I've been talking to the Zenoss management - and I have filled them in on the realities of their current pricing model and I believe/hope they are looking at re-vamping their model.
Serious management shops look at system management in two planes: Simple management and Complex Management. This is largely based upon the criticality of the systems. If I were looking at HP Openview I would sink some money in high cost agents for a very few systems, then rely on SNMP agents for everything else. Network hardware management is another issue -- it really should be commodity pricing. Honestly, in the Linux realm and now in the Windows realm, Net-SNMP can do just about anything one would desirefrom an agent standpoint. The only missing piece is Net-SNMP config management. BTW, if you read the Zenoss website closely it will be no surprise that Zenoss does have two different software offerings. They actually provide a feature comparison. > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of James Pulver > Sent: Friday, August 10, 2007 2:45 PM > To: General discussion of using zenoss system > Subject: Re: [zenoss-users] Multi-tentant? > > This does worry me. I picked Zenoss over other products > because of its > open nature. I don't really like the idea of there being parts locked > away from the community, especially as I've seen how good a > job OSS does > with many many other products. > > I don't, of course, begrudge Zenoss making money. And I like > the idea of > Zenpacks as purchasable products - I'd like it more if I could, say, > purchase a Zenpack for $500 or something, rather than a > subscription all > or nothing sort of thing. > > I'd also like some clarification on the licensing - say, can > I buy the > 50 system enterprise, and register say, 50 critical servers, and then > monitor 1,000 more with only community support for getting > them to work? > > I guess my biggest issue is cost, so I'll take what I can get > for free. > Especially as I have no idea what I'd really gain from > Enterprise - most > of it looks like stuff I don't need. > > -- > James Pulver > Information Technology Area Supervisor > LEPP Computer Group > Cornell University > > > > Todd Davis wrote: > > What concerns me about this is that it sounds like they are > planning on > > splintering the Core/Enterprise versions even further. Some of the > > items listed are the types of things that the community has been > > requesting for some time. > > > > > > > > Although I have no problem with a company making some money from a > > product, even an open source one, Zenoss Enterprise pricing > is a little > > steep at a minimum $5000/yr. I might be inclined to look > at Enterprise > > in some situations, like the multi-dashboard, but without > seeing how it > > works I don't know if I can justify it. > > > > > > > > Also, I'd like to see them offer some of the features (eg. > ZenPacks) as > > an a'la carte option. > > > > > > > > *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of > *Jones Steve-R4AAJL > > *Sent:* Friday, August 10, 2007 8:37 AM > > *To:* General discussion of using zenoss system; General > discussion of > > using zenoss system > > *Subject:* RE: [zenoss-users] Multi-tentant? > > > > > > > > Tim, this issue with that roadmap is that it is only available to > > Enterprise customers and not pre-viewable to normal Internet > > Interlopers. I personally would like to see a version of > Enterprise > > that is installable and runnable by anyone who wishes to > download it. > > Clearly, the logistics are cumbersome but many of your > competitors have > > this very model. > > > > Steve Jones > > Engineering Compute \\ - - // > > Freescale Semiconductor ( @ @ ) > > > ----------------------------oOOo-(_)-oOOo---------------------------- > > .oooO > > --------------------------- ( )-- Oooo. > --------------------------- > > Office:512-996-6708 \ ( ( ) > > Pager: 888-944-7522 \_) ) / > > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (_/ > > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > ---------- > > > > > > > > This e-mail, and any associated attachments have been classified as: > > [ ] Freescale Semiconductor General Business > > [X] Freescale Semiconductor Internal Use Only > > [ ] Freescale Semiconductor Confidential Proprietary > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Tim Galligan > > Sent: Fri 8/10/2007 7:44 AM > > To: 'General discussion of using zenoss system' > > Subject: RE: [zenoss-users] Multi-tentant? > > > > We (Zenoss) are very focused on our MSP customers and are doing the > > following to support the requirements of Multi-Tenancy: > > > > 1) We added the Global Dashboard in Enterprise Edition V2.0 which > > enables MSP to easily manage multiple Zenoss Server > instances from one > > dashboard. Using this approach our MSP's are able to put up a Zenoss > > Server for each customer, provide them access to the > information and then > > use the Global Dashboard in the NOC to see a consolidated > view of all > > customers. > > > > 2) With Enterprise Release V2.1 we will be adding a > restricted READONLY > > view which will allow you to define exactly what managed > resources you > > want a user (customer) to see and they will have a view of only that > > information in a readonly mode. V2.1 is targeted for release in late > > September. Enterprise subscribers can get early access as needed. > > > > 3) Roadmap for Enterprise Edition Release: We will > support full device > > ACL's. This way you will be able to setup user (customer) as an > > administrator or user and you will be able to specify the managed > > resources they can see. The difference between the #2 and > #3 is that you > > can provide someone with full admin capabilities for > specific managed > > resources with the device ACL's > > > > Tim > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jones > Steve-R4AAJL > > Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2007 10:26 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: RE: [zenoss-users] Multi-tentant? > > > > This company has a product that does what you are asking > > > http://manageengine.adventnet.com/products/opmanager/msp/index > .html. We > > looked at it but had to drop the investigation because the > tool could > > not handle supernetted networks and appeared to be more stable on a > > Windows platform. Your mileage may differ from ours -- we > haven't looked > > at it about 8 months. > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of oms > >> Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2007 6:39 PM > >> To: [email protected] > >> Subject: [zenoss-users] Multi-tentant? > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> I have been trying out Zenoss for a little while now and have > >> been comparing it with a few competing products > >> (Centreo/Nagios, Groundwork etc). > >> > >> I really like the look and feel to Zenoss but unfortunately I > >> dont think it can do what we are looking for. > >> > >> We (and upstart NOC type company) will be offering services > >> to multiple clients, each of which will have a single user. > >> What we require from our NMS is that we can configure, for > >> example, 50 clients each of which having 50 or so devices. > >> > >> We need to keep each client completely separated from the > >> other yet only run one instance of the Zenoss software. We > >> will most likely be purchasing Zenoss Enterprise or the > >> equivalent but the above requirement is a must. > >> > >> I have been playing with Zenoss and trying to replicate what > >> I have mentioned above by creating "organizers" in various > >> ways, yet it seems very restrictive to do this and there is > >> some information leakage between the clients (i.e even though > >> I restricted a certain user by only allowing them to view a > >> certain "Group", that user still saw information from other > >> groups in certain cases). > >> > >> You may think of as an ISP or similar where our clients will > >> have duplicated IP addressing schemes which we need to > >> monitor through separated VPN's. > >> > >> We can do this magic at the routers (NAT etc) but there is > >> obviously no way in Zenoss to store two devices (say > >> 10.1.1.1) for two different users....or is there? Each client > >> will need to log on to a "web portal" of sorts and access > >> information ONLY pertinent to them. > >> > >> If Zenoss cannot do this, would you be kind enough to > >> recommend one that can? > >> > >> Thanks in advance, and thanks for an awesome product. > >> > >> btw- the above was tested on 2.0.3) > >> > >> oms > >> > >> ------------------------ > >> unset > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> -------------------- m2f -------------------- > >> > >> Read this topic online here: > >> http://community.zenoss.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=9785#9785 > >> > >> -------------------- m2f -------------------- > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> zenoss-users mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> http://lists.zenoss.org/mailman/listinfo/zenoss-users > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > zenoss-users mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.zenoss.org/mailman/listinfo/zenoss-users > > > > _______________________________________________ > > zenoss-users mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.zenoss.org/mailman/listinfo/zenoss-users > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > ---------- > > > > _______________________________________________ > > zenoss-users mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.zenoss.org/mailman/listinfo/zenoss-users > _______________________________________________ > zenoss-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.zenoss.org/mailman/listinfo/zenoss-users > _______________________________________________ zenoss-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zenoss.org/mailman/listinfo/zenoss-users
