Actually, we had thought of putting in a module to request the key automatically, the code was fairly simple to request a new key from our server via TCP, and as long as the product had not expired the whole thing could be generated within a short transaction. When we floated it to some of our customers, they mostly responded back with "why?".
So it wasn't worth the time to finish the code, but I kept the original prototype just in case we changed our minds later. Brian On Sat, 31 Dec 2011 20:11:17 -0600, Mike Schwab <[email protected]> wrote: >Here is an idea: How about the message to the operator has reply >value of ACK or ENTER. >ACK would stand for acknowledge that you need a new key. >ENTER would start a dialog to enter a new key. >Reply with a 800 number to call and a customer number for the company. >When the operator calls, you look them up and give them a license key >for the new machine. > >On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 6:43 PM, Brian Westerman ><[email protected]> wrote: >> So the question should be, who should bear the cost of that? The vendor, >> who has no control over the choices, or the site that wants to run the >> software? >> >> Unfortunately, this whole thread has sparked a heated debate internally >> here. There are those that are for scrapping the licensing code, and those >> that want it increased so that it's tighter with an easier way to extend >> things, (which seems counter productive to me). As with most arguments, the >> ones that develop the code have one mindset, and the ones that support the >> code have another, with the one that don't do either sitting on the fence >> cheering for blood:). >> >> Brian >> >> >> On Fri, 30 Dec 2011 21:55:37 -0500, Robert A. Rosenberg <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>>At 20:42 -0600 on 12/29/2011, Brian Westerman wrote about Re: cpu / >>>machine identification: >>> >>>>We have DR support in our software, but I was under the impression >>>>that most of the DR sites were running the OS under VM and they >>>>simulated the serial anyway. >>>> >>>>I suppose their are sites that do not run the DR under VM, but don't >>>>the sites who don't run under VM know the serial number ahead of >>>>time, and wouldn't it be already built into the software, or they >>>>have a already setup job to enter the new serial(s)? I know I would >>>>have it set up if it were me. >>> >>>Knowing the Serial Number of the machine you are going to run DR on >>>and having it already built into the software is being too >>>optimistic. Not only can you have multiple DR Sites to go to and >>>choosing one based on who can service you when you need DR Services >>>but even if it was only one site, I am sure that they have multiple >>>machines and you would not want to list all of them. Until you get >>>there, you would not know which machine that is going to be assigned >>>to you. >>> >>>---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, >>>send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, >> send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > >-- >Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA >Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all? > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- >For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, >send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
