Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!ginosko!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!lll-winken!ames!pacbell!pbseps!perl
From: perl@pbseps.UUCP (Richard Perlman)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.sequent
Subject: Re: Dynix licensing
Keywords: license, user-limits
Message-ID: <633@pbseps.UUCP>
Date: 1 Oct 89 01:52:53 GMT
References: <6006@wolfen.cc.uow.oz>
Reply-To: perl@pbseps.PacBell.COM (Richard Perlman)
Organization: Pacific Bell Separations, San Francisco, CA
Lines: 27

In article <6006@wolfen.cc.uow.oz> steve@wolfen.cc.uow.oz (Steve Cliffe) writes:
>Can someone please tell me why Sequent persists with the user-limit concept
>
>Pyramid dropped this quite a while ago and our Sun's have no such 
>limit...

I was told by Sequent that the user limit is part of the AT&T
license agreement (I have not independantly verified this).  We
currently have a 32 user license, we can upgrade to 64 users or
unlimited. I do not know why some other vendors do not use such 
a limit, but here is one possible way they could avoid it:

	Simply include a license sized appropiately to the
	machines maximum capacity.  A large system like a Pyramid
	might simply charge you for the max license on purchase.
	A small system like the SUN 386i may include a license
	that it would be impractical to  exceed based on system
	load/power.

If you want more users on your Sequent, just buy a license for
more users!  

I'd rather pay for what I need and know what I got.

-- 
Richard Perlman * perl@pbseps.pacbell.com || {ames,sun,att}!pacbell!pbseps!perl
180 New Montgomery St. rm 602,   San Francisco, CA  94105  |*|  1(415) 545-0233