PERSONAL PLUS : Admin shouldn't be considered as a user on the license model

[itcms]

Because the admin performs many crusial tasks, I believe the admin shouldn't be considered as a user on the license model.

In licensing model you mention 2 users , lets be 2 other users without lifting the total domains
Currently, I have one user with two domains.
He tries to build a live environment as user one and a staging environment as a devuser, and he can't do that on the current schema without using admin.
Please can you consider this as an option?

 

[Richard G]

I believe the admin shouldn't be considered as a user on the license model.

It has always been like that in Directadmin. For people where it's intended for, it's good like how it is.

However, if you would like to have things changed, there is a special seperate place to ask:

Upvoty

feedback.directadmin.com

Be aware you need a seperate account for this.

 

[DirectAdmin Sales]

@Richard G is correct that that is has always been that way. The license was even named with that understanding -- the PLUS refers to having one account in addition to the default admin one.

The license was created to meet the top 3 requests we were receiving on the older Personal license: An extra account, Pro Pack features, and a price that didn't demand a jump to the cost of Lite.

We are certainly open to feedback but I believe this is the first time we've seen a request that it should be "admin + extra account + extra account" instead of the way it is now. I'm sure others will share their opinion here.

 

[kebirhost]

Hello,

You should divide licences as VPS and dedicated. Since the prices of pro licences are very high for VPS servers. It is very difficult to sell DA panel with VPS to our customers.

Melih

 

[DirectAdmin Sales]

Hello,

You should divide licences as VPS and dedicated. Since the prices of pro licences are very high for VPS servers. It is very difficult to sell DA panel with VPS to our customers.

Melih

Hi Melih,

We are open to anything, as long as the numbers make sense. The problem is that "VPS" can mean anything these days. When we first started, VPS was a new & unique concept. They were often used for testing (rather than production) & they tended to be very weak systems. It seemed reasonable to give them a big discount.

Now, we see some of our customers with 192GB RAM VPS. I can go over to Vultr and buy a 96-core 255GB memory VPS! ? Many of these virtual servers are more powerful than some bare-metal servers.

Therefore "VPS" has too much variation to be useful as something that defines a license. One VPS could be weak with 256MB RAM , and the next one could be a monster with 256GB RAM.

Of course, I know you are not talking about monster servers here, but I was just illustrating that we need a better measure than just "VPS." This is where it gets more complicated. Instead of the account/domain model, it could be possible to have licenses based on hardware instead. So instead of "VPS" discount, it might be 2 core / 2 GB memory (or less) discount. Hardware-based licenses.

Maybe there is some other options we're missing. Input would be appreciated!

 

[kebirhost]

Hello,

I am sure you will find suitable solutions for everyone. The VPS datacenter license was very affordable. The Pro license, on the other hand, was almost 4-5 times that. Unfortunately, this serious increase pushes hosting companies like us to find other solutions.

We are selling VPS service as hosting company. Monthly prices are between 4.5 Euros and 25 Euros. A customer who buys 4.5 Euro VPs cannot pay a license fee of 20 USD.

The personal license price is very good, but the number of domains is low and I think the number of accounts and domains may be equal instead of the number of domains. Because it is very convenient to have separate accounts in restore operations.

We love the "Directadmin" panel, but the price change isn't exactly what we expected personally. We expect a slightly more customer-oriented configuration.

Thank you so much,
Melih

 

[itcms]

The development costs and the need for support also have a price, so I don't have any argument on that, and the price is low with what you get as the final product.
Already the price in cooperation with competitors is excellent.
My only concern was the personal license, as it was the first time I had a client who wanted a different user for development to perform tests.
He finally agreed to change his license if he wanted to implement his request.
Thanks all for your observation - notes, and explanations