Interesting!
One way to look at this is that the Oracle licenses to maintain a Sun
Ray over a period of 6 years should not exceed AUD$882 - AUD$521 =
AUD$361= USD$351
That way the Sun Ray can be as competitive in showing MS Windows as any
MS Windows based Thin client. (from a MS license point of view)
I think I would have a hard time explaining to customers that, Premium
Support on 1.3 MB of Sun Ray firmware and 3 servers OSes with VDI
software, would be more expensive than the Microsofts software assurance
costs for all Windows 7 OSes on all clients. ;-)
I am not used to $AUD so I try to do some calculations of my own:
Basic Assumptions:
Microsoft SA on Windows 7 Pro = USD$858 / 6 years / Windows installation
(=AUD$882 see below)
Microsoft VDA = USD$507 / 6 years / device (=AUD$ 521 see below)
Sun Ray 3i = USD$699
Sun Ray 3 = USD$249
Sun Ray RTU = USD$150
Calculations:
1. Sun Ray hardware support = (12% of Sun Ray hardware price. Needed
to update the firmware)
Sun Ray 3i = USD$84 / per year
Sun Ray 3 = USD$30 / per year
2. Sun Ray software support
Premium support = 22% of RTU = USD$33 / year
3. Oracle Premium system support for the Oracle VDI servers
3x servers for running a high available VDI implementation capable of
supporting 100 Sun rays will need:
12% of hardware price / year / 100 = 12% of say USD$5000 /year / 100 =
$600 / 100 = $60 per Sun Ray / year
Ok, now lets add this all up!
License cost for Sun Ray 3 = $150 + 6x $30 + 6x $33 + 6x $60 = $888 /
Sun Ray per 6 years
License cost for Sun Ray 3i = $150 + 6x $84 + 6x $33 + 6x $60 = $1,212 /
Sun Ray per 6 years
Ooooops!!! What happend!!!!!
Did I make a mistake?
I am not even close to the $351 difference in the microsoft vda license.
Can someone at Oracle please explain the following to me?:
1. Why is the firmware support on the Sun ray 3i so much more expensive
than on the Sun Ray 3? In my opinion it should all be the same. External
/ internal video what's the difference in code?
2. Why is the software support and licensing of the Sun Ray 3 and 3i
more than 2,5 to 3.5 times it should be to be competitive in the Windows
client market?
My conclusion is that someone at Oracle really needs to go through these
percentages since there is not much room for lower hardware prices to
counter this. (As Craig very accurately explained)
As I mentioned above I don't think Oracle can justify these support
prices for the Sun Ray / VDI software. It is just not that much code.....
Kind regards,
Ivar
David Bullock schreef:
On 26 October 2010 03:18, Brad Lackey <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On Oct 25, 2010, at 8:54 AM, David Bullock wrote:
I can't talk much to the latest pricing of the DTU's and
associated licensing, except to note that the recent 'product use
rights' from Microsoft requires that virtualised desktop OS's
only be accessed from a device which also has a Windows OS on it
- or else one is up for 'VDA' license just a few dollars *more*
than a full licence for Windows. So Oracle can't entirely be
blamed for the shift in viability of the solution as a whole.
(The commonly-used Wyse/HP/et-al terminals generally have an OEM
Windows CE on them and dodge this hit ... and actually suggests
something that Oracle could do (license WinCE OEM without using
it!) ... to increase the attractiveness of the solution pricing).
When doing VDI or WTS/RDS from a thin client, Microsoft requires
server side licenses. Period. There is no free lunch here, there
is no avoiding paying MS for developing software that we use.
There are certainly several routes and options for licensing data
center MS products for consumption by a remote client so don't get
confused.
For new deployments, VECD (Virtual Enterprise Centralised Desktop) is
no longer one of those routes. Instead, many of the rights previously
conferred by a VECD licence are now conferred by having Software
Assurance on the device you are accessing the virtualised desktop
*from*. If the device you use to access the virtualised desktop
doesn't have a Software Assured version of Windows, then you can
purchase and assign a VDA license to it to acquire the same rights.
Looking at the appropriate commercial purchasing program for companies
with 5 - 250 desktops (Open Value Standard) over the full 6-year term
of that type of agreement, here are the RRP (in $AUD) of those
respective options:
A. Windows 7 Pro with SA over 6 years (3 x Win Pro/SA pack, then 3 x
SA only) is $882.
B. Windows Virtual Desktop Access over those same 6 years (36 x
VDA/month) is $520.92
So over a 6 year period, Microsoft are getting their grubby mits on
$521 of the savings derived from deploying thin clients.
These difficulties affect all thin-client systems equally, and isn't a
dis-advantage of Sun Ray in particular (chill, Oracle dudes). But it
does mean that the VDI case is more difficult to make. I did find it
surprising that Oracle employees weren't aware of the change. If you
Google for "microsoft vecd change", you'll get a bunch of industry
discussion griping about VECD -> VDA change imposed in March of this year.
(My earlier statement about VDA costing *more* isn't currently true
when comparing apples to apples over the 6-year term - although I seem
to remember differently last time I did the math. Also, may earlier
statement that using a WinCE OEM'ed 'thin' client gets around the need
for VDA seems to be false as well - unless you can get SA (at $94/yr)
for a WinCE device (versus VDA @ $173/yr), which isn't something I've
seen discussed anywhere).
cheers,
David Bullock
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
SunRay-Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.filibeto.org/mailman/listinfo/sunray-users
_______________________________________________
SunRay-Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.filibeto.org/mailman/listinfo/sunray-users
