The Licensing FAQ

[CyberNerd]

@Ashok, webman at least is weighing up the cost of the licensing. If two products do the same thing nad have similar support, one costs licenses and one doesn't then its a no brainer which to deploy if you have the skillset. It's an FAQ afterall.

[DMcCoy]

Originally Posted by CyberNerd

@Ashok, webman at least is weighing up the cost of the licensing. If two products do the same thing nad have similar support, one costs licenses and one doesn't then its a no brainer which to deploy if you have the skillset. It's an FAQ afterall.

About licensing, not whether you should pay for something.

My Zimbra server keeps dying at home. I can't buy commercial support with less than 10 licenses. Free is not always better.

[CyberNerd]

I can't buy commercial support with less than 10 licenses. Free is not always better.

MS support isn't free either, thats extra.

[localzuk]

Originally Posted by DMcCoy

About licensing, not whether you should pay for something.

My Zimbra server keeps dying at home. I can't buy commercial support with less than 10 licenses. Free is not always better.

It isn't aimed at people who run it as a home server (who really runs their own email server??). I doubt you'd have bought exchange for home use... So your argument is completely bogus really. Put it this way, a 25 user license for the zimbra network edition costs £314ish. Compare that to a basic exchange 5 user pack being £910. It still works out cheaper...

[GrumbleDook]

Folks, this thread is about licenses and how they are applied ... not about whether they are worth it or not.

If you want to argue about that take it to FFS.

[DMcCoy]

I suggest you also cover the continued misuse of terminal services and office licenses

[GrumbleDook]

Originally Posted by DMcCoy

I suggest you also cover the continued misuse of terminal services and office licenses

Somehow I think that the words 'worms', 'can' and 'opening' apply here.

This may indeed be the largest misuse and abuse of licenses now that TS is growing in use.

[sahmeepee]

I would also like to see Adobe taken outside and shot for their (mis/ab)use of the term "site license". I was told today that to put Adobe CS3 on 501 computers in my single site I would have to buy two site licenses. Zing!

[ashok]

Originally Posted by localzuk

It isn't aimed at people who run it as a home server (who really runs their own email server??). I doubt you'd have bought exchange for home use... So your argument is completely bogus really. Put it this way, a 25 user license for the zimbra network edition costs £314ish. Compare that to a basic exchange 5 user pack being £910. It still works out cheaper...

All i'm trying to highlight is that schools chooses which ever software works for them, of course people can suggest various alternatives but its up to schools on which product they go. I raised the point that the thread was going off topic.

Zimbra may well provide the same functionality as MS Exchange but since someone raised the point of exchange licenses (not zimbra licenses or costs) i thought i get into the conversation.

Exchange CALs can be user cal or device cal and from what i understand its best to go with device cals (this is of course different if you have less PCs and many users)

The external connector license is not required for schools unless you want to allow third-party users to connect or use services hosted by exchange. If the user is part of school/institution then they will have an account on the network and it is this account that they will be using to access the email from outside i.e. via OWA. This is where external connector does NOT come in as many people are led to believe. This is because it is the pupil of the school/employee of organisation accessing his/her emails from the coporate mail server.

Ash.

[NickJones]

Originally Posted by ashok

If the user is part of school/institution then they will have an account on the network and it is this account that they will be using to access the email from outside i.e. via OWA. This is where external connector does NOT come in as many people are led to believe. This is because it is the pupil of the school/employee of organisation accessing his/her emails from the coporate mail server.

Interesting - I was told we had to have one in order to use our (EasyLink) remote access, however that falls into the category which you describe, i.e. school users accessing school accounts.

[mrforgetful]

Originally Posted by sahmeepee

I would also like to see Adobe taken outside and shot for their (mis/ab)use of the term "site license". I was told today that to put Adobe CS3 on 501 computers in my single site I would have to buy two site licenses. Zing!

That's because their site licenses cover up 500 computers.

Simple solution, miss one out.

Funny really because you're also allowed to install and use it at up to 50 teachers home computers, I'm sure they'd not mind using one of those for that extra computer...

[NickJones]

Originally Posted by mrforgetful

That's because their site licenses cover up 500 computers.

So it's not a SITE licence then, is it; it's a 500 user licence. Trading Standards Agency anyone?

[mrforgetful]

Originally Posted by NickJones

So it's not a SITE licence then, is it; it's a 500 user licence. Trading Standards Agency anyone?

Techinically it's not a 500 user license either because they have to be on a single site.

It depends how much you want to complain about it, personally I'd rather you not take them to TSA, what if they retract the license completely? It's a bargain for Education no matter how you look at it.

Even if you had to buy 2 site licences you'd still be saving thousands on what a business would pay.

[DMcCoy]

Originally Posted by NickJones

So it's not a SITE licence then, is it; it's a 500 user licence. Trading Standards Agency anyone?

One could argue that it's a license that covers up to 500 machine in a single site *location*. It really is a bargain compared to what I had to pay for 24 copies of design premium before it came out!

[NickJones]

Originally Posted by DMcCoy

One could argue that it's a license that covers up to 500 machine in a single site *location*.

Perhaps, but remember that many volume licences also state that the user must all be on the same site.

I think that if the licence is limited to 500 users, they should start calling it that - continuing to offer the ridiculous educational discount naturally, but just call it what it is.