I have to say that I don't like the idea. I can't think of many features (or modules) that would only benefit Enterprise (paying) customers. To me, it sounds like a contradiction. It either means that not too many modules will be available to Enterprise customers and therefore it won't make sense to pay for it -OR- that there will be a lot of wanted modules in the Enterprise version and everyone using Opsview will have to pay to get them. If this approach is going to work for Opsera, it will be at the cost of the open source users. That's the way I see it.
Rafael On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 9:33 AM, Ben <[email protected]> wrote: > The implication with "lots of versions" is that each version will have a > differing feature set. Not real sure what you're getting at here. If not, > why bother with the different versions? Clearly you want to charge different > amounts for different feature sets, which sound like every other tiered > project out there. > > One model I am impressed with is Splunk, they charge for amount of data > indexed not number of servers. Granted this wouldn't work for opsview, but > its something to think about anyway. Basically what this means is, if I > decide to have indexing servers in every datacenter and a cluster of search > servers, it makes no difference to my price. If i need to add a few servers > of either type, I don't need to call and get additional licenses. Now, if I > suddenly decide to start indexing 300 more servers worth of logs... then I > will have to increase my license (if i go over my limit). But the neat thing > is it doesn't _stop_ any indexing or flow of log data to your boxes, you > just can't search on it =P > > > On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 3:59 AM, James Peel <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> > James.. if your website doesn't look like this in the next 1-2 years, >> > everything's fine i think :) >> >> >> >> We're adopting a different model to GW so I concur :) >> >> There is no reason for us to have lots of different Opsview versions >> since we're not restricting the feature set. I expect we'll treat >> Opsview modules as discrete items with their own product information >> and so on. >> >> >> -- >> James >> _______________________________________________ >> Opsview-users mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.opsview.org/listinfo/opsview-users >> > > > > -- > Ben Lutgens > Linux / Unix System Administror > > Three of your friends throw up after eating chicken salad. Do you think: > "I should find more robust friends" or "we should check that refrigerator"? > -- Donald Becker, on vortex-bug, suspecting a network-wide problem > > > _______________________________________________ > Opsview-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.opsview.org/listinfo/opsview-users > > -- Rafael Carneiro Network Engineer
_______________________________________________ Opsview-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.opsview.org/listinfo/opsview-users
