Gerry Hickman said:
It's not to do with what we "think" is reasonable.
That's not what I meant. I meant that I think it's legal. I don't have
my MSDN licence on me at the moment, but I'll check when I can.
It's to do with what
is legal under the license agreement, and I've seen nothing in the small
print saying it's OK to set up a central server (Win2k3, Sharepoint,
Exchange, IIS, SQL Server) and have all developers connect and
collaborate? The way I'm reading the license is that each developer can
only install and use their OWN copy of the servers - if true, it's
totally absurd.
Yes, but I don't think that *is* the way it's meant. Rather than me
speculating, actually, I suspect your best course is to ask MS. I'm
sure they have a whole department dedicated
No, that would definitely not be allowed. I guess in an environment that
big, all the servers would have production licenses and any dev tools
would be on volume licenses.
Yup.
Ah OK. Well that, in itself, implies the code base is not identical.
It's good to know the difference though.
It doesn't imply that the installed code is necessarily different - it
could just be the installer.
But surely the "Product ID" will still be the "OEM/MSDN" one??
I don't think so. (I think OEM is different to MSDN, basically.) I've
certainly had no trouble using a full licence key with an MSDN disc.
Hmmm, well as above, I'm pretty sure the product ID will be different.
Anyway, I'll look into this, it would be nice to only have to manage ONE
set of CDs!
Absolutely. It's what I'm currently doing, and I've certainly had no
technical problems with it. (Whether there's some trace or not I can't
say for sure, of course, but I've never run into problems.)
