Steve Dirickson b894 WestWin <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>With respect to the original posting: actually, I'd consider the
>"user-based" licensing that Jim "discovered" to be the most fair variant
>of that idea; you pay for the actual number of real-live right-now
>simultaneous users. Not "potential" users, not "recognized" users, but
>immediate, in-your-face users.

I totally agree with Steve.  I'll go further and say that I think that the
conventional tiered pricing is a major stumbling-block in the renaissance
of the HP3000.  Having an exorbitant price for a piece of software because
it runs on a big machine, even though only two or three people use it,
particularly if this is repeated for several pieces of software, is a good
way for HP to lose a hardware sale.  PC software shared on a server is
usually priced on a user basis and will almost have a signifincant pricing
advantage over tier pricing (left over from the old mainframe days).  I
think that HP should flex its muscles and pressure software vendors into
pricing on a user basis rather than a tier basis (where reasonable, of
course).



John D. Alleyn-Day
Alleyn-Day International
408-286-6421   408-286-6474 (Fax)
[log in to unmask]       http://www.Alleyn-Day.com