On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 11:23:32PM +1100, Del arranged a set of bits into the following: > Evan Tait wrote: > > >I'd like to know where you're getting your XP licenses from. Because > >$500 per, is a MAJOR rip job. > > So, typically, where do you get them from and what do you pay? Because > if you go into Harvey Norman and ask for an XP license off the shelf, > that's about what it costs. Like harvey norman have a decent price for a lot of things... If you just approch MS as a business you get almost half that (mention Linux and drop another 20%), educational institutions (those that arn't covered by state departments that drop > 80M on MS) > >Servers are a mixture of Windows 2003 and Linux (gentoo) and a PC-BSD > >box i'm toying with. The windows servers are used just for Active > >Directory/Domain Controller, File Storage and backups, and Citrix > >Server. The Linux machines are for WWW, Mail, mediawiki, mambo, and > >other misc services. > > And where do you get your CALs? Or, like most organisations, are you > running illegally? I'm tempted to call you on this. Every business large enough to have multiple people as full time IT are legal as far as possible (that I've dealt with). Most micro businesses don't get in to those hassels, that really leaves: * Small businesses with a server tucked away - usually contract IT, or have a "knowledgeable user" * Contractors > One of the major licensing changes introduced with the Windows 2000/ > 2003 series servers (from NT and past work-alikes) is that with NT you > only had to pay for a CAL to access the server as a file share. If > you just used the server for printing, or just used it as a PDC/BDC > for authentication, then you didn't have to pay for a CAL. Now that's > no longer the case -- with Active Directory you have to pay for a > Windows Server CAL for all authenticating clients. So, if you have > Linux desktops and a Windows server then you basically end up paying > for a Microsoft CAL for each of your Linux machines. Yes, although even in audits they usually don't stress this as it probably wouldn't hold up if they ever got sued over it. The big point is that the machine costs (in theory) the same amount for licences whether it's running Windows or Linux as CALs are usually right around the same price as an OS. > One thing you may want to consider is switching to samba for your > file and print services (obvious choice) and also move to something > like Fedora Directory Server for authentication rather than ADS. > You can run FDS as an authentication back end to samba, giving you > multi-master, multi-domain controller capability and better LDAP RFC > compliance than ADS, while still being able to support both Windows > and Linux clients, and without the high cost of CALs. Much as I think AD is often not needed there are times when it is, and I believe that current versions of citrix do need AD. So they're stuck with AD, sure you could move the file/print servers to linux (and for printing that's often a good idea unless you run accounting for jobs) and only keep redundent AD servers.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature