CloudatCost Server Vanished
-
@Dashrender said:
Scott, considering the other thread, what type of windows license do you need to run a windows server in C@C?
There is none that lets you.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
Scott, considering the other thread, what type of windows license do you need to run a windows server in C@C?
There is none that lets you.
So for Cloud based Windows servers, you're only option is to rent the OS from the Cloud provider? like Rackspace $10/month/machine?
-
azure
-
Here's more info on that type of licencing. http://bit.ly/1FxIRTP
-
@Dashrender said:
So for Cloud based Windows servers, you're only option is to rent the OS from the Cloud provider? like Rackspace $10/month/machine?
Correct. The price is baked in so just compare someone's CentOS to Windows offerings of the same specs to see what the price difference is. It's the only licensing model for this sort of thing.
Just like how Windows 8 on a VM requires VDI. Special cases means special licensing from MS.
Same with Red Hat. If you want RHEL, you need it through the cloud provider, you can't bring your own. Only the free, open source OSes transparently work in a cloud setting. The cloud is making open source so much easier to use.
-
@Hubtech said:
azure
?
-
@scottalanmiller said:
Same with Red Hat. If you want RHEL, you need it through the cloud provider, you can't bring your own. Only the free, open source OSes transparently work in a cloud setting. The cloud is making open source so much easier to use.
It is?
-
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Same with Red Hat. If you want RHEL, you need it through the cloud provider, you can't bring your own. Only the free, open source OSes transparently work in a cloud setting. The cloud is making open source so much easier to use.
It is?
Yep. And Red Hat licensing is actually worse than Windows Server.
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
Yep. And Red Hat licensing is actually worse than Windows Server.
Not really, it comes with awesome support. Windows you just pay to have the right to be unsupported.
-
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Same with Red Hat. If you want RHEL, you need it through the cloud provider, you can't bring your own. Only the free, open source OSes transparently work in a cloud setting. The cloud is making open source so much easier to use.
It is?
Yes, global workloads are shifting to open source at an unbelievable pace. The cloud is the primary driver. Licensing for things like Windows is so much more dramatic to today's businesses than it used to be.
-
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Same with Red Hat. If you want RHEL, you need it through the cloud provider, you can't bring your own. Only the free, open source OSes transparently work in a cloud setting. The cloud is making open source so much easier to use.
It is?
Would, keeping open source as easy as it always was but making everything else so much harder, make more sense?
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
Yep. And Red Hat licensing is actually worse than Windows Server.
Not really, it comes with awesome support. Windows you just pay to have the right to be unsupported.
lol. True. The right to be unsupported.
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
Yep. And Red Hat licensing is actually worse than Windows Server.
Not really, it comes with awesome support. Windows you just pay to have the right to be unsupported.
lol. True. The right to be unsupported.
The Red Hat equivalent to Windows is...... CentOS. Microsoft doesn't even have a RHEL equivalent offering.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Same with Red Hat. If you want RHEL, you need it through the cloud provider, you can't bring your own. Only the free, open source OSes transparently work in a cloud setting. The cloud is making open source so much easier to use.
It is?
Yes, global workloads are shifting to open source at an unbelievable pace. The cloud is the primary driver. Licensing for things like Windows is so much more dramatic to today's businesses than it used to be.
There's big pushes to get linux to a centrally controllable system much like group policy even for local deplyoments. FreeIPA has the authentication part down but is suppose to be working on the rest. http://www.freeipa.org/page/Main_Page
Samaba 4 was suppose to be into this as well.
-
Just use Chef or whatever.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
Just use Chef or whatever.
Not really the same thing. Great for cloud and servers. Not good for end users machines.
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Just use Chef or whatever.
Not really the same thing. Great for cloud and servers. Not good for end users machines.
Is that really true? What aspect of it do you find really that different than GPO? I can do pretty similar things with both. Not identical, obviously.
-
You're basically having to program everything. It's more like a poorly implemented SCCM than it is group policy. If you want the GUI with Puppet it will cost you quiet a bit.
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
You're basically having to program everything. It's more like a poorly implemented SCCM than it is group policy. If you want the GUI with Puppet it will cost you quiet a bit.
True, but often programming things makes things easier in the long run. And there are tons of recipes already available. So you can do a lot with Chef without writing your own stuff.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Same with Red Hat. If you want RHEL, you need it through the cloud provider, you can't bring your own. Only the free, open source OSes transparently work in a cloud setting. The cloud is making open source so much easier to use.
It is?
Would, keeping open source as easy as it always was but making everything else so much harder, make more sense?
I suppose, MS is definitely falling behind. The old days of customers having one, two or even three servers are pretty much over. Anyone, especially SMBs can easily have 3+ servers all on a single host. They definitely need to rework the pricing structure, simplifying it for cloud use as well.
