Re: [Hampshire] 22% of Windows Installs Non-Genuine

Top Page

Reply to this message
Author: Paul Tansom
Date:  
To: hampshire
Subject: Re: [Hampshire] 22% of Windows Installs Non-Genuine
** john lewis <johnlewis@???> [2007-01-26 09:58]:
> On Thu, 25 Jan 2007 22:30:22 +0000 (GMT)
> Gordon Scott <gordon@???> wrote:
>
> > I think quite a few places do/did this .. file the licences and
> > install discs away safely and just install all systems on the site
> > with the same disc. Whoops one `Genuine' installation and a couple
> > of dozen `Non-Genuine'.
>
> I used to do this when I was a sys admin but that _was_ before M$
> had this validation nonsense.
>
> I also used to work on the principle that not all the system were in
> use at the same time and so long as the number of users actually
> using it at any one time didn't exceed the number of licences I was
> covered.
>
> I think Wordperfect at one time actually said as much in their
> licence, they certainly said WP could also be installed on a users
> home system as well as the work one.

** end quote [john lewis]

This is exactly why one of my previous employers didn't upgrade to
Microsoft Office some years back. They had Lotus Smartsuite installed on
a server and concurrently licensed - so we had around 100 licenses to
cover 500 to 1000 potential clients connecting in (many didn't even have
it installed, but technically all could if they wanted). This was all
perfectly legal and Lotus even provided the mechanism to control the
licensing (even if it was easy to bypass!). When we looked into the
Microsoft options for this they insisted on a license per machine that
could access the network install, even if it didn't use it. With the
same setup that meant 1000 licenses, although if we tied the security
down a bit we could reduce that. The only advantage it gave over local
copies was a central place for upgrades, and we could justify the
expense so anyone who absolutely needed Office would justify purchasing
a local copy. That said the company refused to purchase the newer
version of Smartsuite because they would buy anything new unless it was
Office. That meant that we were still using Smartsuite 3.1 in 2000!! I
did roll out a network install of StarOffice, but nobody wanted that
anymore than they wanted Smartsuite - MS Office or nothing!

--
Paul Tansom | Aptanet Ltd. | http://www.aptanet.com/