Anonymous_User Absent Member.
Absent Member.
1021 views

Let me count...

the ways I hate Microsoft and it's licensing practices. Other than MS
over-complicating licensing in hopes of better profits, actually getting
the licenses is another problematic issue. I bought terminal service
licenses, but have no idea where to get them. Last time I had to deal
with them they sent a certificate for them. I got my CDW rep working on
it for me though.

The second problem I have isn't as much to do with Microsoft directly as
it does indirectly. I can't seem to get SQL Server 2000, not that I
really want it. However, to my misfortune, the main program here
requires it. Why? Because the people who developed our software
decided that MS made SQL Server 2005 to hard to program with. So they
are leap frogging SQL Server 2005 and going directly to 2008. (I have
names for them, but they aren't appropriate here.)

OPEN SOURCE SAVES LIVES!
Labels (1)
0 Likes
9 Replies
Anonymous_User Absent Member.
Absent Member.

Re: Let me count...

Ok, well I figured out the terminal service licensing problem. Not
explain well, but easy enough to remedy.

The SQL Server is going to be my Achilles heal though. I blame the
developers for this one, but I blame MS too. I'm tired and cranky and I
can blame whomever I wish. 😄
0 Likes
Anonymous_User Absent Member.
Absent Member.

Re: Let me count...

> the ways I hate Microsoft and it's licensing practices.

Stop using their products...getting easier to do these days.


0 Likes
adrockk Contributor.
Contributor.

Re: Let me count...

If they require SQL 2000, then make them provide it. Tell them you are more
than willing to buy the licenses, but just tell them they need to get their
hands on it for you.
--



Matthew spewed:

> Ok, well I figured out the terminal service licensing problem. Not explain
> well, but easy enough to remedy.
>
> The SQL Server is going to be my Achilles heal though. I blame the
> developers for this one, but I blame MS too. I'm tired and cranky and I can
> blame whomever I wish. 😄


0 Likes
Anonymous_User Absent Member.
Absent Member.

Re: Let me count...

Adam Gabriel wrote:
> If they require SQL 2000, then make them provide it. Tell them you are more
> than willing to buy the licenses, but just tell them they need to get their
> hands on it for you.


We are not willing to pay for it again. We just bought a license to SQL
Server 2008, which according the the Microsoft guy at CDW is
downgrade-able to 2000. The biggest problem is getting the media. You
can't download it from Microsoft and I don't know anybody who has a copy.

I tried calling Microsoft, but after 30 or so minutes got tired of
waiting and hung up. However, I am going to tell them about all the
problem with SQL Server 2000. I've already suggested the switch to
something like Postgresql. 😄
0 Likes
Anonymous_User Absent Member.
Absent Member.

Re: Let me count...

GofBorg wrote:
>> the ways I hate Microsoft and it's licensing practices.

>
> Stop using their products...getting easier to do these days.
>
>


Not for me. I'm stuck with them.
0 Likes
Knowledge Partner
Knowledge Partner

Re: Let me count...

Yes, MS Licensing is terrible. Not only does their website say one thing, but their sales and licensing people say completely contradictory things.

For example:

In Windows 2003, MS changed the Terminal Server licensing again so that you are REQUIRED to buy a TS CAL for every device that's connecting (in addition to Windows CAL) UNLESS the device is Windows XP AND you bought it before some date that I can't remember.

In Windows 2000, MS only required TS CALs if you were using something pre Windows 2000/XP.

However, supposedly their sales people say that the 2003 statement is incorrect and there's supposedly some hidden area on the website that contradicts their own licensing statement.
0 Likes
Anonymous_User Absent Member.
Absent Member.

Re: Let me count...

Matthew;1797873 wrote:
Adam Gabriel wrote:
The biggest problem is getting the media. You
can't download it from Microsoft and I don't know anybody who has a copy.



I have a Technet subscription (gives me access to all the media I can download, as well as play-around licenses for anything I want to try out before spending any more money) and a shiny magazine (don't actually read the magazine much, but it's still printed on paper, so I appreciate it).

I don't like saying anything nice about MS, but that is a handy resource if you have to use their stuff at all.
0 Likes
Anonymous_User Absent Member.
Absent Member.

Re: Let me count...

One issue I had with CDW and MS Licensing. They like to sell it to you off
of someone else's contract. You wont ever receive anything from MS. You
need to get the Enrollment ID they used and call MS.
You will probably need to call MS anyways to activate your Terminal license
server anyways.

Jordack

"Matthew" <systemRemovEtyrant@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:fNbTl.3093$rb5.1674@kovat.provo.novell.com...
> the ways I hate Microsoft and it's licensing practices. Other than MS
> over-complicating licensing in hopes of better profits, actually getting
> the licenses is another problematic issue. I bought terminal service
> licenses, but have no idea where to get them. Last time I had to deal
> with them they sent a certificate for them. I got my CDW rep working on
> it for me though.
>
> The second problem I have isn't as much to do with Microsoft directly as
> it does indirectly. I can't seem to get SQL Server 2000, not that I
> really want it. However, to my misfortune, the main program here requires
> it. Why? Because the people who developed our software decided that MS
> made SQL Server 2005 to hard to program with. So they are leap frogging
> SQL Server 2005 and going directly to 2008. (I have names for them, but
> they aren't appropriate here.)
>
> OPEN SOURCE SAVES LIVES!


0 Likes
Anonymous_User Absent Member.
Absent Member.

Re: Let me count...

> However, supposedly their sales people say that the 2003 statement is
> incorrect and there's supposedly some hidden area on the website that
> contradicts their own licensing statement.


I imagine MS violates their own EULA by now.

0 Likes
The opinions expressed above are the personal opinions of the authors, not of Micro Focus. By using this site, you accept the Terms of Use and Rules of Participation. Certain versions of content ("Material") accessible here may contain branding from Hewlett-Packard Company (now HP Inc.) and Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company. As of September 1, 2017, the Material is now offered by Micro Focus, a separately owned and operated company. Any reference to the HP and Hewlett Packard Enterprise/HPE marks is historical in nature, and the HP and Hewlett Packard Enterprise/HPE marks are the property of their respective owners.