+ Post New Thread
Page 5 of 15 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 215
Hardware Thread, Softxpand Miniframe in Technical; Rob, you're a legend. 95% of the education market in Worcestershire uses either RM or Ranger, so we've been unceremoniously ...
  1. #61

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Derby
    Posts
    51
    Thank Post
    11
    Thanked 13 Times in 10 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5
    Rep Power
    0
    Rob, you're a legend. 95% of the education market in Worcestershire uses either RM or Ranger, so we've been unceremoniously locked out, which has really frustrated my resellers and their end users, as the above mentioned have been unwilling to make the necessary tweaks. Net Support have been fantastic and helped schools take advantage of SoftXpand and keep Net Support which they love. We've got one of your men coming in next thursday for further talks too which is really pleasing.

  2. #62

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    8
    Thank Post
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by miniframeuk View Post
    Hi Guys,

    I've been talking to the MD here in the UK who is just back from Israeli Head Office. We are prepared to state that you only need 1 copy of Windows XP per system. After some dialogue between Ballmer and Segal this directive is what MiniFame will be communicating globally.

    We are happy for all you guys to persist in your attempts to have Microsoft confirm this for your own peace of mind and will make ouselves available to your reps at Microsoft to help you clarify this position to them, as on occasion they need to know the technical witchcraft behind the product to best understand the licensing implications.

    Whilst learning about TS CALs, Windows Server has been interesting I hope this puts this one to bed. 1 Copy of XP.

    Being a young wipper snapper, I was too eager to comment back on Dr Shivago's posts earlier. It is clear that BeTwin surfaced before SoftXpand. I was discussing it with my MD who explained that BeTwin was the product that everyone tried but didn't work, most likely due to technology limitations back before the millenium. We think the BeTwin concept is brilliant. However anyone who considers a screen saver to be eco friendly is a mad man no? The UK Govt are actively trying to prevent their users from enabling screen savers.

    Also, does anyone know if the Ranger Suite & RMs network management products are actually white label versions of Net Support?

    Cheers, and have a good one!
    Col
    I'm having trouble to accept your declerations, as you mentioned yourself as "Being a young wipper snapper"... till it's out from MiniFrame HQ & MS that you need 1 XP license per system I suggest
    you don't miss lead everyone here. The same goes for your past enouncments about SoftXpand 3
    supporting Windows 7 and Dual Head VGA cards etc.

    If BeTwin was a product everyone tried but didn't work, how come it still exist and developing new
    and much more advanced systems than SoftXpand ? I don't see SoftXpand supporting any of those
    OS that BeTwin does (2000, XP Home, Vista 32&64bit).

    I would like to bring another piece of history here:
    http://www.stable.com.tw/images/stor.../007030836.gif
    I think that ThinSoft can submit a claim on MiniFrame for infringement...

    And as for being a mad man, I still didn't get any answers to my questions. Well, what can I expect
    from a sales man...

    Dr. Jivago

  3. #63

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Derby
    Posts
    51
    Thank Post
    11
    Thanked 13 Times in 10 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5
    Rep Power
    0
    1 (The number of XP licenses) - Who's misleading?
    2 (The supported OSes) - Change the record.
    3 (Patent infringement) - Thank you for the best laugh this morning. After leaving the house wearing shorts (but not checking the weathe forecast) and getting soaked, you've made my day.
    4 (Attack on my integrity) - I want to ask you to stop, but this is better publicity than MiniFrame coming up in the House of Commons even! Investing in our future - Community - ComputerworldUK

    You clearly believe in the BeTwin product range so good luck to you. We don't want to make enemies and we've all got jobs to do.

    Cheers,
    Col (salesman)

  4. #64

    Ric_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    London
    Posts
    7,582
    Thank Post
    107
    Thanked 761 Times in 592 Posts
    Rep Power
    179
    Admin bit: Guys, can you please calm down a bit and keep on topic.

    @miniframeuk: I would have to agree with the MS 'unofficial' line mentioned earlier. In the Windows XP Pro EULA it states:

    Except as otherwise permitted by the NetMeeting, Remote Assistance, and Remote Desktop features described below, you may not use the Product to permit any Device to use, access, display or run other executable software residing on the Workstation Computer, nor may you permit any Device to use, access, display, or run the Product or Product's user interface, unless the Device has a separate license for the Product.
    IMHO this conclusively states that if you are using some form of device to run multiple instances of the OS, you have to have a full license for each instance. This also fits with the way Remote Desktop connections work on XP Pro. If a user connects to an XP PC remotely, it will lock the local console and transfer control to the remote client.

  5. #65
    stu
    stu is offline
    stu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Plymouth Uni
    Posts
    436
    Thank Post
    31
    Thanked 7 Times in 7 Posts
    Rep Power
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by miniframeuk View Post
    1 (The number of XP licenses) - Who's misleading?
    2 (The supported OSes) - Change the record.
    3 (Patent infringement) - Thank you for the best laugh this morning. After leaving the house wearing shorts (but not checking the weathe forecast) and getting soaked, you've made my day.
    4 (Attack on my integrity) - I want to ask you to stop, but this is better publicity than MiniFrame coming up in the House of Commons even! Investing in our future - Community - ComputerworldUK

    You clearly believe in the BeTwin product range so good luck to you. We don't want to make enemies and we've all got jobs to do.

    Cheers,
    Col (salesman)
    1 Unless you have written proof from Microsoft that this is true then you are as it is Microsoft's product you are manipulating

    2 The latest OS being supported by a product is quite a critical issue for most schools/ users/ administrators

    3 I don't know what process went in to making / deploying your product so i cant comment on the patent

  6. #66

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Derby
    Posts
    51
    Thank Post
    11
    Thanked 13 Times in 10 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5
    Rep Power
    0
    Hey Guys, thanks for your comments. The only M$ response thus far has been:

    Windows Operating System

    One of our M$ Gold partners (MTB in Kent) had the response below from Jackie Elleker, Licensing Specialist at M$:

    "Jackie: We have a product that allows a normal PC to present multiple (up to 6) desktops via multiple mice, keyboards and screens. It means that the operating system (e.g. windows) is installed only once on that PC device. If the licence is purchased in per device mode does this mean that the PC is licenced correctly with one licence? Best regards, Mike"

    "Hi Mike, Apologies for the delay – I hope these answers help you. Desktop Operating Systems – per copy per device license. You must acquire a license for each device on or from which you access or use the software (locally and remotely). You may install only one copy on the device. You may install that copy on the host operating system or in a virtual (or otherwise emulated) hardware system." Which means that 1 copy of the OS is all that's required. Best regards, Jackie.

    However, I'm beginning to get more into the nitty gritty of the licensing as it's hugely important to you guys. I know I need to get you clarification on this but I assure you it's not MiniFrame who are stalling on the press release.

    In fact I'm going to call M$ and try and sell it to them! Anyone have a number for someone in their IT department here in the UK?

  7. #67

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Derby
    Posts
    51
    Thank Post
    11
    Thanked 13 Times in 10 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5
    Rep Power
    0
    Hey Ric, just re-read your post. When we handed the EULA to legal, noone could agree on the definition of a device and I believe therein lies the problem. Can a USB hub be considered an access device?

    Stu, the OS issue was that Dr Jivago asked why we haven't got a SoftXpand product that runs on pre XP OS's. SoftXpand 3 is already Windows 7 ready, and we upgrade our users for free to latest versions of OS's.

    I'll do my best to keep you all updated on the number of OS's you'd need.

  8. #68

    Ric_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    London
    Posts
    7,582
    Thank Post
    107
    Thanked 761 Times in 592 Posts
    Rep Power
    179
    Quote Originally Posted by miniframeuk View Post
    Hey Ric, just re-read your post. When we handed the EULA to legal, noone could agree on the definition of a device and I believe therein lies the problem. Can a USB hub be considered an access device.
    True... however, I would have thought that any 'product' that allows multiple instances of the OS to run can be considered a device in this instance. It need not mean hardware, as is the case with software virtualisation technologies - these require multiple OS licenses.

    Taking XP Pro as the example, the OS is fundamentally a single user product which you have created software for allowing off-the-shelf hardware to be used as access devices making the OS multi-user.

  9. #69

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Derby
    Posts
    51
    Thank Post
    11
    Thanked 13 Times in 10 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5
    Rep Power
    0
    Hi Guys, the UK MD has written an answer to this on my blog page.

  10. #70

    SYNACK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    10,691
    Thank Post
    824
    Thanked 2,570 Times in 2,187 Posts
    Blog Entries
    9
    Rep Power
    731
    Quote Originally Posted by miniframeuk View Post
    The only M$ response
    Right, I have been watching this thread for a while and been purposfuly putting off replying to it but I give in...

    You are a company that is building upon Microsoft technology for your core business and it seems relying on an exemption from them to make your product signifigantly cost effective for clients. I am completely puzzled by your insistance then on refering to them as M$.

    This in general is a derogotory moniker often used by fan(atic)s of other systems, why would you effectivly insult the core of your own system and do you consider this behaviour to be even remotly proffessional?

    Next up is your absolute insistance without any proof that people only need one license. You cannot speak for Microsoft and while your and your companies word may mean something to those that know you it is not in any way leagally binding. Without a genuine Microsoft statement the only way that you can state this is ift he purchase agreement for your software contains a clause stating that your company is liable for and will pay for any licensing over and above what you have stated is nessisary.

    It may well be the case that Microsoft will decide in your favor however this has not been the case for simmilar systems. I am aware that this puts you in a difficult situation when it comes to selling the system as you still do not have a definitave answer from Microsoft however this also puts your clients in a difficult situation also. It is part of our jobs to be careful with regard to software licenses and protect our schools/clients from prosecution and so we must all investigate issues like this thoroughly and to our own satisfaction.

    I do hope that you get your responce from Microsoft soon so that this matter can be fully resolved.

  11. Thanks to SYNACK from:

    verygreenpc (6th July 2009)

  12. #71

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Derby
    Posts
    51
    Thank Post
    11
    Thanked 13 Times in 10 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5
    Rep Power
    0
    Sorry, I use M$ because the board members here use it, I had no idea it was derogatory. Is that true?

    You're correct in many of your assertions and I'm glad you posted (we need this to come out), but M$ haven't gone legal because they can't and haven't since SoftXpand was released. So how could they make life tough for us? Perhaps by remaining schtum on the issue, and it's working.

    I know we have representatives from Microsoft, M$ or however you'd like me to call them on this forum, so why can't they put at ease the minds of the end users for us once and for all; they can come to the office, we'll have a Q and A and then we'll state the facts. Clearly it's a big issue. It's not an issue for any clients who have bought SoftXpand though, and never will be.

    We as an organisation are committed to the 1 copy of XP model. There are things I cannot write, and it's not to create a mirage, it's just I can't. However I like your idea of liability on licensing and will feed that up the chain here. Would that bring comfort?

    I am convinced after speaking with management that Microsoft will never ever ever ever state in writing other than by email to Gold partners that 1 copy of the OS is all that's required.

    A funny thought I just had is that the Mexican Government now has over 25,000 SoftXpand units deployed and growing monthly, and the Nigerian Navy deal has grown to include various government operations. Could this cause an international war!

  13. #72

    SYNACK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    10,691
    Thank Post
    824
    Thanked 2,570 Times in 2,187 Posts
    Blog Entries
    9
    Rep Power
    731
    Quote Originally Posted by miniframeuk View Post
    We as an organisation are committed to the 1 copy of XP model. There are things I cannot write, and it's not to create a mirage, it's just I can't. However I like your idea of liability on licensing and will feed that up the chain here. Would that bring comfort?
    As long as it held up to scrutiny by the school legal advisors I do think that this would make it much more attractive and provide effective risk minimisation.

    Quote Originally Posted by miniframeuk View Post
    I am convinced after speaking with management that Microsoft will never ever ever ever state in writing other than by email to Gold partners that 1 copy of the OS is all that's required.
    Possibly not, you could always set one up at one of your offices and then call the copyright police on yourselves. This would probably result in an audit and a definitave answer.

    Quote Originally Posted by miniframeuk View Post
    A funny thought I just had is that the Mexican Government now has over 25,000 SoftXpand units deployed and growing monthly, and the Nigerian Navy deal has grown to include various government operations. Could this cause an international war!
    I don't think that any wars would get started over it though. MS does not really have the trained minions that some other brands enjoy

  14. #73

    tmcd35's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    5,243
    Thank Post
    772
    Thanked 804 Times in 670 Posts
    Blog Entries
    9
    Rep Power
    299
    Quote Originally Posted by Ric_ View Post
    True... however, I would have thought that any 'product' that allows multiple instances of the OS to run can be considered a device in this instance. It need not mean hardware, as is the case with software virtualisation technologies - these require multiple OS licenses.
    Only one instance of the OS is run. Products like iTALC and ABTutor see the different user desktops as RDP sessions. But what is actually happening is an extended display with different keyboard/mouse combinations inputing to different screens across the extended display.

    Taking XP Pro as the example, the OS is fundamentally a single user product which you have created software for allowing off-the-shelf hardware to be used as access devices making the OS multi-user.
    Here I agree, XP Pro (and Vista/7) are single-user-at-a-time EULA's. This means to use this product you need separate licenses for each user who will be using the system at the same time. My question remains - what is the best way to purchase those licenses? At FPP or even OEM prices this system could not be cost effective. At open/select license prices it's a totally different story.

    Knowing how SoftXpand works it brings up another interesting question. If you need multiple licenses to use SoftXpand, then surely you'd need multiple licenses to play multiplayer games on the PC where two or more users are directly controlling the in game action on the same machine.

  15. #74

    tmcd35's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    5,243
    Thank Post
    772
    Thanked 804 Times in 670 Posts
    Blog Entries
    9
    Rep Power
    299
    As I am sure many of you are aware I am extremely interested in this technology and I've been researching both it and Windows EULA's quiet extensively of late.

    I thought I'd share my current thoughts and findings:

    1. I am becoming of the opinion that Miniframe are correct - under Windows XP's EULA you only need 1 Windows XP License.

    Why? The answer is in Windows Vista's EULA

    2. I believe this software is NOT ALLOWED under Windows Vista's EULA - and for that matter neither are multiplayer (on the same computer (splitscreen,etc)) games.

    Compare the clause 2 in Windows Vista EULA -

    2. INSTALLATION AND USE RIGHTS. The software license is permanently assigned to the
    device with which you acquired the software. That device is the “licensed device.” A
    hardware partition is considered to be a separate device.
    a. Licensed Device. You may install one copy of the software on the licensed device.
    You may use the software on up to two processors on that device at one time. You may
    not use the software on any other device.
    b. Number of Users. Except as provided in the Device Connections (all editions), Remote
    Access Technologies (Home Basic and Home Premium editions) and Other Access
    Technologies (Ultimate edition) sections below, only one user may use the software at a
    time.
    c. Alternative Versions. The software may include more than one version, such as
    32-bit and 64-bit. You may use only one version at one time. If manufacturer or
    installer provides you with a one-time selection between language versions, you may use
    only the one language version you select.
    Note Clause 2b - number of users

    Compare with Windows XP Pro SP2 EULA Clause 1.1 -

    1. GRANT OF LICENSE. Manufacturer grants you the following rights provided that you comply
    with all terms and conditions of this EULA:
    1.1 Installation and use. You may install, use, access, display and run one copy of
    the SOFTWARE on the COMPUTER. The SOFTWARE may not be used by more than two (2)
    processors at any one time on the COMPUTER, unless a higher number is indicated on the COA.
    Notice XP limits number of processors but not number of users.

    Both VISTA and XP limit number of device connections to ten for file and print sharing only

    1.4 Device Connections. You may permit a maximum of ten (10) computers or
    other electronic devices (each a “Device”) to connect to the COMPUTER to utilize one or more of
    the following services of the SOFTWARE: File Services, Print Services, Internet Information
    Services, Internet Connection Sharing and telephony services. The ten connection maximum
    includes any indirect connections made through “multiplexing” or other software or hardware
    which pools or aggregates connections. This ten connection maximum does not apply to other
    uses of the SOFTWARE, such as synchronizing data between a Device and the COMPUTER,
    provided only one user uses, accesses, displays or runs the SOFTWARE at any one time. This
    Section 1.4 does not grant you rights to access a COMPUTER Session from any Device. A
    “Session” means any use of the SOFTWARE that enables functionality similar to that available to
    an end user who is interacting with the COMPUTER through any combination of input, output
    and display peripherals.
    And Remote Desktop Connections (no limit on number in EULA on XP) - or similar technology (VNC, etc) - must be licensed per device

    1.5 Remote Desktop/Remote Assistance/NetMeeting. The SOFTWARE contains
    Remote Desktop, Remote Assistance, and NetMeeting technologies that enable the SOFTWARE
    or applications installed on the COMPUTER (sometimes referred to as a host device) to be
    accessed remotely from other Devices. You may use the SOFTWARE’s Remote Desktop feature
    (or other software which provides similar functionality for a similar purpose) to access a
    COMPUTER Session from any Device provided you acquire a separate SOFTWARE license for
    that Device. As an exception to this rule, the person who is the single primary user of the
    COMPUTER may access a Computer Session from any Device without acquiring an additional
    SOFTWARE license for that Device. When you are using Remote Assistance or NetMeeting (or
    other software which provides similar functionality for a similar purpose) you may share a
    Session with other users without any limit on the number of Device connections and without
    acquiring additional licenses for the SOFTWARE. For Microsoft and non-Microsoft applications,
    you should consult the license agreement accompanying the applicable software or contact the
    applicable licensor to determine whether use of the software with Remote Desktop, Remote
    Assistance, or NetMeeting is permitted without an additional license. Except as otherwise
    permitted by the NetMeeting and Remote Assistance features described above, a license for the
    SOFTWARE may not be shared or used concurrently on different computers, such as a workstation,
    terminal or other device.
    But the key with SoftXPand under XP is that no additional devices are being used. All users are using the same workstation/computer. The one user restriction does not appear until the Windows Vista EULA.

    It'd be interesting, based on this, how the Windows 7 EULA reads...

  16. #75

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    8
    Thank Post
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by miniframeuk View Post
    1 (The number of XP licenses) - Who's misleading?
    2 (The supported OSes) - Change the record.
    3 (Patent infringement) - Thank you for the best laugh this morning. After leaving the house wearing shorts (but not checking the weathe forecast) and getting soaked, you've made my day.
    4 (Attack on my integrity) - I want to ask you to stop, but this is better publicity than MiniFrame coming up in the House of Commons even! Investing in our future - Community - ComputerworldUK

    You clearly believe in the BeTwin product range so good luck to you. We don't want to make enemies and we've all got jobs to do.

    Cheers,
    Col (salesman)
    1 Glad to see I'm not the only one who thought you are misleading...

    Here is another link from the past:
    Link: http://www.multiseatcomputer.be/files/mini5.pdf

    2 Why can't I get a decent answer from you ?

    3 You're welcome.


    Dr. Jivago

SHARE:
+ Post New Thread
Page 5 of 15 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •