[...previous excellent discussion snipped...]

I'd like to make an observation that we appear to be implicitly saying
but not stating directly.  The pricing variables we have discussed thus
far are based on:

   * CPU horsepower (tier-based),
   * Number of users supported (system user-based)

but to some extent ignoring:

   * Concurrent users of the product

It is my opinion that tier-based pricing is archaic.  If you buy Win95
for your 4Mb 386/25 [not recommended] you pay the same as the user with
the 64Mb 200Mhz Pentium Pro.  Same argument for a 25-user license of
Netware, or a 5-user server copy of Reflection.  This is fair.  This is
also *NOT* happening with MPE.  Even the "user-based" pricings are
themselves often tied to tiers.

Furthermore, MPE "user-based" pricing is system-wide.

Can't we get a 8-user COBOL license for our developers and a 256-user
license for MPE/IMAGE?

Can't I get a single-user license for Glance, since I'm the only one who
will use it?  For that matter, why must I pay to find out what my system
is doing anyway (isn't that an expected OS service?).

The "finer" points of licensing are debateable with tools such as
Glance, or a 3rd-party spooler [license for 'x' printers?], or a
disc defragmentation tool [license for 'x' Gb?], or database tools,
etc.  The more obvious "user-based per product" issues involved with
compilers, databases, etc. should be clear.

Jeff Kell <[log in to unmask]>