From: John Cuccia 

You have to count CALs, because users have to have them to legally access
the db server.  I believe that a single user CAL is allowed to talk to as
many servers as there are, but you need to account for their cost when
doing a comparison.

The OS is a additional cost, separate from the CAL and should be the same
in either case, so doesn't need to be included.


On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 08:46:10 -0700, Ellen K.
 wrote:

>I don't think you should count the CALs.  Because typically you'll have
>multiple servers and the users talk to all of them.  And if we're
>comparing SQL Server vs Oracle, anyway the O/S shouldn't be counted...
>if you go with Oracle you still have to pay for your O/S.  Oracle
>Enterprise on the per-user license is $800 per user.
>
>On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 09:27:32 -0500, John Cuccia 
>wrote in message :
>
>>On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 09:22:38 -0400, "Robert Comer"
>> wrote:
>>
>>>> As for per-user, I can't imagine going per-user on a production
>>>> database, per-CPU gets cheaper at a pretty low number of users.
>>>
>>>Just what is that pretty low number of users?
>>
>>Looks like just under 100, based on this:
>>http://www.microsoft.com/sql/howtobuy/default.asp
>>
>>Enterprise is $19128 per processor.
>>
>>Per server + user CAL price is $6382 + $146/user, so
>>
>>(19128 - 6382)/146 = 87

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5