Another point to made along those lines is that IBM QUICKLY shifted the
licensing model for the 515/525 models to a concurrent setup (rather than
the original 'named' concept). IBM should not treat the licensing model
for programming seats differently.
Sent by: Midrange Systems Technical
03/12/2008 11:50 Subject
AM Re: Elimination of PDM/SEU in favor
Please respond to
Walden H. Leverich wrote:
My understanding is the new pricing model is _named_ user, not
concurrent user. So if I have a day operator, a night operator, a
weekend operator, and someone that covers when someone is out sick I
need 4 licenses, not one. Am I incorrect?
Named users vs. concurrent users is a big issue. I've suggested on
several occasions in my articles and on this list that people sit down
and figure out the ramifications to their companies and really hammer
IBM with their concerns. I know that at least one person at IBM is
going to say that the operators can just sign on with the same user
profile, but that sort of answer isn't going to fly in heavily Sarboxed
The last I heard, named is the way IBM is going. Now is the time to
make noise about it.
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
Scanned by IBM Email Security Management Services powered by MessageLabs.
For more information please visit http://www.ers.ibm.com
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.