Ed Brill

Post a Comment

1. 1  Ben Langhinrichs http://www.GeniiSoft.com/showcase.nsf/GeniiBlog | 4/9/2008 2:49:12 PM

   I have to admit that even as a cost conscious small business owner, it was a no brainer getting the Utility Express license. Besides the cost being fairly reasonable, I am somewhat relieved at having had to make this decision, because now I can add authentication to my support forum and other places, which I had avoided before due to concerns that the whole thing would be complex and expensive. If anything, I am just kicking myself for not doing this earlier. Fortunately, the chance to create an IdeaJam for Genii made the decision easy now.

1. 2  JC Penedo  | 4/9/2008 3:18:12 PM

   Domino Utility Express has no entitlements for Lotus Workflow (LW) and Domino.Doc (DD).Domino Utility Server provided those entitlements. But LW and DD are gone, no new versions announcements, so without them it makes no sense to pay the price premium of a Domino Utility Server.

1. 3  Mike Wissinger  | 4/9/2008 4:09:01 PM

   @2 - Clustering. On a big public-facing site, clustering can be essential. The Express offerings don't permit that.

   Beyond that, there's a break-even point where a large number of web collaboration licenses plus an enterprise server is more expensive than a utility server doing the same job. Not something that works for everyone, but it is handy for those who need it.

1. 4  Henning Heinz  | 4/9/2008 4:54:59 PM

   Utility Express does allow Clustering and Partitioning but is limited to 400 Value Units.

1. 5  Christopher Byrne http://www.controlscaddy.com/ | 4/9/2008 5:22:45 PM

   Would it not have been cheaper just to buy the business partner value package for software?

1. 6  Charles Robinson  | 4/9/2008 5:57:23 PM

   @4 - All I can find on the Express site is this:

   Q. What does an IBM Lotus Domino Utility Server Express license include?

   A. Lotus Domino Utility Server Express is an application server license option that includes unlimited access to non-mail applications (authenticated or anonymous) from a Web browser or a separately priced Lotus Notes for Collaboration client. In addition, Lotus Domino Utility Server Express includes Lotus Domino partitioning, clustering for applications and advanced administration features.

   I haven't found anything that specifies clustering and partitioning are only valid up to 400 PVU's. Since Express licensing lets you install an unlimited number of servers, is that 400 PVU's per server or for the entire environment?

1. 7  Mike Robinson http://www.invcs.com | 4/9/2008 6:47:53 PM

   This is intriguing...It may have been helpful to place a link in the article so one could quickly go to the Utility Express site.

1. 8  Kerr  | 4/9/2008 8:19:40 PM

   @6&7,

   { Link }

   OK now my head hurts. Looking like the utility express is PVU only, so you have to pay for each one, but you can have clustering. But you can't run mail on it. Unless you buy CALS for it. But then can you cluster it?

   I hate licensing.

1. 9  Paul Robichaux http://www.robichaux.net/blog | 4/9/2008 11:57:00 PM

   On the one hand, it's wonderful that Alan and Ed are responsive to questions like this from the community. On the other hand, it's a sad commentary on IBM's licensing practices that Ben had to ask in the first place. On the gripping hand, it's not like Microsoft's licensing is any easier to understand. At least Oracle's is generally pretty simple (though stupid: $500/seat for Oracle Information Rights Management?! no $ale).

1. 10  Flemming Riis  | 4/10/2008 1:28:18 AM

   -. Looking like the utility express is PVU only

   Yeah dont but QuadCore unless its -really- needed

1. 11  Stuart McIntyre http://blog.collaborationmatters.com | 4/10/2008 3:00:51 AM

   @5 I agree, the Value Package's Run Your Business licences would have done the trick, and that comes with a whole load of other benefits too.

   That's the way most partners do things.

1. 12  Kevin  | 4/10/2008 7:15:49 AM

   There are more details available in the License Information Documents which at least us on the VAD side refer to quite often.

   However, as we've found before they aren't always updated as quickly as we'd like, and for some reasons FAQs have occasion to trump the official license doc. ; )

   The Express cutoff is *generally* also 1000 employees in the organization. This is documented in the LID for the product.

   @9 - It is a fair point Paul that licensing can be a tangled web for many vendors, IBM included, and as you point out, certainly with MSFT. I will say though this isn't so much about licensing practices as much as whether the information is readily available. I tend to consider the two as different matters.

   I do tend to agree though, the Value Pack & Run Your Business would have done it as well. Most of the partners I work with go down this road for their internal needs.

1. 13  Sjef Bosman http://www.bosman.fr | 4/10/2008 7:43:05 AM

   I've also been looking for the licensing structure of Domino, but I soon gave up. Better use the phone to call Sales probably.

   Nevertheless, it seems rather straightforward to me: put a calculation form somewhere on the IBM/Lotus website, with all the parameters of the products, and produce some GOOD advice with it. Shouldn't be too difficult, now should it? The parameters at the top, and the alternatives at the bottom, with pricing and all.

   Someone told me that there is a training available for licensing... Is that really true??

1. 14  Ben Langhinrichs http://www.GeniiSoft.com/showcase.nsf/GeniiBlog | 4/10/2008 8:28:35 AM

   OK, as an experiment, what would be the cost of a Business Partner Value package for three years? $2650 (year 1) + $690 (year 2) + $690 (year 3)= $4030 What if I add in the cost of running my Notes client with an express option? That would add a bit under $200 for the three years, so let's say a total of $4230

   Now, what would be the cost of the BP Value Package for three years? $2000 (year 1) + $2000 (year 2) + $2000 (year 3) = $6000

   So, while there may be more benefits, the cost for three years, which is about the minimum I use for any cost projection, is significantly less for purchasing the software directly. In addition, I would be a customer instead of a business partner, and there is a conjecture out that that such a designation implies IBM listens more or responds better. Even if I am wrong, and it becomes clear, I have little to lose, since I could switch to the Value Package and save the $1440 or so in renewals for the latter two years.

   I am not meaning to minimize the value of the Buisness Partner Value Package for many companies, but for a one person VSB with my particular focus, it is not compelling. The one part that is really not clear to me is how having access to passport will differ from the value access package for $795 per year. Since it confers no rights to run, but only to test, will I be able to get that same software through passport, or will I only have access to the Domino server? That is part of what I am trying to learn in this exercise.

1. 15  Ben Langhinrichs http://www.GeniiSoft.com/showcase.nsf/GeniiBlog | 4/10/2008 8:34:05 AM

   Sorry, in my example, the first set of numbers should be for the Utility Express license, and the second set for the Business Value Package.

1. 16  Kevin  | 4/10/2008 8:40:43 AM

   @15 - Glad you cleared that up. lol I thought something looked funny there.

   Honestly though, as you're finding, it all is a matter of what you're going to use and your end benefit one way or the other.

   If the "off the shelf" Express offering works for what you need and that is it...then heck, do it.

1. 17  Paul Robichaux http://www.robichaux.net/blog | 4/10/2008 8:42:52 AM

   @12: it's fair to consider the two as different matters. MS is generally good about making the information available, only it's incomprehensible when you find it. I love the idea of a simple calculator for licensing costs, and I hope it catches on at both IBM and MS.

1. 18  Rob McDonagh http://www.CaptainOblivious.com | 4/10/2008 9:09:10 AM

   @9 Love the "gripping hand" bit, Paul!

1. 19  Arthur Fontaine  | 4/10/2008 9:26:58 AM

   Been a while since we created this license but I can tell you it was designed for just this scenario: a small organization wanting to deploy full-fledged Domino Web applications. We understand that authentication unlocks a lot of Domino application goodness. The other Domino Express limitations (clustering, cascading directories, etc.) are not imposed here either. As long as you have 1,000 or fewer employees, you get the full Domino goodness (sans mail) to do whatever you need.

   Regarding e-mail; you can certainly do e-mail things with Utility Server (any version) such as mail-in databases and Webmaster mailboxes, so long as you're not providing dedicated end user mailboxes. And if you do need those, just apply a Domino Messaging Server license to the same machine (yes you can apply multiple licenses on a single machine) and make sure that everyone with a mailbox has a valid e-mail CAL (in Notes, DWA, or WebMail). CALs can either provided by you or "Bring Your Own"; a Domino CAL entitles you to hit any Domino server in the universe, not just the one you bought it for. Just remember that the entity hosting the server is on the hook to make sure CALs are in place when required.

1. 20  Ed Brill http://www.edbrill.com | 4/10/2008 9:32:51 AM

   I'm not really understanding the kvetching about Notes/Domino licensing comprehension. Each of the products has a link on the left side under "related links" to Notes and Domino licensing, which takes you here:

   { Link }

   Then, as has been mentioned, the channel announcements have additional information { Link } ,and the license text itself { Link } has the rest.

1. 21  Ben Langhinrichs http://www.GeniiSoft.com/showcase.nsf/GeniiBlog | 4/10/2008 10:24:17 AM

   I have to say, my only difficulty was in determining which kind of license to use, and if I had not been so convinced by previous complaints I have heard, I am pretty sure I could have figured it out myself anyway. I had no real trouble finding or understanding the pages on licensing, which seem to have come a long way since the last time I looked, which would have been about eight years ago.

1. 22  Tony S lee  | 4/10/2008 10:51:48 AM

   OK so @20 and @21 says the licensing and purchasing process is straightforward.

   Back in the day working in an SMB, we bought Dell's not necessarily because it was a better product, but it was EASY TO PICK EXACTLY WHAT YOU NEEDED TO BUY. I may be alone in this thought but if you had a configurator that calculated the pricing after options were selected and explained, it would go a long way in helping SMB customers make a decision. If it could put on a sidebar the OS license and CAL requirements you would save people alot of time and confusion.

1. 23  Sjef Bosman http://www.bosman.fr | 4/10/2008 10:55:52 AM

   @20: Please think from a client's or consultant's perspective and not the "shopowner's". You may know where to find your products and how they are different, but for the average outsider it is too difficult. One can only compare two products if one reads through all the material. If one picture says more than a thousand words, imagine what one spreadsheet-form could do for you (I hope). In my perspective, potential SMB clients don't even call IBM because they heard that Domino server licensing is difficult and expensive.

1. 24  Charles Robinson http://cubert-codepoet.blogspot.com | 4/10/2008 11:52:31 AM

   @20 - It's frustrating that you don't understand why people are having problems with this. The problem is exactly as you stated: the information is spread across multiple sources. It's buried in reams of text that you have to read extremely carefully and even then it's not at all clear. Different bits are on separate parts of the site. There is absolutely, positively NO REASON I should have to click through three different pages to find out what a Domino Messaging Server Express license entitles me to.

   This goes back to the comment I made on the Quickr announcement asking for a simple to read matrix that shows what is available in each edition.

   @21 - You only needed one server that doesn't provide e-mail, partitioning or clustering. Now try to figure out how to layer Express licenses for a SMB with 200 employees, clustered mail, clustered and partitioned app servers, BES and Sametime. :-) I ended up going with Enterprise licensing. It was easier since I could buy the same license for everything and not worry whether I was in compliance.

1. 25  Ed Brill http://www.edbrill.com | 4/10/2008 12:00:58 PM

   @24 can you point to specific gaps in the FAQ that was my first link?

1. 26  Charles Robinson http://cubert-codepoet.blogspot.com | 4/10/2008 12:29:51 PM

   Ed - The information is mostly there, it's just scattered all over the place. I finally found on the PVU Licensing page that you don't have to purchase CAL's for browser access non-mail applications, and down in the FAQ section on the Express Licensing page it says you can't partition Messaging Express servers. Why does it have to be buried in the middle of paragraphs of text? Why not a clean and easy to read layout with checkboxes or some other intuitive and pleasing graphic to show features? Perhaps something like this: { Link }

   This is the second time I've read about mixing Express license, but what are the rules for how they mix? Can you layer a Collaboration Express license with a Utility Express license to get clustering and partitioning for both? What about Messaging with Utility server if you just want to use 100% web-based apps and DWA but want to cluster your mail servers?

   I challenge you to find a top-level link anywhere that takes you to anything about the Utility server, Express or not. There are two entries in the grid at the top, but you can't click it. Hint: there is a link buried in the Servers page { Link } that takes you to a special Utility Server page.

   Those are the sorts of things SMB IT Managers try to navigate and end up frustrated and annoyed by the IBM website.

1. 27  Flemming Riis  | 4/10/2008 2:20:26 PM

   @20 -I'm not really understanding the kvetching about Notes/Domino licensing comprehension.

   Links to the PVU calculator directly would be nice

   https://www-112.ibm.com/software/howtobuy/passportadvantage/valueunitcalculator/vucalc.wss

   Paying double for a Quad Core Intel based server might come as a surprise for some.

   Only allowing 2 Quad Core CPU on the Express could interresting

   And i honestly cant find anywhere how you handle servers running on vmware.

1. 28  Ben Langhinrichs http://www.GeniiSoft.com/showcase.nsf/GeniiBlog | 4/10/2008 3:12:56 PM

   Charles - I fully agree that it is probably a lot more complex when dealing with the mix you have had to deal with. I was mostly responding to the idea raised by Christopher Byrne and echoed by Stuart McIntyre that it would be clearly cheaper to use the BP Value Package. For my needs, that would be more expensive, even if it possibly met other needs I have not considered.

1. 29  JC Penedo  | 4/10/2008 3:15:17 PM

   @14, you are right, after paying Value Package for 3 years it would have been cheaper for us to buy the licenses and later on the renewals. IBM should give us the option to select software brand for $400 USD each (the 5 brands Lotus, Websphere, Data Mgt, Tivoli and Rational should add the $2,000USD for BPs that works with all the brands)

   On the other hand, Microsoft Action Pack is just $150 USD + $140 USD S&H, grand total of $290 USD. And they do provide CDs in a really nice binder. Do IBM know that ?

1. 30  Henning Heinz  | 4/10/2008 4:08:33 PM

   I do really like the idea of JC Penedo but I assume that many partners would then reduce to 2-3 options.

   IBM is aware of the Microsoft Action Pack and afaik it has already been discussed here. I think the response was that a monopolistic company with high margins can be more generous to its partners.

   I do not like the Microsoft Action Pack. I have had to do with "Microsoft Partners" that hired me to install their OS or Office Package because they couldn't. There is a lot of misuse in this area because the price is so attractive and the requirements are ridiculous.

1. 31  Erik Brooks  | 4/11/2008 6:51:26 AM

   @26 - I completely agree. This stuff is much more complex than it needs to be. A simple chart would do wonders.