Recommended Posts

So I'm trying to buy a copy of 2003 Standard and running into all these different CALs I can buy.

So my understanding is that 2003 Standard comes with a 5 connection CAL (5 users or machines).

What I don't know is what that means.

I would assume that means that only 5 machines (or users) can connect to the server at any given time, but if that is the case why does exchange and user drive mappings to network shares work?

What is and isn't a connection that requires a CAL?

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/633184-cals-wtf/
Share on other sites

Ok so here is how it works.

You can either have user cals or device cals.

Each user or for each computer.

Say you have 100 computers but only 50 people who use them. You would be better off getting a 50 user cal.

if you have 2 comps that 4 people use then you are better off getting device cals.

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/633184-cals-wtf/#findComment-589356172
Share on other sites

A CAL is the great microsoft rip off. You need a CAL for each aspect a client will access. Say you're running exchange, you need a CAL license for the user to access exchange and also a CAL for each user for windows server. Running SQL on top of that? Thats yet another pricey CAL on top of the software prices you've already paid...

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/633184-cals-wtf/#findComment-589367873
Share on other sites

Try growing up, commercial software is priced according to the market and CAL's are perfect for many customers requirements and MS is just being flexible by reflecting that.

Small 10 user organisation wanting SQL server:

Per processor license: ?3250

or

Server license and 10 CAL's: ?1500

See the benefit now?

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/633184-cals-wtf/#findComment-589368102
Share on other sites

If MS went with the "here's the software for free, just pay for the CAL's" model it would work right up until you had an organisation that "forgot" to buy the CAL's or you had a scenario where there was little or no client connections.

If you'd prefer the single cost regardless of scale model, as an organisation with 7000+ PC's we'd be with you, however the charity whose IT we support with 10 PC's would not.

MS is not alone in offering CAL licenses and many other IT companies use this model like Citrix for example and given the alternative of some of horrifically expensive per product licenses that you get (Oracle for example) I'm pretty sure what most would prefer.

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/633184-cals-wtf/#findComment-589368247
Share on other sites

If MS went with the "here's the software for free, just pay for the CAL's" model it would work right up until you had an organisation that "forgot" to buy the CAL's or you had a scenario where there was little or no client connections.

That problem exists even now so it is not something that happens all of a sudden because of that business model. IMO paying for CALs only is the only fair way you can really licence software like that considering how many you need to buy for each user just to access something like exchange or a sql based tool. MS know they've got users over a barell and that's the only reason they charge for the same thing so many times over.

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/633184-cals-wtf/#findComment-589368381
Share on other sites

Try growing up, commercial software is priced according to the market and CAL's are perfect for many customers requirements and MS is just being flexible by reflecting that.

Small 10 user organisation wanting SQL server:

Per processor license: ?3250

or

Server license and 10 CAL's: ?1500

See the benefit now?

Yea, charging per CPU is another idiotic practice. Maybe if you're running a super computer, but not everyday Servers. I have no problem paying for software but I do have a real problem being nickle and dimed to death. CALs are a rip off whether you choose to believe it or not. What this "Priced according to market" nonsense you speak of? Its more like pure greed from where most people sit. Don't get me wrong, I like MS but if they spent half of their time actually listening to what people want and stop trying to continually empty the wallets of their customers while accusing them of piracy the whole time (WGA) things would be much better for them.

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/633184-cals-wtf/#findComment-589369714
Share on other sites

For back office SQL servers for web sites the CPU model makes sense and I'd still call that an everyday setup for many businesses.

These points all seem to be simply saying that MS charge too much for software and continually look for ways to make more money, isn't that how business works??? How is MS any different from Apple, Oracle, Citrix and nearly ever other commercial software developer out there?

MS is just an easy target for these MS sux comments because of their market position. This makes their products almost a must have which in turn makes people resent having to pay for it (it seems like a tax) even if the costs are comparitive with the competition.

The fair criticisms of MS are on their behaviour with competitors and the lack of interopability with their products from other vendors. If the platform was more open there would be more alternatives and it would be clear then that there pricing and licensing is pretty much the same as every other vendors.

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/633184-cals-wtf/#findComment-589369916
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Again, this is an irrelevant attempt to attack the messenger. The truth does not require any justification.
    • Removed the blue and underline as you did not post a link. This would also  be considered spamming.
    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      jessse3334 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      506
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      196
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      153
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      65
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!