[DRBD-user] Isn't the support contract rather expensive?

Maurice Volaski mvolaski at aecom.yu.edu
Fri Aug 19 22:18:42 CEST 2005

Note: "permalinks" may not be as permanent as we would like,
direct links of old sources may well be a few messages off.

>some people still don't quite get it :(
>anyone has a suggestion for how we can improve on
>beeing supported for drbd?

I just looked at the price and it's seems to be incredibly expensive. 
For one thing, it seems that duration of the contracts is for three 
months. That in of itself is odd. Who wants support for such a short 
period? Aren't most contracts a year?

To make any comparison meaningful, the cost needs to be extended out 
for a year where applicable and for us in the US converted to US 

basic support, 4 * 474 =	$1896
standard support, 4 * 1763 =	$7052

By comparison, Canto, who sells a well-known digital archive 
management solution, charges us $925 a year for what is essentially 
equivalent to the standard support for drbd for our 5-user workgroup 
server product. (A product whose database will be soon be protected 
by drbd :).) Note this price is slightly discounted because we are an 
educational institution, and the prices would go up as the number of 
simultaneous clients goes up.

By another comparison, Dantz, makers of a great cross-platform backup 
solution, Retrospect, is charging us $610 for a yearly tech support 
contract, the equivalent of the standard support contract above. This 
price may also be a bit discounted because of our educational status.

Either way, standard support for drbd is essentially an order of 
magnitude more expensive.

I suggest dropping installation support altogether and extending the 
existing basic and standard support options to a year at their three 
month price. Even then, it's not cheap.

Maurice Volaski, mvolaski at aecom.yu.edu
Computing Support, Rose F. Kennedy Center
Albert Einstein College of Medicine of Yeshiva University

More information about the drbd-user mailing list