On Mon, 10 Dec 2001 10:53:42 -0500 Ann Smith said: > IBM has 'engine' based pricing for z/VM and LINUX/390 support >contracts also appear to be engine based. VIF is a being dropped. Now >that it is clear you need z/VM to run multiple LINUX/390 guests, people >need products to backup that z/VM. The Sterling contracts for VMBACKUP >and VMTAPE I think were MIP based. What has CA done as far as special >pricing for LPAR's running LINUX/390 under z/VM? A z/900 engine might be >250 MIPS and old pricing schemes would make the CA products cost too >high. The need for z/VM provides CA with an opportunity to market their >well established VM backup products to new customers so long as the >price is kept reasonable. And not all of the customers may be new. For >shops with mainframes in house you get the most bang for your buck by >putting LINUX/390 on bigger IFL engines. Does CA have any special >pricing options for VMBACKUP and VMTAPE for LPAR's running LINUX/390 >under z./VM?
>From what I have seen, CA's pricing of products is crazy. I have VM/Backup and fortunately have a perpetual license for the product and was paying support fees based on the Sterlings MIPS based pricing. This year, when the support contract was due for renewal, after 6 months of talking with different people at CA, I got slaped with a yearly maintenance fee that was over 4 times what I was paying before. To add to that, CA claims that my 2003-115 which is a model group 35 machine based on IBM and every one else, is rated as a model group 40 by CA. Nobody at CA was willing to elaborate on how they get away with this. Perhaps someone on the list that works for CA can do so now!!! It is sad that the great products developed by great people at Sterling must suffer to poor marketing which tarnishes their name.
