A REAL Filepro manual or just charge my ass and help me out with this memo exporting please
Nancy Palmquist
nancy.palmquist at vss3.com
Fri Apr 9 11:41:47 PDT 2021
Mark,
I have long complained about the filePro chosen licensing scheme,
especially for windows which is a windows count and not a butt/CPU count.
Seems to me they should license CPU's not windows but that argument is
long lost.
I have also tried to get a license that would not need to download a
file. This makes it very difficult to distribute a licensed version as
a runtime for a vertical package.
But they do not see filepro as an engine to use to develop vertical
packages for distribution, they see filePro as a custom development package.
You know I think filePro is a great tool and I will continue to use it
but I have had two long standing complaints.
1) the licensing model
2) the install procedures - I have yet to install filepro right the
first time - even on my own machines. I seem to be deficient in this
one area and have never been able to overcome it.
But this is just my two cents.
Have a great weekend all.
Bye,
Nancy
On 8/16/2017 2:17 PM, Fairlight via Filepro-list wrote:
> Richard,
>
> Most of the software today come with licensing schemes which do one of the
> following:
>
> 1) Activate with a simple code, and don't care about hardware changes.
>
> 2) Activate with a simple code, care about hardware changes, and give you a
> grace period to reactivate. (Windows follows this, I believe.)
>
> 3) Activate with a simple code, care about hardware changes, and give you
> -no- grace period. (Office 2010 definitely falls into this category, as to
> PopCap Games' games.)
>
> 4) Activate with a dongle-based license, against an eLicenser, iLok, or
> similar USB dongle or HDD-based key store. The dongle-based solutions
> allow you to switch which computer you're using, irrespective of hardware
> configuration; if you have a dongle with a valid license, you're golden.
>
> Of the software which cares about hardware changes, -most- only track
> cumulative changes before bitching. Windows doesn't care until you replace
> 2-3 components at once, typically.
>
> Then there's filePro. It cares if you change the two pieces of hardware
> -most- likely to change, which are your HDD and your NIC. Hell, I
> preemptively upgrade hard drives before they start dropping sectors, both
> to make sure I don't have data loss issues, and to upgrade capacity. I
> upgraded three hard drives last year, from 2TB to 6TB each, plus my SSD
> from 512MB to 1TB. There were about five pieces of software which even
> cared, and the only one which was problematic was Office 2010, which
> required a 3hr-long argument with Microsoft before they finally relented
> and gave me a new license. [This is one reason I'm so reticent to move
> from Win7 to Win10, as it's documented that it'll do it again.] The only
> reason it tripped some software was because I replaced so four pieces at
> once. Aside from Office, I was pain-free within an hour, and you have no
> idea how much software I have installed, from games, to VSTs, to
> productivity software.
>
> As far as NICs, I've seen too many blown NICs at client sites to want to
> rely on that. That's insane.
>
> Not only that, you're at the mercy of the company to get the new code.
> It's not like they have a simple and automated challenge/response client
> built into anything, as iZotope does. Oh, and when you need to do an
> emergency reinstall because your box blew out at 1am on a weekend? No,
> thank you very much.
>
> This draconian kind of scheme does not belong in what would purport to be
> enterprise-grade software. Even AutoCAD, dicks though they are, were at
> least dongle-based.
>
> ***NO*** software company should have the right to dictate that your
> legitimately licensed software immediately stops working properly the
> second you dare exercise -your right- to freely upgrade your hardware, for
> whatever reason you choose to upgrade. Compounding the issue is the
> general consensus from people I speak with who say that fP-Tech is
> notoriously hard to reach in a timely fashion.
>
> It's a matter of principle. When allegedly business-class software has
> worse user protection than artistic/creativity-based software like music
> VSTs, there's an issue.
>
> I'll say this: As a developer myself, I accept piracy as a cost of doing
> business. That is the price of playing in the software sandbox, full stop.
> Piracy is going nowhere, ever. My products are not inexpensive (OneGate is
> $1k, as are a few others). If someone needs to steal from me that badly,
> they need the money more than I do, apparently. I could use the money, but
> so be it. (God help them if I catch them, but I'm not going to penalise
> people with a horrible UX or borderline spyware up-front. No.)
>
> I would rather sink R&D time/money into features which cause users to
> -want- to purchase my quality software, rather than punish paying customers
> with draconian DRM. If you're making software which is good enough that
> people -want- to pay you for quality goods, and you can survive in a
> meritocracy, then you know you're doing it correctly. If you have to force
> them to do it, it's time to re-evaluate your offerings.
>
> I would rather every software company followed suit, and did business
> decently, rather than screwing their paying customers. A lot of people are
> dropping companies who play ball like this, because the -only- thing a lock
> does is keep an honest man out. People have also been known to pay for
> licenses of software, then pirate a copy with the DRM bypassed, strictly
> for the better UX. It is not an uncommon practise.
>
> mark->
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 01:35:39PM -0400, Richard Kreiss thus spoke:
>> Top Post:
>>
>> I don't know why everyone is bitching. Most of the software one purchases
>> today comes with some sort of licensing scheme. All of the paid Anti-virus
>> programs and the various tool programs come with licensing and will not
>> function if the registration code or license code is not entered.
>>
>> My Microsoft Action Pack comes with licensing and the user count available
>> with that software. If it comes with a single user count, it only allows
>> for the software to be installed and registered on one computer. If you try
>> to install it a second time, you will get an error message.
>>
>> Keep in mind that the *nix version of filePro always had user restrictions,
>> the Windows version on the other hand did not. One could purchase a 5 user
>> network version and have 250 users access it. Or an employer (direct
>> purchase) could purchase a 20 user license and not have any issues as the
>> business grew and added more users without paying for additional licenses.
>>
>> Yes, I wish there was an easier way to implement filePro's license manager.
>> However, I and my clients have not had issues with it. The only issue is
>> when a session does not end properly and the license manager needs to be
>> stopped and restarted to release that session. This happens mostly with
>> remote sessions.
>>
>> Also, at least with the Windows version, a batch file for adding the license
>> is supplied in case there is a problem installing the service at
>> installation time. With a minor modification this batch file can also stop
>> and the restart the license service. This could also most likely be
>> re-written using Windows PowerShell scripting.
>>
>> If you are referring to the complaint about sessions vs. seats, that is
>> something else. Intuits' QuickBooks also has a per session license.
>>
>> I have a client who used the Xenix version of filePro many years ago and was
>> familiar with that licensing. When we moved to the Windows licensing, he
>> was not happy with the per session licensing as a number of his employees
>> opened multiple windows, including himself. The trade-off was he did not
>> have to consider system command outputs as part of his user count. After
>> analyzing his usage, he only had to purchase an extra 5 user runtime to
>> handle the additional sessions.
>>
>> Although I am one person programming, I can have open 4 to 5 sessions on my
>> computer or 2 sessions on my laptop(tablet). I therefore have a 5 user
>> license for my office and a 2 user license for my tablet.
>>
>> What I find interesting is that those who have not upgraded are missing out
>> on all of the new features and functions that have been added since the
>> older version you are running. fP Tech has made upgrading rather cost
>> effective with their subscription plan. Keep in mind that they need to be
>> selling(have cash flow) to stay in business and their primary product has to
>> have new features and functions to keep up with client needs.
>>
>> Some of these features many would consider minor such as the ability to have
>> a scrolling screen field or the ability to apply a selection set to an
>> automatic index( making an auto index into an automatic demand index). Some
>> major changes are the ability to encrypt a field and now a complete file.
>> Visually the new selectbox() function which is similar to a listbox() except
>> one can prompt the user to type in characters to get to the item wanted.
>> Also added, although not as easy as PrintWizard, is the ability to output
>> PDF files. This breaks the dependency on PCL 3 and 5 compatible printers.
>>
>> For use developers, this can be an added income source in converting
>> existing outputs to PDF. I already did this for one client from and @key
>> which listed 3 letters which one could be selected. It then asked printed
>> or PDF. The print option the allowed for the selection of a printer.
>>
>> I had wanted to allow the user to select one of two directories(folders) to
>> send the PDF but that was nixed. It is dent to the user's "My Documents"
>> folder on their local machine.
>>
>> Mark, You develop tools to be used to handle issues that the primary program
>> cannot handle or cannot or does not handle well. You also have a licensing
>> mechanism to insure that your software is not pirated.
>>
>> Sans the license manager, isn't there new functionality that can be added to
>> an existing application that will entice your clients( developer or in-house
>> programmer) to want to upgrade? They do offer a free 30 day license to test
>> the new version. It is worth a look and the time spent.
>>
>> I have been developing with filePro since it was owned by Small Computer
>> Company at 230 W 41st street. I mention this as my offices were at 140 W
>> 40th. I started with Tandy's proFile and moved to FilePro 16 (Xenix) 1983.
>> I have been doing this for a lot of year now and am still learning. I have
>> received much help for others on the list when I have had problems.
>> However, there is nothing like being able to "play" with new functionality
>> to see what it can or can't do. One of the wish-list items was the ability
>> to size a browse window to fit the number of records selected, This was
>> especially true when only 2 or four records were selected when programmed
>> for 12. I took up this challenge one day and found a way to accomplish
>> this. I do use that programming when appropriate. Ken Brody demonstrated a
>> way to make a memo window dynamic at a filePro conference.
>>
>> Yes, filePro has shortcomings but how many programs can run software
>> developed on their early iterations? I can run programs I wrote in versions
>> 3,4, 4.1,4.5,4.8,5.0, etc. that goes back to programs I wrote in the late
>> 80's and 90's. I have clients who are still running by textile brokerage
>> program in versions earlier then 5.0 and only call when they need a new
>> printer or need to move the program to a new computer. The just don't have
>> problems. If they do, it is usually just a matter of rebuilding the
>> automatic indexes.
>>
>> Many years ago I had my primary application lifted by an employee who left a
>> client.
>>
>> After that, I had to write programming that in effect locked that
>> application to my client's equipment. The programming is similar for fP
>> Tech's licensing but without the user count. I also added programming to
>> insure that I received any payments where a client owed me monthly. No
>> payment, They could see and print out reports on what was already there but
>> could not add any new records.
>>
>> The interesting thing about this was the fellow who stole my software had
>> hired a bookkeeper who had worked for another client and when they finally
>> had an issue called me do come in a fix it. That was some 6 years after
>> pirating my program. I politely explained to the bookkeeper that I wouldn't
>> be available except if they paid the current price of the software plus a
>> rental fee for 6 years of prior use by certified check. An appointment
>> would be made after the check cleared my bank. They of course never paid
>> and the program became useless to them. By the way, this company is no
>> longer in business.
>>
>> So, the question is, how much pirating of filePro has been reduced and how
>> much income have they gotten from this licensing model? Everyone, keep in
>> mind the original owner's Small Computer Co. sued there largest outside
>> developer for thousands of dollars in lost revenue by that developer giving
>> away versions of filePro. I don't remember the name of the company but I
>> think it was in Pennsylvania. Small Computer won that case.
>>
>> Richard Kreiss
>>
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Filepro-list [mailto:filepro-list-
>>> bounces+rkreiss=verizon.net at lists.celestial.com] On Behalf Of Fairlight
>> via
>>> Filepro-list
>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2017 9:01 AM
>>> To: filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
>>> Subject: Re: A REAL Filepro manual or just charge my ass and help me out
>> with
>>> this memo exporting please
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 12:53:59PM +0000, Henry Melancon via Filepro-list
>>> thus spoke:
>>>> Do they not realize they are losing money because of the licensing????
>>> Well, I see two possible options:
>>>
>>> 1) They've only heard it from third party consultants/programmers rather
>> than
>>> direct customers (although I know Brian White has said it, and is an
>> employee of
>>> a direct customer), or
>>>
>>> 2) They've heard it from customers, and simply don't care. That's an
>> approach
>>> big companies like Adobe can afford to take, as people are always going to
>> want
>>> Adobe products. I wasn't under the impression that fP-Tech was in that
>> league.
>>> mark->
>>> --
>>> Audio panton, cogito singularis.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Filepro-list mailing list
>>> Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Subscription Changes
>>> http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
>>
--
Nancy Palmquist MOS & filePro Training Available
Virtual Software Systems Web Based Training and Consulting
PHONE: (412) 835-9417 Web site: http://www.vss3.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.celestial.com/pipermail/filepro-list/attachments/20210409/903b3c7a/attachment.html>
More information about the Filepro-list
mailing list