Support licensing structure update
-
@ddbolt I've never understood the need for backup support. For configuration, performance enhancement or some specific needs, it's ok, but for backup it makes no sense. It only serves as an excuse like, "We paid for it but they didn't make it either."
-
@dariosplit if your system does not backup correctly your customers VMs AND your customers would be ransomwered you instantly understood the value of backup support, like any other support that covers any critical part of your infrastructure.
-
I'm out, I'm afraid. With the new pricing structure we're looking at a 550% price increase over last year. I understand that everything's going up in price but there is no possible way I can justify that level.
-
Sorry to see you go, but the claim of a 550% price increase is simply incorrect. Previously, you had only XOA Starter, which provided basic access to XO but no support for your XCP-ng hosts.
If you donāt want to pay for XCP-ng support, you still have the option to use Xen Orchestra from the sources, effectively bringing your cost down to zero.
Thereās no realistic scenario where both XOA and XCP-ng support could be offered at an equivalent price than XOA Starter. Providing security updates, new features, and continuous improvements for both platforms requires significant effort and resources. Ensuring sustainability while maintaining high-quality software and support is crucialānot just for us, but for the entire community.
That said, weāve introduced Essential plans specifically for smaller infrastructures, offering great value for up to three hosts. This provides a cost-effective solution while still benefiting from our ongoing development and support.
-
@nim81 said in Price Increases:
I'm out, I'm afraid. With the new pricing structure we're looking at a 550% price increase over last year. I understand that everything's going up in price but there is no possible way I can justify that level.
Just use XO from Source, or https://github.com/Jarli01/xenorchestra_installer or ronivoy's script.
Obviously you're not able to afford the product and support, yet you feel as if you should be given the product for free. Which in that case, build it yourself or use a community provided solution to getting the solution for free.
-
@olivierlambert I appreciate you taking the time to respond. Maybe I have misunderstood the pricing, but from what I can see the new Essentials package is limited to 3 hosts whereas the old ones had no limit. To use the 5 hosts I currently have, I'd be needing the Pro package at $1000 per host, no? Previously I could use the Starter package at $910 with unlimited hosts.
I by no means expect to be given the product for free, but to me it feels like I'm now being forced to buy additional support that I didn't want or need; to my mind I don't think I've ever even put a single support ticket in
-
@nim81 said in Support licensing structure update:
to my mind I don't think I've ever even put a single support ticket in
Then you're a perfect candidate for the source edition, no?
-
@DustinB Yes, I guess I am sadly. I used the source edition for quite a while in the past, but moved to the paid version of XOA a couple of years ago because I had a bit more budget and wanted to support a great product, but there's no way I can possibly justify the levels of increase being asked here.
-
@nim81 said in Support licensing structure update:
@olivierlambert I appreciate you taking the time to respond. Maybe I have misunderstood the pricing, but from what I can see the new Essentials package is limited to 3 hosts whereas the old ones had no limit. To use the 5 hosts I currently have, I'd be needing the Pro package at $1000 per host, no? Previously I could use the Starter package at $910 with unlimited hosts.
I by no means expect to be given the product for free, but to me it feels like I'm now being forced to buy additional support that I didn't want or need; to my mind I don't think I've ever even put a single support ticket in
I think there is a big misunderstanding. Before our bundle, you had:
- XOA pricing (no support for XCP-ng, just tested/turnkey/stable XOA) with the 3 tiers
- XCP-ng pricing ($600 per host per year for standard, ie 1x business day, $1200 for Enterprise)
So you just decided to not have any support for XCP-ng in the past. XOA support never ever included XCP-ng support. Never.
If you took the support for XCP-ng, it would have cost you at least $3000 just for XCP-ng standard ($6000 with XCP-ng Enterprise) and then you needed to add XOA Starter. So suddenly, comparing apples to apples makes more sense
If you think you don't need actual XCP-ng support, it means the day you have an issue with XCP-ng, you are on your own. It's cool to see you didn't in the past, and I hope you will never have in the future. But who knows? Also, paying for support is far more than just this, it's also supporting the project, which isn't free to handle, now costing around 3 to 4 millions per year to maintain both XO and XCP-ng. So it's a way to be sure the lights will be always on.
There's many options to keep it cheaper, like organizing a pool with 3 hosts and get an Essential plan for example (and not supporting the 2 extra hosts in another pool for example)
-
@nim81 said in Support licensing structure update:
but there's no way I can possibly justify the levels of increase being asked here.
As Olivier has said, your comparing paying for XOA with no support, to XOA and XCP-ng supported in a package deal. I don't know that the Vates team has specifically cancelled the XOA only package, but that is a bit germane to the conversation.
Just use XO from Source, or one of the scripts and move on with your day. If your business grows you can always sign up for support again.
