On Jul 27, 2005, at 21:24, Jerry Callison wrote:
>Would pay for a soft client?
Yes, I would pay, and already do for other vendors products. And
their cost is MORE than a sunray client.
Actually I am still a little miffed about a Sun Ray client license
fee at all. Would you pay Texas Instruments for a fancy graphing
calculator and then pay an additional surcharge to actually use
it?!? "Never ask your customers to do something that you
wouldn't." (Guy Kawasaki, _Rules_for_Revolutionaries_) Charge the
Sun Ray server license per CPU and skip both user and connection
licensing. Make it easier on all of us. :^)
I would get totally ripped by this. That's the oracle model and it
sucks. I have sever DOZEN standby cpu's that I use and then would
have to pay for them. Even though the max number of DTU's where
fixed. I would not be in support of this. I prefer the Unlimited RTU,
plus the ability to pay for X number of users for a smaller site.
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Please support Team Qualcomm/SAIC find a cure for MS. Sponsor me in
MS150
http://ms150baytobay.com/darkavich
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Steven Misrack
Staff Engineer
Qualcomm, QCT-Engineering Systems
+1.858.651.7535
Never confuse having a career with having a Life
-- Eddie Bauer
---------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
SunRay-Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.filibeto.org/mailman/listinfo/sunray-users
