but there's no license enforcement in the software to begin with so how
is it problematic from a revenue standpoint?
Craig Bender wrote:
It's really the enforcement of the license. Which we don't do currently
which would make something like a soft client problematic from a revenue
standpoint.
David Mackintosh wrote:
On Wed, Jul 27, 2005 at 08:41:02PM -0700, Craig Bender wrote:
That's awesome!
I hear you on the softclient. I'm in your camp. I always try. Two
questions though (being serious here):
Would pay for a soft client?
If Sun Ray changed it's licensing that it was per connection (i.e.
like Citrix), how would you feel about that?
Hi Craig
Personally -- yes, I'd pay for a soft client. Why? Because it gets
into the total-value scenario -- I could issue my home users with the
soft client to run on their windows things, and over a VPN to a
dedicated Sun Ray client interconnect network, you would have all the
benefits of a remote user experience with practically none of the
hassles of having remote employees use their own spyware infested
home computers.
(breath)
OK, regarding the licensing -- how would a 'per-connection' licensing
scheme differ from the current (apparrent) 'per-user' licensing scheme?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
SunRay-Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.filibeto.org/mailman/listinfo/sunray-users
_______________________________________________
SunRay-Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.filibeto.org/mailman/listinfo/sunray-users
--
Darin Perusich
Unix Systems Administrator
Cognigen Corp.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
SunRay-Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.filibeto.org/mailman/listinfo/sunray-users
