<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: What&#8217;s the use of Flex Data Services Express?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://flexblog.faratasystems.com/2007/02/08/whats-the-use-of-flex-data-services-express/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://flexblog.faratasystems.com/2007/02/08/whats-the-use-of-flex-data-services-express</link>
	<description>A blog about our experience with Adobe Flex</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2012 19:52:28 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Yakov</title>
		<link>http://flexblog.faratasystems.com/2007/02/08/whats-the-use-of-flex-data-services-express/comment-page-1#comment-3706</link>
		<dc:creator>Yakov</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Feb 2007 18:32:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://flexblog.faratasystems.com/?p=157#comment-3706</guid>
		<description>Adobe is making a serious mistake by not providing any options between free FDS Express and $6K per CPU for 100 concurrent users. Why are they eliminating a huge number of potential businesses having anywhere between 2 and 100 concurrent users?
100 concurrent users at $6K, translates into $60 per each concurrent user. This could be the answer - do not lower the price, but create more fine-grained pricing, for example  a license say for 7 concurrent users will cost $7*60=$420 per CPU. Many smaller businesses would easily pay $840 for licensing of each two-CPU server. If my business goes well, let me quickly upgrade the FDS license from 7 to 10 concurrent users, and so on.  

 </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Adobe is making a serious mistake by not providing any options between free FDS Express and $6K per CPU for 100 concurrent users. Why are they eliminating a huge number of potential businesses having anywhere between 2 and 100 concurrent users?<br />
100 concurrent users at $6K, translates into $60 per each concurrent user. This could be the answer &#8211; do not lower the price, but create more fine-grained pricing, for example  a license say for 7 concurrent users will cost $7*60=$420 per CPU. Many smaller businesses would easily pay $840 for licensing of each two-CPU server. If my business goes well, let me quickly upgrade the FDS license from 7 to 10 concurrent users, and so on.  </p>
<p> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anatole Tartakovsky</title>
		<link>http://flexblog.faratasystems.com/2007/02/08/whats-the-use-of-flex-data-services-express/comment-page-1#comment-3099</link>
		<dc:creator>Anatole Tartakovsky</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Feb 2007 23:48:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://flexblog.faratasystems.com/?p=157#comment-3099</guid>
		<description>Jeff, 
   ISPs do not get involved with the Java boxes - you are pretty much on your own in terms of software setup and configuration. However, most of the ISPs that our clients are running (and departamental &quot;proof of copncept&quot; servers fall in the same category) have multi-cpu boxes - even if Java server is just a part of overall solution. 

   Is it legal to use process affinity t bind instance of Java server to 1 CPU? Other CPUs will be bound to DB/Web tasks only.
   
   Another cases are virtual hosts that use VMWare type of software to host multiple apps on multicore server. Those servers can be bound to variable number of CPUs - can it be considered legal for &quot;Express&quot;  if it is bound to 1 CPU only?

Thank you,
Anatole</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jeff,<br />
   ISPs do not get involved with the Java boxes &#8211; you are pretty much on your own in terms of software setup and configuration. However, most of the ISPs that our clients are running (and departamental &#8220;proof of copncept&#8221; servers fall in the same category) have multi-cpu boxes &#8211; even if Java server is just a part of overall solution. </p>
<p>   Is it legal to use process affinity t bind instance of Java server to 1 CPU? Other CPUs will be bound to DB/Web tasks only.</p>
<p>   Another cases are virtual hosts that use VMWare type of software to host multiple apps on multicore server. Those servers can be bound to variable number of CPUs &#8211; can it be considered legal for &#8220;Express&#8221;  if it is bound to 1 CPU only?</p>
<p>Thank you,<br />
Anatole</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Yakov</title>
		<link>http://flexblog.faratasystems.com/2007/02/08/whats-the-use-of-flex-data-services-express/comment-page-1#comment-3066</link>
		<dc:creator>Yakov</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Feb 2007 21:14:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://flexblog.faratasystems.com/?p=157#comment-3066</guid>
		<description>Richard, I gave a pretty simple example of a community Web site that does not have an easy way to be converted into the use of FDS Express. IMHO, this is an obstacle for &quot;getting the message out&quot; about this technology. If this was meant as a developers edition, it should be named so. For example, there is a free license for WebLogic applicatoin server Developers editions. It&#039;s clear.

I&#039;ve heard on some of the Adobe presentations (do not remember which one) that FDS Express is suitable for small community sites. If this is still the case, there should be an easy way to use it with any ISP without asking for server virtualization. May be it would be just easier to restrict Express edition to 5 concurrent connections (WebLogic Dev Edition works this way) rather than to a single CPU?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Richard, I gave a pretty simple example of a community Web site that does not have an easy way to be converted into the use of FDS Express. IMHO, this is an obstacle for &#8220;getting the message out&#8221; about this technology. If this was meant as a developers edition, it should be named so. For example, there is a free license for WebLogic applicatoin server Developers editions. It&#8217;s clear.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve heard on some of the Adobe presentations (do not remember which one) that FDS Express is suitable for small community sites. If this is still the case, there should be an easy way to use it with any ISP without asking for server virtualization. May be it would be just easier to restrict Express edition to 5 concurrent connections (WebLogic Dev Edition works this way) rather than to a single CPU?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeff Whatcott</title>
		<link>http://flexblog.faratasystems.com/2007/02/08/whats-the-use-of-flex-data-services-express/comment-page-1#comment-3065</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeff Whatcott</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Feb 2007 20:46:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://flexblog.faratasystems.com/?p=157#comment-3065</guid>
		<description>Hi.  We don&#039;t license by the core today, so Core 2 DUO CPUs are legal for Express.   We&#039;re interested in talking to hosting companies about hosting Flex Data Services in a way that would be low cost for developers, consistent with the goals of the Express edition.  If you are aware of an ISP that has expressed interest, please put is in contact with them. 

Jeff Whatcott
Adobe</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi.  We don&#8217;t license by the core today, so Core 2 DUO CPUs are legal for Express.   We&#8217;re interested in talking to hosting companies about hosting Flex Data Services in a way that would be low cost for developers, consistent with the goals of the Express edition.  If you are aware of an ISP that has expressed interest, please put is in contact with them. </p>
<p>Jeff Whatcott<br />
Adobe</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Richard Leggett</title>
		<link>http://flexblog.faratasystems.com/2007/02/08/whats-the-use-of-flex-data-services-express/comment-page-1#comment-3064</link>
		<dc:creator>Richard Leggett</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Feb 2007 20:40:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://flexblog.faratasystems.com/?p=157#comment-3064</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s probably easier to think of it as a &quot;developer edition&quot;, just as we had with several Macromedia products, great for developers that are running a local server, or small teams for initial development before going to a staging or production server. I guess the name is a little confusing in that respect. Technically if you are running on an ISP using a virtual server (e.g. media temple, dreamhost etc) you still only have access to 1 CPU even though the hardware underneath is using multiple CPUs for hosting the multiple virtual servers, or is this a different example?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s probably easier to think of it as a &#8220;developer edition&#8221;, just as we had with several Macromedia products, great for developers that are running a local server, or small teams for initial development before going to a staging or production server. I guess the name is a little confusing in that respect. Technically if you are running on an ISP using a virtual server (e.g. media temple, dreamhost etc) you still only have access to 1 CPU even though the hardware underneath is using multiple CPUs for hosting the multiple virtual servers, or is this a different example?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

