Linux
Welcome to c/linux!
Welcome to our thriving Linux community! Whether you're a seasoned Linux enthusiast or just starting your journey, we're excited to have you here. Explore, learn, and collaborate with like-minded individuals who share a passion for open-source software and the endless possibilities it offers. Together, let's dive into the world of Linux and embrace the power of freedom, customization, and innovation. Enjoy your stay and feel free to join the vibrant discussions that await you!
Rules:
-
Stay on topic: Posts and discussions should be related to Linux, open source software, and related technologies.
-
Be respectful: Treat fellow community members with respect and courtesy.
-
Quality over quantity: Share informative and thought-provoking content.
-
No spam or self-promotion: Avoid excessive self-promotion or spamming.
-
No NSFW adult content
-
Follow general lemmy guidelines.
view the rest of the comments
Just to really drive this point home, if I go and price out a dell R470 with the default config from dell.ca it's $9700. If i want a windows server license, that's another $4700 on top of that.
Why pay 50% more for software that is slower and harder to support? That's not even thinking about SQL server licensing which is even more expensive.
Almost anyone buying servers already has Microsoft enterprise agreement licenses, which are much cheaper than that retail price.
This is true, but as I recall the minimum users you need to get an enterprise agreement license is ~500 users. So you're already talking over 6 figures to have the option to buy cheaper server OS licenses.
Maybe I'm misremembering the name, it's been a while. I remember the minimum volume license purchase was five licenses, but you could buy one Windows server license at whatever price, and four $5 whatever licenses.
I must admit, I've been too far removed from the volume licensing to remember how it worked. It was definitely cheaper than retail and I remember 2016 and beyond you paid by 2 physical cores each, at least for datacenter.
All I recall was that they changed the licensing terms twice in ~5 years, and the forced minimum of ~500 users for enterprise put one of my past employers into a bind.
I would not be surprised if they had changed it once or twice since.
They've dropped physical cpu licensing model and now you pay per vCPU/thread (unless they've changed it again). People would buy a host with 128 cores and use virtualization to cram it into one physical CPU. You're not wrong that there's enterprise packages to pay way less, but it's still a nightmare and if you get audited you're guaranteed to have to pay up some extra $ since nobody gets it right.
Even the microsoft VARs can't make sense of it. A previous job (service provider) got audited 2 months after I left and it sounded like a total headache.
That was in 2018 or so, but I'm sure there's something similar now. If they haven't forced everyone to subscription licenses, that is.
You're likely thinking of CALs, and one is required for each person accessing the server. Licensing turns into a nightmare very quickly.
Right. But Linux is.... checks notes... free.
Edit: Just because y'all want to pay for support does not make Linux any less free.
most enterprises who need the kind of scale that a Microsoft enterprise agreement even makes sense are paying just as much for Redhat or similar.
"free" is not really a consideration in the selection.
Enterprise Linux however is not. The majority of places won't buy anything without support. Which is why I sell a lot of Red Hat.
@frongt @Shadow Almost anyone buying servers doesn't give two hoots about licenses, just freely load them up with a copy of whatever Linux distribution they've got.