<?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/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Reporting Services Licences &#8211; An Update</title>
	<atom:link href="http://charliem.wordpress.com/2006/01/27/reporting-services-licences-an-update/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://charliem.wordpress.com/2006/01/27/reporting-services-licences-an-update/</link>
	<description>My online Memory about Microsoft Dynamics CRM, Business Intelligence and all things technical</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 Dec 2009 08:51:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Charlie Maitland&#8217;s Blog &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Reporting Services Licences bites again</title>
		<link>http://charliem.wordpress.com/2006/01/27/reporting-services-licences-an-update/#comment-9</link>
		<dc:creator>Charlie Maitland&#8217;s Blog &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Reporting Services Licences bites again</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2006 13:20:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://charliem.wordpress.com/2006/01/27/reporting-services-licences-an-update/#comment-9</guid>
		<description>[...] Reporting Services Licences bites again  A while back I posted on the problems I encountered with the SQL Server licencing model that requires Reporting Services to be run on the same box as the database or that a second licence be purchased. I have just had the same conversation with another client. This is getting embarassing and Microsoft REALLY need to address this.  Reporting Services is trying to break into a populated market. I know that the licence is much cheaper and easier that the likes of Crystal but they have an installed and trained userbase. getting people to make the switch is hard enough without extra licencing hurdles to jump over. &#160; [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Reporting Services Licences bites again  A while back I posted on the problems I encountered with the SQL Server licencing model that requires Reporting Services to be run on the same box as the database or that a second licence be purchased. I have just had the same conversation with another client. This is getting embarassing and Microsoft REALLY need to address this.  Reporting Services is trying to break into a populated market. I know that the licence is much cheaper and easier that the likes of Crystal but they have an installed and trained userbase. getting people to make the switch is hard enough without extra licencing hurdles to jump over. &nbsp; [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Charlie Maitland&#8217;s Blog &#187; Blog Archive &#187; SQL Server Reporting Services 2005 Licence.</title>
		<link>http://charliem.wordpress.com/2006/01/27/reporting-services-licences-an-update/#comment-7</link>
		<dc:creator>Charlie Maitland&#8217;s Blog &#187; Blog Archive &#187; SQL Server Reporting Services 2005 Licence.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jan 2006 09:25:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://charliem.wordpress.com/2006/01/27/reporting-services-licences-an-update/#comment-7</guid>
		<description>[...] SQL Server Reporting Services 2005 Licence.  EDIT This is not strictly true - Read my follow up here for a fuller picture.  I was prompted to think about some issues on licensing recently for 2 reasons. Firstly I picked up a posting via Technorati that I hoped would answer some questions (it didn&#8217;t) and also because I ran into this issue on the project I am on. The suggested architecture for running SQL Server and reporting services is to have the database on one machine and the Reporting Services on a second machine with IIS installed. very sensible until you find that this means 2 licences for SQL Server. Unfortunately the client had ordered an RS / IIS box but did not have the budget for the second licence and had to send it back. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] SQL Server Reporting Services 2005 Licence.  EDIT This is not strictly true &#8211; Read my follow up here for a fuller picture.  I was prompted to think about some issues on licensing recently for 2 reasons. Firstly I picked up a posting via Technorati that I hoped would answer some questions (it didn&#8217;t) and also because I ran into this issue on the project I am on. The suggested architecture for running SQL Server and reporting services is to have the database on one machine and the Reporting Services on a second machine with IIS installed. very sensible until you find that this means 2 licences for SQL Server. Unfortunately the client had ordered an RS / IIS box but did not have the budget for the second licence and had to send it back. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
