Probably Bill figures that's how Larry got to be #1 and not to be
outdone...RBG
----- Original Message -----
From: <dgoulet_at_vicr.com>
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L <ORACLE-L_at_fatcity.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 12:19 PM
Subject: Re:RE: Pricing Wars
> Actually to me it appears as a "me too" scenario. Namely if Oracle and
IBM can
> collect those kinds of fees then why can't SQL*Server? Or as another
compatriot
> put it, "If MicroSoft is now taking notes from Oracle then the Anti-Christ
> scepter must have been passed from Bill to Larry!".
>
> Dick Goulet
> ____________________Reply Separator____________________
> Author: "Richard Ji" <richard_at_letsplay.com>
> Date: 6/13/00 1:58 PM
>
> Hmmm, now that SQL Server costs as much as Oracle, but doesn't offer the
> same scalability and reliablity as Oracle. This means:
> Oracle will be more popular.
> or
> Oracle will no longer give me a discount! Ouch.
>
> Richard Ji
>
> -----Original Message-----
> Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 3:21 PM
> To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
>
>
> Fascinating. Did you see that the way to join the 'big boys' is not to
> offer a similarly reliable and robust product, but simply to charge as
much
> as the big boys? THAT'S what has been holding back SQL Server, it doesn't
> cost enough!
>
> >>> dgoulet_at_vicr.com 06/13/00 10:42AM >>>
> Hey, For those of you who have been as baffled by Oracle's Power Unit
> pricing
> scheme as I have been, give a read from InformationWeek:
>
> ** Microsoft Updates License Practices
>
> Microsoft is changing the way it licenses server products to bring
> its pricing in line with the expectations of E-businesses.
> Starting with this fall's release of SQL Server 2000 database,
> Microsoft will start charging customers by the number of
> processors running its software, instead of according to the
> number of end users.
>
> The change, which will apply to five additional server products,
> is designed to replace a complex licensing scheme and to match
> more streamlined pricing practices of its database competitors.
> Under the current system, companies buy from Microsoft resellers a
> combination of server licenses, client-access licenses for named
> users, and Internet-connector licenses for unnamed users, such as
> shoppers on an E-commerce site or guests at a marketplace. More
> confusing, the rights associated with each type of license differ
> by product.
>
> "Most customers were probably not getting it right," says Barry
> Goffe, group manager for Windows DNA at Microsoft. "Customers
> said, 'How do I know how many people are connecting to my Web
> site?' And our answer was, 'Guess.' Customers never knew if they
> were in compliance."
>
> Under the new system, companies buying SQL Server 2000 and the
> upcoming Application Center 2000, BizTalk Server 2000, Commerce
> Server 2000, Host Integration Server 2000, and Internet Security
> and Acceleration Server will pay a fixed rate per CPU, regardless
> of the number of end users for an application. Companies will need
> only to calculate the total number of CPUs running the platform
> software and discontinue buying separate server, client-access,
> and Internet-connector licenses, Goffe says.
>
> "Microsoft is raising prices in the enterprise market," says
> Terilyn Palanca, a director at Giga Information Group. That's OK,
> since moving the price of its database closer to offerings from
> Oracle and IBM will help ease customers' perception that SQL
> Server is a departmental product, she says. "As you get into
> large-scale deployments, pricing on a client-access basis would be
> so onerous to calculate. If you want the recognition of an Oracle
> or an IBM, you'd better be priced like that." - Aaron Ricadela
>
> --
> Author:
> INET: dgoulet_at_vicr.com
>
> Fat City Network Services -- (858) 538-5051 FAX: (858) 538-5051
> San Diego, California -- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
> to: ListGuru_at_fatcity.com (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
> the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
> (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may
> also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
>
>
>
> --
> Author: Jim Conboy
> INET: Jim.Conboy_at_trw.com
>
> Fat City Network Services -- (858) 538-5051 FAX: (858) 538-5051
> San Diego, California -- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
> to: ListGuru_at_fatcity.com (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
> the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
> (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may
> also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
>
> --
> Author: Richard Ji
> INET: richard_at_letsplay.com
>
> Fat City Network Services -- (858) 538-5051 FAX: (858) 538-5051
> San Diego, California -- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
> to: ListGuru_at_fatcity.com (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
> the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
> (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may
> also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
> --
> Author:
> INET: dgoulet_at_vicr.com
>
> Fat City Network Services -- (858) 538-5051 FAX: (858) 538-5051
> San Diego, California -- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
> to: ListGuru_at_fatcity.com (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
> the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
> (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may
Received on Wed Jun 14 2000 - 12:10:48 CDT
