Roy writes:

>  I realise you actually get 3 goes, and you get upgrades free, and you can
>  probably buy armloads of copies for the price of one QueryCalc 'processor
>  switch' fee, so it doesn't amount to a hill of beans in reality.

I think that the last phrase, "so it doesn't amount to a hill of beans in
reality," is very important to keep in mind in all of this. Otherwise, it
just becomes arguing for the sake of arguing.


> But in Wirt's proposed arrangement for his PC software, AICS *won't*
> co-ordinate with you at all. If you want the software on a new PC, you have
> buy a new copy, just like any user who never had your software before.

The prices are so low for the proposed software that personal services can't
be folded into the costs as they were in the commercial-grade software that
we sold to the HP3000 community, but even here we charge for those services.
However, AICS would be pleased to co-ordinate with you or anyone about
anything, although we would have to charge our standard $150/hour rate while
doing whatever you wished. Unfortunately, that's the bottom line -- literally
-- in all of these kinds of discussions.


Chuck writes:

>  In a corporate setting it is quite common to play trickle down with new
PC's
>  as they are ordered. The new PC's go to an existing employee and his PC is
>  used to upgrade someone else and so on. I do not see many large
corporations
>  agreeing to a license that moves with the PC. It is hard enough to just
make
>  sure you have enough licenses for the number of PC's you own without having
>  to try and tie a license to a particular PC or 3 PC's.

If anything, our proposed licensing mechanism would seem to make life
extremely simple in the environment you describe. You wouldn't have to
constantly audit the number of licenses that you own and determine where they
are, or even whether the numbers agreed. If the PC ran the software, it would
be legal. As new machines were brought into the corporation, they would be
duly registered as well. Essentially all bookkeeping requirements at the
users' end would disappear.


>  You are also assuming that every user will have an internet connection and
>  that the corporate firewall will allow your application to connect to the
>  licensing server.

Yes, we are assuming for the period of establishing a legal license, the PC
would have access to our licensing server. That shouldn't be a problem in any
organization, regardless of how tight their corporate security is. If the
software were important to the prospective organization, they could certainly
find an easy way to make it work, the simplest being of course that access to
the software's licensing server's specific IP address would be allowed.

However, once the PC was legally licensed, an internet connection would no
longer be necessary. While having a license server validate every execution
of the software was mentioned to me several times, both publicly and
privately, requiring that constant connection to the internet seems to me to
present a much tougher burden on the end-user and likely to be a much less
workable solution.


>  Sorry, but I would have to pass on any software with restrictions like you
>  propose.

That is of course part of the beauty of capitalism. People only need consider
purchasing what they find acceptable. I don't think most people will find
much offensive in this procedure, but in every group, regarding any
mechanism, there will always be a few who will bitterly object.

Nonetheless, I do very much appreciate your comments.

Wirt Atmar

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *