RE: Activate Server does not appear to work
- From: "Vera Noest [MVP]" <vera.noest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 13:23:12 -0700
Answered in your thread with subject "Terminal Server Licensing" in
this newsgroup.
The 120 day count certainly does *not* start with mere installation
of the base OS.
_________________________________________________________
Vera Noest
MCSE, CCEA, Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
TS troubleshooting: http://ts.veranoest.net
___ please respond in newsgroup, NOT by private email ___
"=?Utf-8?B?Y3JhaWc=?=" <craig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote on
13 okt 2005 in microsoft.public.windows.terminal_services:
> don't know if anyone is watching this thread anymore- a reply
> would have helped me out too!
> Anyone know if 120 days begins when you turn on terminal server
> (it was in remote admin mode since 2003 was installed in
> oct2004) or if it checks the date of the OS install (which would
> be well over 120 days) certainly behaves like OS not activating
> that it is checking based on the nature of the errors.
> Stinks b/c it is my development image. who the heck wants to
> load the OS
> everytime you want to try a new app?
>
> thanks
.
- References:
- RE: Activate Server does not appear to work
- From: craig
- RE: Activate Server does not appear to work
- Prev by Date: Re: 2000 Terminal Server Recieve 2003 User License
- Next by Date: Re: mapping drive letter to local user's home directory
- Previous by thread: RE: Activate Server does not appear to work
- Next by thread: Re: Terminal Server Licenses and Pooling
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|