Licensing based on installed memory.

[Hugo]

I read recently of 3tera and how they license on the basis of memory and not just processor count. I am interested in hearing what others think of this. If one is creating a product that leverages massive amounts of memory as well as multiple CPUs, then it strikes me as a valid way to license.

Our product (which is under wraps just now) supports the development of applications that need to manipulate very large data stores in-memory, and thus is a way to leverage the power of massive 64-bit address spaces and very large physical memory.

We are considering licensing based upon number of processors supported and max physical memory supported.

Thus to utilize all CPUs and memory in a 4 processor (not core) box with 128GB we will charge some fee. If customer later adds more processors or memory, product will still operate correctly but will not let apps built with product to "see" or exploit, these extra resources, unless license is upgraded.

Do others here have a view on this approach?

Hugo

[Jason Cohen - blog.asmartbear.com]

If you're selling to customers who are used to being charged this way (e.g. Mainframe users), then it's OK. Otherwise it sounds like a bad idea.

Many reasons. For example, people like knowing exactly how much something is going to cost so they can budget it. Something that flexes according to values they probably can't predict over the next 24 months isn't good.

If your competitors do it this way, that makes it much easier. However even so, wouldn't it be an advantage to offer a different sort of plan? Some people might pick you because of it!

[Hugo]

Hi Jason

Well the product does offer compelling features to larger organizations, for example customers that are prepared to buy an eight hex-core processor (total of 48 cores) machine with 512GB of memory in order to process and update vast in-memory data stores (trading systems, securities, options etc) are clearly prepared to throw cash at their problem.

It seems imprudent to not try and leverage this as a revenue generating opportunity.

Small systems, a few processors, 16 GB of memory etc, will of course end up paying far less.

Right now, on paper, I'm equating 32GB of memory with a distinct processor package and pricing this the same (depending upon the actual edition).

Microsoft (and others) do this for their SQL Server 2008 Processor License as I'm sure you know.

The product will install on hardware of any sophistication, but internally (inside the product's own kernel layer) the product will not leverage all memory or all processors but only the number licensed.

Can you see my point?

Does this sound reasomable or indefensible?

Thanks

Hugo