The Lounge is rated PG. If you're about to post something you wouldn't want your
kid sister to read then don't post it. No flame wars, no abusive conduct, no programming
questions and please don't post ads.
They sell data (associating IP addresses with physical locations). Which you then store in your own database. If you backup your database, you must purchase an extra license. If you mirror your server, you must purchase yet another license. If you do database sharding for your databases in the cloud, each instance requires its own license.
This is the worst licensing strategy I've seen in a while.
But you are using multiple copies of the data which could be potentially used to increase the performance of your system across data centres based on regions. doesn't seem that odd. Probably cheaper than selling a license for unlimited use, as you can pay for what you need.
And what about backups? Why should I be charged more if I backup the data? And if I create geographically redundant backups, why should I be charged even more? It's not actually being used; it's just being protected.
They sell data (associating IP addresses with physical locations). Which you then store in your own database. If you backup your database, you must purchase an extra license. If you mirror your server, you must purchase yet another license. If you do database sharding for your databases in the cloud, each instance requires its own license
Excluding the back up part do you have an example of another commercial persistence store solution that doesn't require that in at least some production scenarios?
Yeah, when you give them money they let you download a ZIP file, which contains a CSV of data. You can then do your own work to import that into whatever database you want (your own database that they have no part in).
I suspect they are simply dealing with the issue of data copying in the easiest way possible
I suspect they are gouging companies of as much money as possible.
I started following astronaut Chris Hadfield on Facebook the other day. He had posted a photo of the NE of Scotland with Aberdeen central in the photo and not a cloud in the sky. He took it on the International Space Station. Since following he has been posting some amazing shots from all over the world.
Damn them. We were watching the regional news on Auntie this evening. Mrs. Wife asked me what the temps were doing tomorrow. I really didn't notice them. She came into the lounge to look at the TV and she commented that I wouldn't have noticed because I was too busy looking at the presenter's boobs. This was especially true when the presenter turned side-on to point at the developing weather front. Mrs. Wife was right; the local presenters have rather big ones and you can easily see if it's cold in the studio or not. If the presenters fell over they'd rock themselves to sleep. Thinking about it, I don't think any of Auntie's presenters are selected because their wotsits are small.
If there is one thing more dangerous than getting between a bear and her cubs it's getting between my wife and her chocolate.
I was watching one of the American News channels on Sky a few weeks ago (watching the updates about the snow storms), and the weather girl was wearing thigh length boots and short skirt. Must admit, couldn't tell you what the forecast was either!
I like the idea of the IE: You get the PC, all basic thingies are installed yet.
But what avoids Microsoft from just saying "Yeah, our user can select which browser he wants to have installed by default during the installation process."?
Why not go some more steps further? Let the customer order the OS from an online store, with all the preferences preconfigured and he can write down which software he wants to have installed at all with all the SW configurations possible?
And he can get the SW for a special low "Ordered with windows"-price.