Post by Craig A. Berry
That's about Alpha and Itanium licencing and how it's moving closer to
how x86-64 licencing will work, but it doesn't directly address x86-64
Given how specific Stephen's statement is, he clearly has some specific
knowledge about how this is going to work on x86-64 VMS.
Maybe, or maybe he just knows what "subscription based pricing model"
means. I believe it's pretty much what Oracle did with Java.
As I'd mentioned earlier... New purchases for VSI OpenVMS I64 licenses
are now receiving VSI product PAKs with termination dates. That's a
shift to a SaaS/Subscription model.
There's no VSI service PAK(s) incorporated in the VSI product purchase,
which would have been the logical approach for non-terminating licenses
with terminating support, if that end date was to be managed for local
support-related software. Otherwise, that support-related software
continues to do whatever, and software at VSI has to filter and/or
delete or reject whatever might arrive at VSI servers. All GDPR- and
opt-in telemetry discussions aside, getting crash reports is still
useful irrespective of support, and even if there's no feedback
expected or intended. But I digress. This given the various limits of
the LMF implementation. LMF knows zilch about support licensing, so
there's no support licensing termination date. And as LMF is one of
many applications using RMS and app-maintained fields within records
and and not SQLite or ilk, adding fields can be "fun". But I digress.
My interpretation of the PAKs now being issued is that product licenses
terminate when support terminates, and that we'll be reloading VSI PAKs
for those servers periodically as support is extended or support
Some of us do have licenses for whatever VSI is going to call OpenVMS
on x86-64, but at least some of us do not know the details of those
licenses might be. But I... yeah, that, again.
Who among the readers here that haven't commented on this VSI licensing
change is interesting, too.
Pure Personal Opinion | HoffmanLabs LLC