Yes, you do have a point, but very difficult to manage this way. Your Thin
Client/Workstation names would need to be consistent for all those that
can
or can't run office apps, to make the WMI filter less complex, but way too
hard to manage moving forward. With Appsense, you just give it a list of
workstation names, and away it goes. But as you pointed out, it can be
done. I bet you've never implemented it like this?
Cheers,
Jeremy.
"Jeff Pitsch"
<jepitsch@xxxxxxx
om> To
Sent by: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
thin-bounce@freel cc
ists.org
Subject
[THIN] Re: Office and legalities
03/10/2006 09:08
PM
Please respond to
thin@xxxxxxxxxxxx
g
Not entirely true Jeremy. Group Policy can be filtered based on WMI
filters as well. So depending on your situation this could very well take
care of what your saying.
Jeff Pitsch
Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
Provision Networks VIP
Forums not enough?
Get support from the experts at your business
http://jeffpitschconsulting.com
On 10/3/06, Jeremy Saunders <jeremy.saunders@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I don't think so, because isn't that user control? What if a manager,
that
has access to Office, and is licensed from his Terminal, logs into a
Terminal in the warehouse and runs up Office on that, which is not
licensed
for Office. Then he has broken the licensing agreement. SRP and NTFS
permissions cannot control this (prevent Office from running from that
Terminal). The way we understand it is that if and when the customer is
audited, they will be asked to show how they prevent Office apps from
being
run from these devices. But it seems as though many of us have different
opinions on this. And it's good to see that we aren't the only ones that
have struggled to ensure that our customers have a totally legal
deployment
of Office on Terminal Servers. You can only do your best. Different
opinions is what make the world go around. :)
Anyway, thanks for pointing out the new rules. At least they are starting
to become more realistic with their approach to this subject for the good
of the SMB's.
Cheers,
Jeremy.
"Jeff Pitsch"
<jepitsch@xxxxxxx
om> To
Sent by: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
thin-bounce@freel cc
ists.org
Subject
[THIN] Re: Office and legalities
03/10/2006 07:29
PM
Please respond to
thin@xxxxxxxxxxxx
g
SRP and NTFS to name a couple of free ways of doing it.
Again, as I said, ask 3 different licensing people and get 4 different
answers. This has always been the truth with Microsoft.
Jeff Pitsch
Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
Provision Networks VIP
Forums not enough?
Get support from the experts at your business
http://jeffpitschconsulting.com
On 10/2/06, Jeremy Saunders <jeremy.saunders@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Interesting Jeff....they've gone and changed it.
These scenarios are very different to previous. Scenarios 1, 6 and 7
clearly state that we can do, what they clearly stated we couldn't do
when
we discussed this with them earlier in the year. That's very frustrating.
Even though customers can take advantage of Scenario 1, there is no
control
mechanism in place to manage this. The only real answer seems to be using
Appsense Application Manager to prevent access to these applications by a
per-device mechanism. Otherwise, how do you prevent someone from logging
in
and launching an Office app from a Terminal that is not licensed to run
it?
Cheers.
Kind regards,
Jeremy Saunders
Senior Technical Specialist
Infrastructure Technology Services
(ITS) & Cerulean
Global Technology Services (GTS)
IBM Australia
Level 2, 1060 Hay Street
West Perth WA 6005
Visit us at
http://www.ibm.com/services/au/its
P: +61 8 9261 8412 F: +61 8 9261 8486
M: TBA E-mail:
jeremy.saunders@xxxxxxxxxxx
"Jeff Pitsch"
<jepitsch@xxxxxxx
om>
To
Sent by: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
thin-bounce@freel
cc
ists.org
Subject
[THIN] Re: Office and legalities
30/09/2006 04:55
AM
Please respond to
thin@xxxxxxxxxxxx
g
That's not true Jeremy. The paper I linked explains that it's not true.
It used to be that way but not anymore.
Jeff Pitsch
Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
Provision Networks VIP
Forums not enough?
Get support from the experts at your business
http://jeffpitschconsulting.com
On 9/29/06, Jeremy Saunders < jeremy.saunders@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I'm not 100% sure about that one as the OEM or Retail license means that
the device still has a license. But yes, if you've got Pro installed on
your Terminal/Citrix Server, then they'll need Pro at home.
Microsoft Office licenses are per device, not user. Therefore, every
device
that connects to your Terminal/Citrix Servers must have a license.
The only way to control this is to use Appsense Application Manager,
which
has been certified by Microsoft for this purpose. Changing NTFS
permissions, etc, is not acceptable in Microsoft's eyes.
It took us 6 months to get this clarified by Microsoft. Even the
licensing
people had to go away and think about it because they couldn't understand
their own licensing agreement. They all have their own interpretation. In
the end we had several Microsoft people in the To and CC fields of this
e-mail that went backwards and forwards as we were sick and tired of
getting different answers.
So now whenever we do a deployment where a customer does not have an
Enterprise or Select agreement, we will sell them Appsense Application
Manager. In Australia that works out to be about $2,500 per server. There
is a whitepaper on the Appsense web site discussing this.
Cheers.
Kind regards,
Jeremy Saunders
Senior Technical Specialist
Infrastructure Technology Services
(ITS) & Cerulean
Global Technology Services (GTS)
IBM Australia
Level 2, 1060 Hay Street
West Perth WA 6005
Visit us at
http://www.ibm.com/services/au/its
P: +61 8 9261 8412 F: +61 8 9261 8486
M: TBA E-mail:
jeremy.saunders@xxxxxxxxxxx
"Matthew
Shrewsbury"
<MShrewsbury@COSC
To
ANHOMES.com> < thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by:
cc
thin-bounce@freel
ists.org
Subject
[THIN] Re: Office and legalities
30/09/2006 01:10
AM
Please respond to
thin@xxxxxxxxxxxx
g
I spoke to Microsoft about this and they where even more particular
about this. They said the home version had to be the same version
(Standard/Pro)and had to be the same license model E.G Open Business. Of
course most people with home computers are going to have OEM or Retail.
They said they did make exceptions for one time uses at Kiosks.
Matthew Shrewsbury, MCSE+Internet MCSE 2000 CCA Server+
Network Manager
-----Original Message-----
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Beckett, William (Bill)
Sent: Friday, September 29, 2006 1:04 PM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: Office and legalities
From home is a different story. I thought your email referred to work
PC's. Either way, home PC's would have to have a licensed copy of Office
installed to access Office from a Terminal Server OR Citrix, whatever
your case may be.
-----Original Message-----
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx ] On
Behalf Of Adam.Baum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Friday, September 29, 2006 12:59 PM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: Office and legalities
OK...Here's the hitch..It says that if "the device" is licensed, it can
run in TS too. Most of my home users do not have office, therefore
their "device" is not licensed. Thus the requirement to purchase
another copy of office. Our work laptops are licensed so they get a
free ride.
adam
"Jeff Pitsch"
<jepitsch@xxxxxxx
om>
To
Sent by: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
thin-bounce@freel
cc
ists.org
Subject
[THIN] Re: Office and legalities
09/29/2006 09:56
AM
Please respond to
thin@xxxxxxxxxxxx
g
That document is straight from Microsoft's website.
Remember with microsoft, you can ask 3 different licensing experts and
get
4 different answers. This paper is in writing.
Jeff Pitsch
Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
Provision Networks VIP
Forums not enough?
Get support from the experts at your business
http://jeffpitschconsulting.com
On 9/29/06, Adam.Baum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx < Adam.Baum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > wrote:
Interesting...where did you get this info? We had MS come right in
and
tell us we were not in compliance with licensing for Office.
adam
"Beckett, William
\(Bill\)"
<bill.beckett@ste
To
elcase.com > <thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >
Sent by:
cc
thin-bounce@freel
ists.org
Subject
[THIN] Re: Office and legalities
09/29/2006 08:33
AM
Please respond to
thin@xxxxxxxxxxxx
g
Huh, that's not what the documentation says. It says that if a device
is
licensed and has office installed, then that device is allowed to run
office from a terminal server session. Directly from the doc -
Q.
Once a device is licensed for a Desktop Application can I use that
application both locally on the device and through Terminal Services?
A.
Yes. A Desktop Application license gives the licensee the right to
locally install the software and also to use the same software through
Terminal Services. The licensee, however, is not required to locally
install the software and, in the case of Terminal Services, local
installation may not be technically possible or desired.
Q.
If I already have a device is license for a Desktop Application, what
additional licenses do I need to use that device as a remote client
within a Terminal Services environment?
A.
If the device owned by the end user is already licensed for the
Desktop
Application software, only the Windows Server and Terminal Services
licenses are necessary for remote Terminal Services usage of that
Desktop Application.
-----Original Message-----
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx ] On
Behalf Of Adam.Baum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Friday, September 29, 2006 11:22 AM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: Office and legalities
We found out the hard way (from Microsoft) that Office licensing in a
TS
environment is not so simple. MS does not offer a special licensing
program for Office. If your MF users also have Office on their
desktops, then you will need additional licenses to use it in the TS
world. We have
500+ metaframe users who have Office on their work desktops.
Microsoft
came back and said we need an additional license for each user if they
want to run it from metaframe. We ended up publishing Office to only
those users/workgroups that purchased the additional licensing. The
bulk of our users get the Office viewers when they remote in.
By the way, these are NOT concurrent licenses. They must be per user
and limited to those users who have purchased the additional licenses.
adam
"Beckett, William
\(Bill\)"
<bill.beckett@ste
To
elcase.com> < thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by:
cc
thin-bounce@freel
ists.org
Subject
[THIN] Office and legalities
09/29/2006 07:02
AM
Please respond to
thin@xxxxxxxxxxxx
g
Can I get some people to weigh in on the following scenario? -
With a published application environment, you can restrict who gets
access to what. If you don't want someone running office on a Citrix
box, then you can prevent them from running Office on a Citrix box. So
let's say I have 5 MS office 2003 licenses. I install it and publish
it
for 5 users in the farm. Am I legal within those boundaries from a
Microsoft licensing perspective? Enviroment is Win2003 TS with PS 4.0
************************************************
For Archives, RSS, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or set Digest or Vacation
mode use the below link:
//www.freelists.org/list/thin
************************************************
************************************************
For Archives, RSS, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or
set Digest or Vacation mode use the below link:
//www.freelists.org/list/thin
************************************************
************************************************
For Archives, RSS, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or
set Digest or Vacation mode use the below link:
//www.freelists.org/list/thin
************************************************
************************************************
For Archives, RSS, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or set Digest or Vacation
mode use the below link:
//www.freelists.org/list/thin
************************************************
************************************************
For Archives, RSS, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or
set Digest or Vacation mode use the below link:
//www.freelists.org/list/thin
************************************************
************************************************
For Archives, RSS, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or
set Digest or Vacation mode use the below link:
//www.freelists.org/list/thin
************************************************
************************************************
For Archives, RSS, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or
set Digest or Vacation mode use the below link:
//www.freelists.org/list/thin
************************************************
************************************************
For Archives, RSS, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or
set Digest or Vacation mode use the below link:
//www.freelists.org/list/thin
************************************************
************************************************
For Archives, RSS, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or
set Digest or Vacation mode use the below link:
//www.freelists.org/list/thin
************************************************
************************************************
For Archives, RSS, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or
set Digest or Vacation mode use the below link:
//www.freelists.org/list/thin
************************************************
