+ Post New Thread
Page 6 of 15 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 215
Hardware Thread, Softxpand Miniframe in Technical; Originally Posted by miniframeuk 1 (The number of XP licenses) - Who's misleading? 2 (The supported OSes) - Change the ...
  1. #76

    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

  2. #77

    tmcd35's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    5,576
    Thank Post
    834
    Thanked 873 Times in 726 Posts
    Blog Entries
    9
    Rep Power
    324
    Dr Jivago,

    I am a little confused by your posts. I get the feeling you are a rep for BeTwin. If you do work for them please say so and we can have an open and honest debate.

    I get the impression you are trying to discredit SoftXpand. But surely in doing so, as with you last link from the past:

    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
    You will also discredit your beloved BeTwin system.


    Can I ask we take this debate in a new direction? Can we forget software specifics. It doesn't matter if we are talking about nComputing, SoftXPand or BeTwin. Lets start by agreeing that all three systems are very very similar and are fundamentally a good idea.


    Regardless of which of the three systems we individually choose to use (if any) the question we should concentrating on is same for each - Windows Licensing and EULA's. To be fair it's not up to SoftXpand, nComputing or BeTwin to answer this question. This is a question for us the end user and Microsoft.

    I've clearly stated my position and have provided documented evidence from M$'s EULA's to support my arguments.

    My contention remains that the fairest method of licensing this software for schools is 1xOEM + 1xEnterprise Edition Select/Open license per 4 workstation.

    I would welcome some official clarification from Microsoft themselves. Until then this si how I choose to interpret the EULA and how I will be licensing such systems I purchase.
    Last edited by tmcd35; 3rd July 2009 at 09:50 PM.

  3. Thanks to tmcd35 from:

    verygreenpc (6th July 2009)

  4. #78

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    8
    Thank Post
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by tmcd35 View Post
    Dr Jivago,

    I am a little confused by your posts. I get the feeling you a rep for BeTwin. If you do work for them please say so and we can have an open and honest debate.

    I get the impression you are trying to discredit SoftXpand. But surely in doing so, as with you last link from the past:



    You will also discredit your beloved BeTwin system.


    Can I ask we take this debate in a new direction? Can we forget software specifics. It doesn't matter if we are talking about nComputing, SoftXPand or BeTwin. Lets start by agreeing that all three systems are very very similar and are fundamentally a good idea.


    Regardless of which of the three systems we individually choose to use (if any) the question we should concentrating on is same for each - Windows Licensing and EULA's. To be fair it's not up to SoftXpand, nComputing or BeTwin to answer this question. This is a question for us the end user and Microsoft.

    I've clearly stated my position and have provided documented evidence from M$'s EULA's to support my arguments.

    My contention remains that the fairest method of licensing this software for schools is 1xOEM + 1xEnterprise Edition Select/Open license per 4 workstation.

    I would welcome some official clarification from Microsoft themselves. Until then this si how I choose to interpret the EULA and how I will be licensing such systems I purchase.

    I'm only a costumer who bought 20 licenses of BeTwin (10 XP & 10 Vista) and also made all the
    check ups you are trying to do, and the result was buying a license per user.

    Unless you have academic degree in laws, I think it's wrong that you give MS's EULA as an example
    and from there conclude your arguments.

    I agree with you that MS should give us the answers, but they'll never do so - why should they ?
    So to go on the safe side, I urge you to buy those licenses. There are many more good sides to
    those products that on the long run will save you much more money than the cost of another
    OS license : TCO, maintanance, network infrastructure, and ofcourse - electricity and electronic waste.

    I'm a true believer of those multi-seats systems and got a little irritated by miniframeUK stating they are the first, the best and the only software product in the market. It's simply not true and I had to put an end to it.

    Dr. Jivago

  5. #79

    tmcd35's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    5,576
    Thank Post
    834
    Thanked 873 Times in 726 Posts
    Blog Entries
    9
    Rep Power
    324
    Okay, sorry if I jumped off the deep end a little - but I was getting a little annoyed at the x product is better than y product arguments, and which came first. Really it doesn't matter. MiniframeUK (Colin) is plugging his product, it's only to be expected and I take it with a pinch of salt.

    You say you licensed each seat - 20 seats. I agree this is the way forward. The question is how did you purchase those licenses? 20 FPP licenses, thats 4000+. 20 OEM licenses, thats 2000+. Or 20 select/open licenses - about 600. And then there are questions with OEM and select/open licenses on their validity in this case. Thus the confusion and arguments here in.

    FPP licenses mean this technology is too expensive and a waste of time. OEM licenses is very border line in cost and the other benefits of this tech may sway it. Select/Open licensing makes this tech a complete no brainer!

    You don't need a Law Degree to read a EULA and draw conclusions from it. And the MS EULA, if legally binding (and there are some good arguments why it may not be), is the only source to draw from on this topic. It's the EULA that tells us if we are allowed to do this or not. Therefor reading and drawing conclusions from the EULA is the only way to get to the bottom of this without either

    a) a definitive statement from Microsoft

    or

    b) a civil case being brought to test either the validity or meaning of the EULA

    Quite frankly I have more chance of winning the lottery than either of those happening and so I am left with EULA and my interpretation of it. If my interpretation is wrong Microsoft are free to sue me and a civil court will make a ruling.

  6. #80

    Ric_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    London
    Posts
    7,590
    Thank Post
    109
    Thanked 762 Times in 593 Posts
    Rep Power
    180
    Quote Originally Posted by tmcd35 View Post
    Regardless of which of the three systems we individually choose to use (if any) the question we should concentrating on is same for each - Windows Licensing and EULA's. To be fair it's not up to SoftXpand, nComputing or BeTwin to answer this question. This is a question for us the end user and Microsoft.
    I disagree... surely the companies selling such products should tell the end user what licenses are needed. If you take, for example, a Citrix partner, they will tell you that you need to purchase per user or per device terminal services CALs in addition to your XenApp licenses. Likewise, I would imagine Windows CALs and Office licenses should be purchased according to the same rules as in a terminal services enviroment.

    I also believe that the only 'safe' way of licensing is to air on the side of caution... you cannot assume that these softwares get around the 'device issue'. If you turned around to MS and told them you were running multiple instances of XP in VMs on a single physical host so that multiple users could connect, they wwould simply tell you to buy the correct number of licenses. IMHO this is the same situation to what is being discussed.

    I think that the only way to resolve this grey area is for Softxpand (or a similar company) to follow the same path as Citrix and become a MS partner. Paying MS for the right to alter their software in this way is the only way to get a definitive answer. I'm not a fan of MS licensing but I do believe that a company building it's product around the MS operating systems should pay for the right.

  7. Thanks to Ric_ from:

    verygreenpc (7th July 2009)

  8. #81

    tmcd35's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    5,576
    Thank Post
    834
    Thanked 873 Times in 726 Posts
    Blog Entries
    9
    Rep Power
    324
    Quote Originally Posted by Ric_ View Post
    I disagree... surely the companies selling such products should tell the end user what licenses are needed.
    I think this is were some confusion is creeping into this thread. That fact is they are advising us on how many licenses they believe we require to run the software. The answer they have been given all along in 1.

    Now since it's an End User agreement, it's up to us the End User to make sure we keep within the terms and conditions of the agreement we've accepted. It's not up to any third party to do that for us. If Microsoft do not like our interpretation of the agreement then they have a legal remedy to take against us.

    As NM's it's up to us to interpret the EULA and not blindly trust the advice of the third party software companies. It may be they are giving correct advice, but we have to make sure for ourselves. This includes Citrix. Citrix advice me on how meny CALs they believe I need to use their product, It's up to me to make sure and buy the correct number of CALs. If I don't Micrsofts problem is with me not Citrix.

    I also believe that the only 'safe' way of licensing is to air on the side of caution... you cannot assume that these softwares get around the 'device issue'. If you turned around to MS and told them you were running multiple instances of XP in VMs on a single physical host so that multiple users could connect, they wwould simply tell you to buy the correct number of licenses. IMHO this is the same situation to what is being discussed.
    For Windows XP this is the entire debate. nComputing clearly use a hardware device to communicate with extra RDP session. SoftXPand and BeTwin on the other hand don't. I have 1 computer with 1 extended display and 5 usb keyboards plugged in.

    SoftXpand would argue, and I am beginning to agree, that no additional device are being connected. In my mind SoftXpand/BeTwin have more in common with a split screen multiplayer game than multiple RDP sessions.

    The question here is the definition of the word "device". I could find nothing clear in the EULA for XP. And so unless Microsoft make this definition clear, only a court can answer the question.

    This ambiguity only exits in the XP EULA. The Vista EULA clearly states 'One User' at a time - clause 2b. So without additional licenses using SoftXpand on VISTA is against the terms of the EULA.

    I think that the only way to resolve this grey area is for Softxpand (or a similar company) to follow the same path as Citrix and become a MS partner. Paying MS for the right to alter their software in this way is the only way to get a definitive answer. I'm not a fan of MS licensing but I do believe that a company building it's product around the MS operating systems should pay for the right.
    I like this idea. It's certainly one way to start putting this to bed. So Miniframe, you want to lead the way? Go on, apply to become an MS partner and tell us how you get on.
    Last edited by tmcd35; 4th July 2009 at 06:34 AM.

  9. #82

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Derby
    Posts
    51
    Thank Post
    11
    Thanked 13 Times in 10 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5
    Rep Power
    0
    Hey Terry, you are the voice of reason, thanks for your understanding of the solution. I'll update everyone as to what is happening as soon as I can. I'll try and coincide it with the launch of SoftXpand 3 and our rebrand. Anyone on EduGeek who has SoftXpand already will be able to upgrade to the latest version for free.

  10. #83

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    8
    Thank Post
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Rep Power
    0

    Back to the future

    Quote Originally Posted by miniframeuk View Post
    Ayup Dave, SoftXpand currently supports Windows Server 2003 and SoftXpand 3 will support Windows 7 and Windows 2008. You're bang on the money about it clarifying the liecnsing, I cannot argue with that, whereas the Windows XP licensing is open to debate.

    I recall the promises of dear Miniframe from three month ago, and wanted to know if they were fulfilled.

    Checking on MiniFrame's web site, they don't support Windows 7 nor Server 2008 with their new SoftXpand 3. The only OS they do support it's Windows XP Pro 32 bit.

    On the other hand, Thinsoft supports now fully Windows 7 and Server 2008 (32 & 64 bit) with
    their BeTwin and WinConnect products.

    Colin, What kind of excuse would you give now ?

    Dr. Jivago

  11. #84

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Derby
    Posts
    51
    Thank Post
    11
    Thanked 13 Times in 10 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5
    Rep Power
    0
    Hello All,

    Sorry for the lack of response. We had a bout of the pig flu, and also launched SoftXpand in Scotland at the Scottish Learning Festival, and to the Contact Centre Market at the Call Centre Expo. We recently won the Dell Technology Innovation of the Year Award too, and have had to present to the UK Government CIO.

    Remember SoftXpand is a classic desktop virtualisation solution, often referred to us as Ultra thin, not a server based Thin client computing solution. I regret that the Windows 7 version is in beta and I don't expect a release of this in 2009.

    As previously stated we posted Microsofts official response that 1 copy of the Operating System was all that was required. However, with many schools, they've been sending accross their volume license codes and activation CDs for licensing which we've been using to build their multiseat computers. This seems to have circumvented the operating system licensing issue to a large extent.

    Most software products will allow all users to open and edit different documents at the same time, using the same program. Users who intend to run the software products concurrently are advised to review the Software Products' End User License Agreement.

    We've been checking out the BeTwin products and had them in the office. We are impressed by the product range, just not the performance.

    Cheers,
    Col

  12. #85
    chrbb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Midlands
    Posts
    1,506
    Thank Post
    141
    Thanked 66 Times in 61 Posts
    Rep Power
    46
    Apart from the licensing issue, is anyone using Softxpand? If so have you experienced any problems with it running our wonderful education software, do you need to buy a super expensive pc to run it? With a small budget we can't afford to buy anything that may end up not the value for money and the environment that we thought it was.

    This is a request for honest feedback as I'm pretty sure I'll be asked about it soon at school

  13. #86

    dhicks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Knightsbridge
    Posts
    5,613
    Thank Post
    1,230
    Thanked 773 Times in 671 Posts
    Rep Power
    235
    Quote Originally Posted by chrbb View Post
    Apart from the licensing issue, is anyone using Softxpand?
    Nope, we're running an nComputing system in our staffroom. All the software I've tried on it doesn't even seem to notice it's running on anything other than a "normal" Windows PC (although we're running it on Server 2003, which might make a difference). I have just had to re-image the machine as the staff had stuffed it so full of spyware it was spending all its time running conflicting spyware apps, all, I assume, spying on each other. Obviously this isn't nComputing's (or SoftExpand's) fault, but it does make for a single point of failure.

    --
    David Hicks

  14. Thanks to dhicks from:

    chrbb (11th November 2009)

  15. #87

    tmcd35's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    5,576
    Thank Post
    834
    Thanked 873 Times in 726 Posts
    Blog Entries
    9
    Rep Power
    324
    Quote Originally Posted by chrbb View Post
    Apart from the licensing issue, is anyone using Softxpand? If so have you experienced any problems with it running our wonderful education software, do you need to buy a super expensive pc to run it?
    Yes, I have it installed on 1 PC in our SEN dept here. Also, another local secondary school have it everywhere - on all machines. I went and viewed their set-up before trialing it here.

    We've had a few teething problems due to incompatibilities with out student GPO's. But since sorting that out it's been fine. The teacher and students in that room don't realise it's one PC - they think there are four seperate stations - which I class as a success. So far no issues with software.

    I have two minor reservations. There's a 10 second timer that can be disturbed during PC boot up, this gives you a chance as an admin to boot the PC normally instead of running the SoftXpans system. Or gives students a chance of stopping the boot process, grrr. The previous version booted to a normal logon screen and autostarted SoftXpand if you didn't logon from there within 5-10sec. Which was better.

    The other question is licensing. Especially with my reading of the Windows 7 EULA. Although I personally feel Enterprise Edition should cover for 4 licenses inc virtualisation, the EULA does seem to suggest only one user at a time.

    We are seeing how this test PC in SEN works over the next term. We'll see how the land lays come Easter when we are due to do the next suite upgrade.


    Edit: We are also testing nComputing in our Library. So far nComputing, with it's hardware solution, does seem the easier and better to set up. However SoftXpands upgrades, roadmap and generally very good support trump nComputing everytime. nComputing's hardware solution with SoftXpands development and support teams would be ideal!
    Last edited by tmcd35; 10th November 2009 at 09:26 PM.

  16. 2 Thanks to tmcd35:

    chrbb (11th November 2009), verygreenpc (11th November 2009)

  17. #88

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Derby
    Posts
    51
    Thank Post
    11
    Thanked 13 Times in 10 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5
    Rep Power
    0
    Hi Chaps;

    For the hardware solution, a SoftXpand ecoware inside 6 user PC with Windows XP should be around the 1,200 SRP from the VAR network.

    Terry (aside from Oriel) is the only end user in the world currently running SoftXpand 3.0 RC in a live environment. This was a slip on my part I'm afraid so I'll take the slapped wrists. Terry the full version will be with you next week I'm told by the development team.

    Liked your comment about the hardware solution, it's something we're examining in real detail (although next week's SoftXpand 3.0 should be plug and play) and hope to make some announcements early Q1 next year.

    In fact let's put it out there. How would you guys prefer it? An integrated proprietary access device, monitor or complete workstation (monitor, keyboard, mouse) or software only using off the shelf usb hub and components? Or a choice of both?

    If anyone needs to find a school near them with SoftXpand let me know and I'll see if I can put you in touch.

    Cheers,
    Col

  18. #89
    chrbb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Midlands
    Posts
    1,506
    Thank Post
    141
    Thanked 66 Times in 61 Posts
    Rep Power
    46
    Sorry same question again a few months on and post Bett trip

    Is anyone using this successfully in a primary school in the ICT suite? We have a suite of 23 computers that will need replacing this year and next, going to have to replace half this year and remaining half next year. The thought of needing 4 new and softxpand or a similar software setup is making me wonder if my plan of replacing current desktops with like is the right idea. However with a very limited budget if I make the wrong choice we have to live with for 4 years

    Please can any schools (or any that you know of) that are using the system please give me honest opinions, I've had the sales talk now need the feedback

  19. #90

    tmcd35's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    5,576
    Thank Post
    834
    Thanked 873 Times in 726 Posts
    Blog Entries
    9
    Rep Power
    324
    Quote Originally Posted by chrbb View Post
    Please can any schools (or any that you know of) that are using the system please give me honest opinions, I've had the sales talk now need the feedback
    PM'd

SHARE:
+ Post New Thread
Page 6 of 15 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 ... 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
  •