OT: Slightly odd SCO licensing...

[John Esak]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: filepro-list-bounces at lists.celestial.com
> [mailto:filepro-list-bounces at lists.celestial.com]On Behalf Of
> Jean-Pierre A. Radley
> Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2005 11:31 AM
> To: FilePro Mailing List
> Subject: Re: OT: Slightly odd SCO licensing...
>
>
> John Esak propounded (on Thu, Jun 16, 2005 at 07:28:57AM -0400):
>
> | Just thought it would be information ally correct to note. The new
> | version of SCO (6.0) is being delivered with a license that includes
> | a spec for memory. 4Gb seems to be the default for entry level
> | Enterprise. Odd, I never knew it cared about this...
>
> You are confusing RAM and disk space requirements.
>
> For OpenServer 6.0.0:
>  [ http://www.thescogroup.com/products/openserver6/requirements.html ]
>
>         The minimum required RAM is 64 MB;
> 	the recommended amount is 256 MB;
> 	the maximum it can handle is 64 GB.
>
>         To install all packages included in the media kit,
>         4GB of disk space is required. Small footprint
>         installations can run on partitions as small as 1GB.
>
I am confusing nothing. I merely reported (correctly) that SCO is delivering
their licensing as follows... It is they who are confusing things by
printing things like this on their bill with no discussion anywhere visible
of what it means...

LA260-UX00-6.0, 4 CPU, 4Gb

I think I (or anyone) would have to be a mind reader to discern what this
refers to, RAM or disk space required for the installation... I chose to
call it a spec for memory, taking the rather good guess that since they were
mentioning CPU's, and following with 4Gb that it was memory. Since when if
ever does a spec for a machine's capabilities mention the amount of disk
space you intend to put with it? Not that I have ever seen. Of course, I've
only been reading specs on servers for 15 or 20 years. :-)  When one is
buying a license, and the license catalog reference tells you # of CPU's and
then another number, I think it is logical to guess that the second number
is also some sort of licensing thing. The fact that I had to guess is the
problem. This little tidbit of size required for installation should NOT be
on their info and etc., when describing their "license".

It was wrong of me to mention it here without investigating further, but
even the person I was talking with on the phone did not understand that it
was size of installation vs allowable RAM. I did not feel further
investigation after that was required.

No big deal, I hope, and thank you for the clarification.

John Esak