space already gets
> them attention (if they were already there, you can
> bet they would not be doing this ;)
>
> Cheers Murray P

Murray,

You not WRONG,

So many many people are under the GROSS MISCONCEPTION that the whole internet runs on M/S.

Main frames mostly have/used to have # user licences rather than pro#. like some prop S/W run on thin clients

Did I miss a period of change there.

D. 		drb1 (4492)
282784 2004-10-19 23:42:00 I think you'll find IBM et all charge per processor on mainframes, but it's a subject I'm not up on.

Cheers Murray P 		Murray P (44)
282785 2004-10-20 00:21:00 > I think you'll find IBM et all charge per processor
> on mainframes, but it's a subject I'm not up on.
>
> Cheers Murray P

Its appears to be what there doing but i missed that one, thats what happens when you spend to many years wandering and enjoying.

D. 		drb1 (4492)
282786 2004-10-20 00:29:00 The IBM hardware rental charges used to be roughly based on the amount of work you could get from the computer system. If you upgraded to a more powerful CPU, you paid more. If you got an extra CPU you paid more. If you ran an extra shift, you paid more. If you put in more memory modules you paid more. Some of the cost was the maintenance but there was a very definite attitude that the users would pay "per unit of work".

But I wouldn't want to pay per processor for Windows if I built a 1000 CPU cluster. That's why they use Linux. :D (Also because it works). 		Graham L (2)
282787 2004-10-20 01:38:00 >
> But I wouldn't want to pay per processor for Windows
> if I built a 1000 CPU cluster . That's why they use
> Linux . :D (Also because it works) .
>

Graham,

M/S are trying to monopolise clustering like they have to all other sections of the it industry in the public view, promoting the there is only M/S lie .

Clustering came from NASA and RED hat with Beowulf . Clustering is FREE . open source Technology .

M/S should be banned from using clustering technology unless it is OPEN SOURCE we dont need our clusters SCREWED by M/S .

D .

~Patenting software is like patenting the text of a book . Neither is necessary to protect Intellectual Property~ (Unknown)

~ Like music, progress in software is dependent on the ideas that have gone before . The creative and innovative part is not the ideas themselves, necessarily, but the particular combinations that make up the whole . Patent the component ideas, and no one can write anything new . ~ (Richard Stallman) 		drb1 (4492)
282788 2004-10-20 01:43:00 Well, DEC were clustering Vax boxes in the 1970s. :D Where do people get the idea that the only computers that have ever existed are called "PC"s? Graham L (2)
1 2 3