Upgrade pricing for Snow Leopard Server?

[sibruk]

Hi,

I wondered if anybody knows what the upgrade pricing from Leopard Server to Snow Leopard Server is? I can't find it published anywhere. Surely if you own Leopard Server, they're not going to make you pay the full retail price for Snow Leopard Server?

Thanks

 

[belvdr]

Unless you qualify for the up-to-date program, you'll pay full price. That's the way it has always been.

 

[sibruk]

Woah, seriously?! No wonder nobody uses OS X Server.

 

[Tallest Skil]

Woah, seriously?! No wonder nobody uses OS X Server.

That and the fact that it's not meant for single people to be using?

Server. As in... servers. As in data centers, massive numbers of computers, entire companies.

 

[belvdr]

Fortunately, I have yet to see a data center with an Xserve in it.

 

[sibruk]

Yes, I know what a server is, and who should be using them. Good to see that the sarky people that usually frequent MacRumors are alive and well.

We are a small business. We chose Leopard Server to run our network. Now, a year on, we are going to have to pay the full price again?! That just seems ridiculous. And it certainly inspires this small business owner to look at an alternative! I don't know any other businesses that use Mac OS X Server. And suddenly I know the reason why.

 

[Tallest Skil]

We are a small business. We chose Leopard Server to run our network. Now, a year on, we are going to have to pay the full price again?! That just seems ridiculous. And it certainly inspires this small business owner to look at an alternative! I don't know any other businesses that use Mac OS X Server. And suddenly I know the reason why.

Because if people need it, they'll pay anything for it. Apple knows this, Microsoft knows this, and they profit from it.

 

[belvdr]

Depending on what you need, I'd look at CentOS or even Ubuntu. OS X Server just seems like a waste to me in the sense that there's not much R&D into the server side. They update the OS X client, then take that and update the server tools and that's it.

 

[sibruk]

Anyway, thanks for the replies. Not what I wanted to hear, but at least I know. Ubuntu server isn't really up to what we need, in that we want an easy-to-use graphical interface. And all the easy-to-enable services like iCal server. Hmm... Let down by Apple again!

 

[belvdr]

Because if people need it, they'll pay anything for it. Apple knows this, Microsoft knows this, and they profit from it.

Nobody is paying just anything for it. It has to be reasonably priced. You, as a CEO of a unregistered corp, should know this.

 

[Tallest Skil]

Nobody is paying just anything for it. It has to be reasonably priced. You, as a CEO of a unregistered corp, should know this.

So $679 for Office is reasonably priced. Right. They'll charge whatever they want because they know companies "have" to pay it.

 

[belvdr]

So $679 for Office is reasonably priced. Right. They'll charge whatever they want because they know companies "have" to pay it.

More reasonable than say $5,000. You said they'd pay anything which is simply not true.

Also, I don't know many companies that purchase Office Ultimate for every employee. That would be a dumb move, since many do not need all those programs. So, now Office Standard fits the bill at $400 retail. Any company that is serious about saving money wouldn't pay retail. You'd find a VAR and they can get you that for < $300 per license new or < $150 for an upgrade. Go with volume licensing and it is even cheaper.

For companies, having compatibility is important for B2B transactions.

 

[purlah]

I bought Leopard Server for personal use because it is the only way I can run a licensed leopard VM on my desktop, which i need to do for isolated development. This is a reasonable use case, and I don't find another $500 reasonable.

 

[merneric]

Yeah it would be nice if they applied the same generous (82.8% by my math) upgrade discount to SL Server as they do to SL client:

SL Client: 29/169 * 100 = ~17.2% = ~82.8% discount, so that
SL Server would be 499 * .172 = ~85.00 for an upgrade from Leopard Server.

I did notice that you can preorder SL Server at Amazon for 444.99 tho...so you can get a *little* bit of a break

 

[Eraserhead]

SL server looks like it adds a few more features than SL client.

 

[Tallest Skil]

More reasonable than say $5,000. You said they'd pay anything which is simply not true.

Do we know this? Companies rely on Office. What's the breaking point where they decide to change every single one of their computers to Macs instead of paying for new software?

 

[merneric]

SL server looks like it adds a few more features than SL client.

That's true. For me, iCal Server2 alone almost makes it worth the 499 price to upgrade, as I am looking VERY forward to finally being able to *effectively* share my calendars with my iPhones.

 

[belvdr]

Do we know this? Companies rely on Office. What's the breaking point where they decide to change every single one of their computers to Macs instead of paying for new software?

Companies rely on Office, but only most of the basic items are required (Word, Excel, and PowerPoint). The line is different for every company, but I haven't been associated with any company that is willing to pay any asking price for any software. I've seen products dropped due to support costs alone.

 

[Sky Blue]

The upgrade pricing is $499 for unlimited clients, unlike the usual $999 price.

 

[merneric]

The upgrade pricing is $499 for unlimited clients, unlike the usual $999 price.

That's not really an *upgrade* price--that is the new list price, as they have eliminated the 10-client (499) vs unlimited (999) pricing scheme...now there is just one 499 unlimited price, regardless of whether or not one is upgrading or buying new.

 

[foidulus]

As someone who uses both OS X servers and Linux servers

at work, I can say that they both have their benefits and drawbacks. OS X server is WONDERFUL for calendaring and Open Directory(esp. now that they worked out a lot of the bugs by the later versions of Leopard), however for most common services it isn't bad, but really isn't all that great. For tasks such as creating a file server, db server etc. then Linux is MUCH better(give me init.d over launchd any day!)

Just my 2 cents.

 

[Eraserhead]

The line is different for every company, but I haven't been associated with any company that is willing to pay any asking price for any software.

I suspect Apple doesn't really do negotiation like that - its not really how they roll. Obviously though if you're spending enough money you can often negotiate on the price.

 

[xparaparafreakx]

Yes, I know what a server is, and who should be using them. Good to see that the sarky people that usually frequent MacRumors are alive and well.

We are a small business. We chose Leopard Server to run our network. Now, a year on, we are going to have to pay the full price again?! That just seems ridiculous. And it certainly inspires this small business owner to look at an alternative! I don't know any other businesses that use Mac OS X Server. And suddenly I know the reason why.

Why are you upgrading? To follow the upgrade train and be cool like everyone?

Worry about what applications work when your clients install 10.6 behind your back and ask for your help later.

Also, $500 for server? What about the cost for client version upgrades in your small business.

 

[Bobacus]

Also, after working with Microsoft Server product for awhile, I've noticed that there is no upgrade version of the server software, only OEM and Retail versions. Plus Cal's need to be purchased for Microsoft Server, so long story short, OS X Server is actually cheaper than Windows Server, unless your going w/ web server, but that really doesn't count.

 

[sibruk]

Why are you upgrading? To follow the upgrade train and be cool like everyone?

Because everyone has been eyeing up features like push email and a proper calendaring server since Snow Leopard Server was announced. We all use iPhones here, so it has been frustrating to see non-Apple-based technologies get preference in the iPhone user experience (Exchange) while we have gone the 100%-Apple route and are left in the doldrums.

Full price upgrade to Snow Leopard Server for what is essentially bug fixes, or features that should have been part of Leopard Server, is a bit of a nasty sting.

Plus, it just makes sense for us to be running the latest releases if possible.

Also, $500 for server? What about the cost for client version upgrades in your small business.

$29/client - that's not going to break the bank! Neither will $500 for server honestly, but it really doesn't sit well to be having to pay full price for something we already own a legitimate licence to, but which we want to move to the latest release for bug fixes and a handful of enhancements.