Comments on: The WebADF Licensing Issue Revisited http://www.spatiallyadjusted.com/2007/03/23/the-webadf-licensing-issue-revisited/ Geospatial Technology, Web Mapping and Spatial Services Thu, 09 Sep 2010 08:01:59 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: anote2chris http://www.spatiallyadjusted.com/2007/03/23/the-webadf-licensing-issue-revisited/#comment-12867 anote2chris Thu, 12 Apr 2007 21:50:46 +0000 http://www.spatiallyadjusted.com/2007/03/23/the-webadf-licensing-issue-revisited/#comment-12867 <p>ESRI,</p> <p>Don't license in the web-tier where you have no business.</p> <p>Don't charge for multi-core procs. That's absurd! It's just a processor family upgrade. Like moving from the p3 to the p4. You didn't charge us for that, why are you charging a premium for processing now? Smells like a marketing goofball got a hold of that one!!! Someone needs to educate them and set the price right.</p> <p>Finally, you're heading down a road that will be certain doom to your company. Everyone else is practically giving their software away, while you are jacking up the price. Doesn't make sense. You are swimming in deep waters here with no hope for rescue if you push your 'base' to find other, cheaper solutions for their webGIS needs. I could go on about this because it's such a big mistake, but I'll just let what I’ve said so far simmer a while.</p> ESRI,

Don’t license in the web-tier where you have no business.

Don’t charge for multi-core procs. That’s absurd! It’s just a processor family upgrade. Like moving from the p3 to the p4. You didn’t charge us for that, why are you charging a premium for processing now? Smells like a marketing goofball got a hold of that one!!! Someone needs to educate them and set the price right.

Finally, you’re heading down a road that will be certain doom to your company. Everyone else is practically giving their software away, while you are jacking up the price. Doesn’t make sense. You are swimming in deep waters here with no hope for rescue if you push your ‘base’ to find other, cheaper solutions for their webGIS needs. I could go on about this because it’s such a big mistake, but I’ll just let what I’ve said so far simmer a while.

]]> By: nolove http://www.spatiallyadjusted.com/2007/03/23/the-webadf-licensing-issue-revisited/#comment-12613 nolove Wed, 28 Mar 2007 15:40:02 +0000 http://www.spatiallyadjusted.com/2007/03/23/the-webadf-licensing-issue-revisited/#comment-12613 <p>I would opt for the Ferrari. No Map Cache or optimized styles necessary.</p> I would opt for the Ferrari. No Map Cache or optimized styles necessary.

]]> By: isAGSworthAFerrari? http://www.spatiallyadjusted.com/2007/03/23/the-webadf-licensing-issue-revisited/#comment-12607 isAGSworthAFerrari? Wed, 28 Mar 2007 07:17:24 +0000 http://www.spatiallyadjusted.com/2007/03/23/the-webadf-licensing-issue-revisited/#comment-12607 <p>Just imagine for a moment that in some european countries, the prices for ESRI licenses is 3x higher (sic!) than in the US.</p> <p>That doesn't make things easier! An AGS Ent. Adv. is not the price of a normal sports car, but of a Ferrari over here...</p> Just imagine for a moment that in some european countries, the prices for ESRI licenses is 3x higher (sic!) than in the US.

That doesn’t make things easier!
An AGS Ent. Adv. is not the price of a normal sports car, but of a Ferrari over here…

]]> By: jxn http://www.spatiallyadjusted.com/2007/03/23/the-webadf-licensing-issue-revisited/#comment-12598 jxn Tue, 27 Mar 2007 22:32:33 +0000 http://www.spatiallyadjusted.com/2007/03/23/the-webadf-licensing-issue-revisited/#comment-12598 <p>"large clients who think AGS is TOO INEXPENSIVE"</p> <p>A FOOL AND HIS MONEY ARE SOON PARTED!!!!</p> “large clients who think AGS is TOO INEXPENSIVE”

A FOOL AND HIS MONEY ARE SOON PARTED!!!!

]]> By: jeff http://www.spatiallyadjusted.com/2007/03/23/the-webadf-licensing-issue-revisited/#comment-12569 jeff Sat, 24 Mar 2007 21:25:16 +0000 http://www.spatiallyadjusted.com/2007/03/23/the-webadf-licensing-issue-revisited/#comment-12569 <p>ESRI got the message. They said at the Dev Summit closing session that it was one of the feedbacks they got from the users and that they are going to reconsider the issue of the ADF licensing.</p> <p>There were lots of issues discussed at the closing session.</p> <p>Unfortunately you were already gone so you could not write about it ... Steve has some words about it: http://thesteve0.wordpress.com/2007/03/23/final-day-and-still-in-palm-springs/</p> ESRI got the message. They said at the Dev Summit closing session that it was one of the feedbacks they got from the users and that they are going to reconsider the issue of the ADF licensing.

There were lots of issues discussed at the closing session.

Unfortunately you were already gone so you could not write about it … Steve has some words about it: http://thesteve0.wordpress.com/2007/03/23/final-day-and-still-in-palm-springs/

]]> By: Bill Dollins http://www.spatiallyadjusted.com/2007/03/23/the-webadf-licensing-issue-revisited/#comment-12568 Bill Dollins Sat, 24 Mar 2007 15:54:40 +0000 http://www.spatiallyadjusted.com/2007/03/23/the-webadf-licensing-issue-revisited/#comment-12568 <p>Okay, I own a business. I don't get the "too inexpensive" comment. Large or small, I don't know any business that prefers software to be more expensive (unless it's the vendor). If you're the Federal government, maybe it makes sense in that La-La-Land "gotta burn my budget" sort of way.</p> <p>In general, this new approach to licensing is shaky but this ADF thing really sticks in my craw. I wonder how ESRI would feel if Microsoft started licensing the .NET framework separately.</p> Okay, I own a business. I don’t get the “too inexpensive” comment. Large or small, I don’t know any business that prefers software to be more expensive (unless it’s the vendor). If you’re the Federal government, maybe it makes sense in that La-La-Land “gotta burn my budget” sort of way.

In general, this new approach to licensing is shaky but this ADF thing really sticks in my craw. I wonder how ESRI would feel if Microsoft started licensing the .NET framework separately.

]]> By: .NET SIG Attendee http://www.spatiallyadjusted.com/2007/03/23/the-webadf-licensing-issue-revisited/#comment-12566 .NET SIG Attendee Sat, 24 Mar 2007 04:21:07 +0000 http://www.spatiallyadjusted.com/2007/03/23/the-webadf-licensing-issue-revisited/#comment-12566 <p>Or as was mentioned at the .NET SIG, sell the Web ADF as a separate product.</p> Or as was mentioned at the .NET SIG, sell the Web ADF as a separate product.

]]> By: TedC http://www.spatiallyadjusted.com/2007/03/23/the-webadf-licensing-issue-revisited/#comment-12565 TedC Sat, 24 Mar 2007 01:46:42 +0000 http://www.spatiallyadjusted.com/2007/03/23/the-webadf-licensing-issue-revisited/#comment-12565 <p>We, the little users, are the Long Tail when it comes to License purchases, so you bring up a good point in that if we all complain collectively maybe something will happen to give us more flexibility in pushing out more applications, while limiting the price of those applications.</p> We, the little users, are the Long Tail when it comes to License purchases, so you bring up a good point in that if we all complain collectively maybe something will happen to give us more flexibility in pushing out more applications, while limiting the price of those applications.

]]> By: NoLove http://www.spatiallyadjusted.com/2007/03/23/the-webadf-licensing-issue-revisited/#comment-12564 NoLove Fri, 23 Mar 2007 22:12:52 +0000 http://www.spatiallyadjusted.com/2007/03/23/the-webadf-licensing-issue-revisited/#comment-12564 <p>PLEASE ESRI give your users who made you a break. We are not all Fortune 500 companies.</p> PLEASE ESRI give your users who made you a break. We are not all Fortune 500 companies.

]]> By: Lefty http://www.spatiallyadjusted.com/2007/03/23/the-webadf-licensing-issue-revisited/#comment-12561 Lefty Fri, 23 Mar 2007 21:21:52 +0000 http://www.spatiallyadjusted.com/2007/03/23/the-webadf-licensing-issue-revisited/#comment-12561 <p>Don't forget James, as you pointed out before....</p> <p>Just serve up WMS and use Open Layers. Easy and simple....</p> Don’t forget James, as you pointed out before….

Just serve up WMS and use Open Layers. Easy and simple….

]]>