[p4] Multiple clients - single user

[Greg Whitfield]

I'm sure nobody was accusing you of piracy.

But on per-user vs per-client, I think making per "real person" is
absolutely the right model for licenses.

If I want to create a new client space to handle different development
branch, or perhaps documentation or management information, I would not
want to be charged for that. Or have my workflow interrupted by having
to go through the purchasing cycle. 

I would also end up getting charged every time I added a new build
machine to my network. 

Clients are about being able to organise your data in a way that suits
your own working practices. If Perforce put up a cost barrier to prevent
you organising things that streamline your own activities I think it
would lose a great deal of its power and flexibility. I probably would
not have recommended purchasing it either.

Just my 10c worth.

Greg
~~~~



-----Original Message-----
From: Didster [mailto:didster at gmail.com] 
Sent: 15 June 2007 11:11
To: Greg Whitfield
Cc: Robert Cowham; paul goffin; perforce-user at perforce.com
Subject: Re: [p4] Multiple clients - single user

Hi Guys,

Thanks very much for all your responses.

Just to be clear, my query was out of curiosity more than anything - we
have already purchased a licence for 9 users which covers our current 4
perm staff + any temps + a bit of expansion.

At our company, we have been forced to use a product called Accurev for
the last 3 years for source control [it's truly dreadful] and the cost
of 9 user licences for perforce was worth every penny.

But...  Not every "company" in the world takes software theft seriously
- and it just seemed to me that it's a strange decision to make the
license based on per-user rather than per-client when sharing a user
technically is possible and presents no problems from a functional point
of view - hence my question.

Thanks


On 6/15/07, Greg Whitfield <Greg.Whitfield at lightworkdesign.com> wrote:
>
>
> >I loved the story of a vendor whose product was secured by a dongle
> read at
> >start up. After a support conversation they realised that a certain
> customer
> >was using the same license multiple times. It eventually turned out
> that one
> >chap at the customer had the job of cycling round between branch
> offices with
> >said dongle every morning, getting the software running on various
> machines!
>
> Can't have been my software then - many moons ago when I wrote the 
> dongle checker for a program, it kept checking at random intervals, 
> and would not allow things like file-save's without a dongle.
>
> Still, a job title of "Dongle Cycler" has a certain ring to it :)
>
>
>