Re: What happens when cals exceeded?

Tech-Archive recommends: Repair Windows Errors & Optimize Windows Performance

From: root (postmaster_at_buchanangc.com)
Date: 05/18/04 

Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 14:43:37 -0700

"Steve Foster [SBS MVP]" <steve.foster@picamar.co.uk> wrote in message
news:xn0difgdx2v2nkl00z@msnews.microsoft.com...
> root wrote:
>
> >
> > "Steve Foster [SBS MVP]" <steve.foster@picamar.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:xn0dien6i1rfnt500p@msnews.microsoft.com...
> > > root wrote:
> > >
> > > > > I carefully made no mention of what the SBS might think in that
> > > > > situation. Fact is, it's legal. Fact is, SBS will almost
> > > > > certainly throw a hissy fit. See my other post for opinions on
> > > > > the SBS LLS (Lame Licensing Service, I believe it stands for)...
> > > >
> > > > And just where are the droves of posts from folks who are being
> > > > horribly abused and let down by the alleged poor licensing
> > > > functionality?? WHERE??
> > >
> > > Um, here? We've had lots of posts over the years about problems with
> > > the LLS in previous versions of SBS.
> >
> > "previous".
>
> Yeah, it's called history, and track record. One day you'll have that
> kind of understanding.
>
> > > There are several threads going on
> > > currently about licensing and CAL usage and counts as shown in the
> > > SBS consoles not making any sense to the local admin person.
> >
> > Those are NOT complaints about CAL problems stopping honest users in
> > SBS2003.
> >
> > > http://groups.google.com/groups?num=50&hl=en&lr=lang_en&ie=UTF-8&saf
> > > e=of f&q=license+logging+service+sbs&btnG=Search
> >
> > Nothing recent there.
> >
> > > http://groups.google.com/groups?num=50&hl=en&lr=lang_en&ie=UTF-8&saf
> > > e=of f&q=out+of+licenses+sbs&btnG=Search
> >
> > Nothing recent of revelance is there either.
>
> Hmmm. selective blindness I see.

Clueless. I invite anyone to go look at those citations for themselves.
>
> >
> > > are a couple of google searches that will give you some idea of
> > > threads about this topic.
> >
> > And those searches PROVE my assertion. There are no "droves".
>
> Who said anything about droves, eh? You did. I said nothing about
> droves.

Clueless. I invite anyone to read the thread and decide for themselves what
was said. When trapped talking in a circle you drop to flat flase claims.

Relevant Pages