| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
BruteForce
Senior Member
Greece
32 Posts |
 Posted - Nov 07 2006 : 09:02:59 AM
|
Hi,
(a) I would appreciate it if a more 'diplomatic' message appears whenever I accidentally exceed the number of licenses. Personally I am using 2 PCs in my desk and one laptop. So this makes me 3 users in the eyes of VA and I get the message very often. No, I am not attempting to exceed anything, I just have 3 workstations, is that evil?
By 'diplomatic' I mean something like "All VA licenses are currently in use. VA will be disabled".
(b) You probably know that if I disable the network adapter when I start Visual Studio, then VA is happy for the remainder of the time. It doesn't seem to have a periodic licensing check; only a startup check. May be this is a feature that I am unaware of, but if everyone in the office disable their network adapter and start 4 instances of VS2005 first thing in the morning and then reenable the adapter, then everybody can work forever with 1 license.
So you might be losing money there.
I am pretty 'sensitive' on licensing issues because our company as well is selling software with licenses and I know from personal experience with some of our clients, that lots of people will not pay for more licenses if they can find a workaround.
Cheers,
Dimitris Staikos |
When all else fails try common sense. |
|
|
support
Whole Tomato Software
5566 Posts |
Posted - Nov 07 2006 : 10:48:47 AM
|
| You make some good points. If we didn't have to worry about piracy, we'd be happy to get rid of all of our license checking. |
 |
|
|
arjun
New Member
2 Posts |
Posted - Sep 12 2007 : 03:48:36 AM
|
Members of my team often work on multiple PCs, and though we only sometimes need VA enabled on all instances of Visual Studio those "some times" are often enough. If you guys can have VA check for the number of unique users instead of PCs, you'd still continue to keep a check on piracy.. but some users would be a little happier.
I'd like to make this a formal feature request: When validating license usage, check for the number of unique users using VA instead of the number of PCs running VA. Is this forum the right place or do I need to do something additional?
Thanks.
Arjun
|
|
|
|
feline
Whole Tomato Software
United Kingdom
19022 Posts |
Posted - Sep 12 2007 : 08:01:05 AM
|
| It is a reasonable idea, but it does beg the question how do we define a unique user? I know when I end up working on more than one machine at a time I am often logged in with a different user name on different machines. |
zen is the art of being at one with the two'ness |
|
|
|
arjun
New Member
2 Posts |
Posted - Sep 12 2007 : 10:31:20 AM
|
I don't think that will be a problem for most users. If you're on a corporate network then in most cases you will be logged on to the network using your domain ID, hence same qualified user name. In your scenario (two machines, different qualified user names, same physical person) it's not feasible to equate the two user names any way, so I don't think anybody will expect it to be supported.
|
|
|
|
xericode
New Member
2 Posts |
Posted - Apr 20 2009 : 5:21:09 PM
|
How about a licensing option for the number of machines you use simultaneously?
There is already a mechanism for checking that an identical license is running elsewhere, so perhaps the mechanism could also check for the number of simultaneous copies.
Just a thought, because I regularly use two machines, and I don't like the idea of buying a second license. I'd be willing to pay, say, 50% of the cost of a second license, though. |
|
|
|
feline
Whole Tomato Software
United Kingdom
19022 Posts |
Posted - Apr 21 2009 : 2:39:27 PM
|
I have emailed you about this via the forum.
The general answer is that the license already covers using two separate machines, one at home and one at work. You only need a single VA license to cover both machines. |
zen is the art of being at one with the two'ness |
|
|
|
xericode
New Member
2 Posts |
Posted - Apr 24 2009 : 05:43:53 AM
|
I was running on two machines, literally side by side (desktop and notebook).
I don't remember which build I was running, but my support license expired recently.
I renewed and upgraded to the current build (10.5.1715.0).
As a result, I no longer see the problem.
As Emily Litella used to say on Saturday Night Live, "Never mind." :-) |
|
|
|
NOPcode
Ketchup Master
USA
84 Posts |
Posted - May 01 2009 : 07:40:38 AM
|
| Given the amount of sometimes serious glitches, I think you need to stop worrying about the unlicensed copies and focus on improving the baseline product. People pay for a program that works and the support. Treating your customers like criminals is not a good business model and breeds resentment and makes them look elsewhere. You might want to talk with the developers at Stardock about this. |
|
|
|
sean
Whole Tomato Software
USA
2817 Posts |
Posted - May 01 2009 : 11:28:59 AM
|
| NOPcode, what kind of problems are you experiencing with our licensing? What about it makes you think we treat you like a criminal? |
|
|
|
NOPcode
Ketchup Master
USA
84 Posts |
Posted - May 04 2009 : 07:57:06 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by sean
NOPcode, what kind of problems are you experiencing with our licensing? What about it makes you think we treat you like a criminal?
One current problem with your licensing system is that when someone goes and downloads the current version, if they didn't pay *very close attention* to the date on it and *and* remember to check their support date, they will blow their install and then be locked out of a product *they bought*. And you can't roll back to the previous version to get it working again, unless you restore from a drive backup. The install should refuse to install in such a case, and let the customer live with the previous unsupported version.
Look back into your support email from about 8-9 years ago for the other question.
I will not bother to get into a licensing argument with you, since your focus is clearly on "everyone is stealing from us" instead of growing the user base. Seriously, start reading Techdirt and talk with Stardock. |
|
|
|
feline
Whole Tomato Software
United Kingdom
19022 Posts |
Posted - May 04 2009 : 3:00:20 PM
|
If you turn on:
VA Options -> Startup -> Automatically check for new version
VA Options -> Startup -> Also check for new beta version
then the check warns you if your current license key does not support the new version. True this does not help if you directly download the newest build, but it should help most users.
If you install a version which your current key does not support you are supposed to get a three day trial, which can be extended by request. This is a useful feature since it lets users try out the latest build, both to see new features and to see if it fixes a specific problem they are experiencing.
Rolling back to an older version which your key supports, you should *never* have to restore a drive backup! I don't remember anyone reporting such an experience, and I have see most support enquiries over the last few years. 8-9 years ago is before I joined Whole Tomato. I have seen a few problems moving between very different versions of VA, but they have always been solved without any such drastic measures.
Are you currently having any problems with VA's licensing approach and your machines? |
zen is the art of being at one with the two'ness |
Edited by - feline on May 05 2009 9:57:00 PM |
|
|
|
sean
Whole Tomato Software
USA
2817 Posts |
Posted - May 04 2009 : 4:20:38 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by NOPcode
One current problem with your licensing system is that when someone goes and downloads the current version, if they didn't pay *very close attention* to the date on it and *and* remember to check their support date, they will blow their install and then be locked out of a product *they bought*.
Last year, we made changes to the new build notification landing page so date dependencies are clearer, though as feline noted, you don't get this information when you visit the download page on your own. This is what a person whose support runs through Jan 2009 would see right now:
http://www.wholetomato.com/downloads/CheckForUpdate.asp?v=1715&b=y&e=2009.01.31&r=y
Unfortunately, installing a trial version does require you to re-enter your license information if you later revert to an earlier version. However, a drive restore is not necessary. If your license is no longer accessible from your email client, a visit to the contact page is all that it takes to get a copy: http://www.wholetomato.com/support/contact.asp .
Furthermore, we continue to host old installers so that you can go back to an older build after trying out newer ones. I don't think that would be the case if our focus were "everyone is stealing from us."
Thanks for the perspective.
|
Edited by - sean on May 04 2009 4:21:35 PM |
|
|
|
kevinsikes
Tomato Guru
USA
271 Posts |
Posted - May 06 2009 : 1:25:21 PM
|
NOPcode,
We have a feature request open to deal with your first issue:
case=23393
In the interest of transparency, this is the text of the ticket:
"This is a request from a user. He installs a newer version of software forgetting that his maintenance has already expired, then realizes he has only 3 days to get purchase approval or revert to the previous version. He requests that the installer notify him that this is the case, and give him the option to bail out of the install."
|
Kevin Sikes
Infotainment Platform Design Engineer
Ford Motor Company |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
Licensing Improvements
