OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00??? - VMS

This is a discussion on OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00??? - VMS ; On 5 Nov, 17:13, VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: > In article , Len Whitwer writes: > > > > >On Nov 4, 5:35=A0pm, Jan-Erik S=F6derholm > >wrote: > >> Len Whitwer wrote: > >> > Ordered HP Basic LTU for integrity ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 80

Thread: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00???

  1. Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of$2400.00???

    On 5 Nov, 17:13, VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
    > In article , Len Whitwer writes:
    >
    >
    >
    > >On Nov 4, 5:35=A0pm, Jan-Erik S=F6derholm
    > >wrote:
    > >> Len Whitwer wrote:
    > >> > Ordered HP Basic LTU for integrity BA347AC "concurrent license" at a
    > >> > list price of $2400.00. Installed on rx2620 system and can only get
    > >> > "ONE
    > >> > USER" on system.

    >
    > >> > Get following error when second user tries to use basic.

    >
    > >> What does the *first* user do at that time ?

    >
    > >> Also post the SHOW LICENCE for the rellevant product.

    >
    > >> By "use" you meen running the compiler at the *same time*, right ?

    >
    > >> You can easaly "fix" this by running the compiles on a
    > >> batch queue with a JOB_LIMIT=3D1. Or any other way that
    > >> makes only one copy of the compiler been running at a time.

    >
    > >> Or wait 10 seconds and re-try the BAS command.

    >
    > >> This isn't a major problem. If you have many developers
    > >> on your system, you could probably add 1 or 2 additional
    > >> "users" and have 10-20 developers running without any
    > >> particular problem.

    >
    > >> And $2400 isn't that much. You can't get a full copy
    > >> of the Adobe "Master Collection" at that price, and that
    > >> is for one single, single-user system...

    >
    > >> I do not see what your problem is...

    >
    > >> Jan-Erik.

    >
    > >> > $ BAS OE001A

    >
    > >> > %LICENSE-F-NOAUTH, DEC BASIC use is not authorized on this node

    >
    > >> > -LICENSE-F-NOLICENSE, no license is active for this software product

    >
    > >> > -LICENSE-I-SYSMGR, please see your system manager

    >
    > >> > %TRACE-F-TRACEBACK, symbolic stack dump follows

    >
    > >> > image =A0 =A0 module =A0 =A0routine =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 line =

    > >=A0 =A0 =A0rel PC
    > >> > abs PC

    >
    > >> > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0=

    > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A00 FFFFFFFF80BBEA10
    > >> > FFFFFFFF80BBEA10

    >
    > >> > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0=

    > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A00 FFFFFFFF80BC3960
    > >> > FFFFFFFF80BC3960

    >
    > >> > BASIC =A0BASICLICENSE =A0BASIC$LICENSE =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 250 000000000000=

    > >0420
    > >> > 00000000002C1380

    >
    > >> > BASIC =A0BASTARTUP =A0ENV_BASIC_INIT =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A01185 0000000000=

    > >000030
    > >> > 0000000000280650

    >
    > >> > BASIC =A0DBASIC_DRIVER =A0GEM_XX_INIT =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0639 0000000000=

    > >000140
    > >> > 0000000000280140

    >
    > >> > BASIC =A0GEM_CP_VMS =A0GEM_CP_MAIN =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A02505 00000000=

    > >00002270
    > >> > 0000000000641F40

    >
    > >> > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0=

    > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A00 FFFFFFFF80C03700
    > >> > FFFFFFFF80C03700

    >
    > >> > DCL =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0=

    > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A00 000000000006BA90
    > >> > 000000007AE27A90

    >
    > >> > %TRACE-I-END, end of TRACE stack dump

    >
    > >> > Having hard time believing that cost for ONE USER basic license is
    > >> > $2400.00.

    >
    > >> > Has anyone ever seen this??? Say it isn't so!!!!

    >
    > >> > -Len Whitwer
    > >> > Puget Sound Data Systems, Inc.
    > >> > 19501 144th Ave. NE Suite D-100
    > >> > Woodinville, WA =A098072
    > >> > e-mail =A0 =A0mailto:l...@psds.com
    > >> > Internet:http://www.psds.com
    > >> > Toll Free: (866)857-0710
    > >> > Tel: (425) 488-0710
    > >> > Fax: (425) 488-6414- Hide quoted text -

    >
    > >> - Show quoted text -

    >
    > >The first user of Basic works just fine. (No Problems) Show license
    > >indicates the license is loaded with a units of "1". But then again
    > >when you so a show license on OVMS "FOE" it also has a units
    > >of "1". (Unlimited license) I'm still not convinced that this BASIC
    > >license shouldn't be unlimited.

    >
    > >Any other ideas or should I just BUCK UP??

    >
    > $ SHOW LICENSE/USAGE
    >
    > Some licenses have a unmber of UNITS associated with them and an ACTIVITY
    > charge for using it (ie. CONSTANT=#). So, if you have a license with two
    > units and an activity charge of CONSTANT=1, the licensed product can be
    > used by, for example, two processes. What is the "ACTIVITY" on you VMS
    > FOE license?
    >
    > In your case, the license has UNITS 1 and an ACTIVITY charge of 1; how-
    > ever, I think it is bad form to have the compiler dump because of a lic-
    > ence issue -- it should return a resonable error status and message in-
    > dicating the problem.
    >
    > --
    > VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM
    >
    > ... pejorative statements of opinion are entitled to constitutional protection
    > no matter how extreme, vituperous, or vigorously expressed they may be. (NJSC)
    >
    > Copr. 2008 Brian Schenkenberger. Publication of _this_ usenet article outside
    > of usenet _must_ include its contents in its entirety including this copyright
    > notice, disclaimer and quotations.


    It does indeed seem like very bad form to have a stack dump because of
    a "simple" licensing issue. So, asking a perhaps dumb question, are
    there any likely system configuration issues (y'know, along the lines
    of "insufficient GBPAGES", etc) which could lead to the licensing
    issue ending up in the unclean-exit symptoms we see here, issues which
    might arise when someone new to this kind of thing (as Len appears to
    be) has a go at installing and using the BASIC compiler?

  2. Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00???

    In article , johnwallace4@yahoo.co.uk writes:
    >On 5 Nov, 17:13, VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
    >> In article , Len Whitwer writes:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> >On Nov 4, 5:35=A0pm, Jan-Erik S=F6derholm
    >> >wrote:
    >> >> Len Whitwer wrote:
    >> >> > Ordered HP Basic LTU for integrity BA347AC "concurrent license" at a
    >> >> > list price of $2400.00. Installed on rx2620 system and can only get
    >> >> > "ONE
    >> >> > USER" on system.

    >>
    >> >> > Get following error when second user tries to use basic.

    >>
    >> >> What does the *first* user do at that time ?

    >>
    >> >> Also post the SHOW LICENCE for the rellevant product.

    >>
    >> >> By "use" you meen running the compiler at the *same time*, right ?

    >>
    >> >> You can easaly "fix" this by running the compiles on a
    >> >> batch queue with a JOB_LIMIT=3D1. Or any other way that
    >> >> makes only one copy of the compiler been running at a time.

    >>
    >> >> Or wait 10 seconds and re-try the BAS command.

    >>
    >> >> This isn't a major problem. If you have many developers
    >> >> on your system, you could probably add 1 or 2 additional
    >> >> "users" and have 10-20 developers running without any
    >> >> particular problem.

    >>
    >> >> And $2400 isn't that much. You can't get a full copy
    >> >> of the Adobe "Master Collection" at that price, and that
    >> >> is for one single, single-user system...

    >>
    >> >> I do not see what your problem is...

    >>
    >> >> Jan-Erik.

    >>
    >> >> > $ BAS OE001A

    >>
    >> >> > %LICENSE-F-NOAUTH, DEC BASIC use is not authorized on this node

    >>
    >> >> > -LICENSE-F-NOLICENSE, no license is active for this software product

    >>
    >> >> > -LICENSE-I-SYSMGR, please see your system manager

    >>
    >> >> > %TRACE-F-TRACEBACK, symbolic stack dump follows

    >>
    >> >> > image =A0 =A0 module =A0 =A0routine =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 line =
    >> >=A0 =A0 =A0rel PC
    >> >> > abs PC

    >>
    >> >> > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0=
    >> > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A00 FFFFFFFF80BBEA10
    >> >> > FFFFFFFF80BBEA10

    >>
    >> >> > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0=
    >> > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A00 FFFFFFFF80BC3960
    >> >> > FFFFFFFF80BC3960

    >>
    >> >> > BASIC =A0BASICLICENSE =A0BASIC$LICENSE =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 250 000000000000=
    >> >0420
    >> >> > 00000000002C1380

    >>
    >> >> > BASIC =A0BASTARTUP =A0ENV_BASIC_INIT =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A01185 0000000000=
    >> >000030
    >> >> > 0000000000280650

    >>
    >> >> > BASIC =A0DBASIC_DRIVER =A0GEM_XX_INIT =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0639 0000000000=
    >> >000140
    >> >> > 0000000000280140

    >>
    >> >> > BASIC =A0GEM_CP_VMS =A0GEM_CP_MAIN =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A02505 00000000=
    >> >00002270
    >> >> > 0000000000641F40

    >>
    >> >> > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0=
    >> > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A00 FFFFFFFF80C03700
    >> >> > FFFFFFFF80C03700

    >>
    >> >> > DCL =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0=
    >> > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A00 000000000006BA90
    >> >> > 000000007AE27A90

    >>
    >> >> > %TRACE-I-END, end of TRACE stack dump

    >>
    >> >> > Having hard time believing that cost for ONE USER basic license is
    >> >> > $2400.00.

    >>
    >> >> > Has anyone ever seen this??? Say it isn't so!!!!

    >>
    >> >> > -Len Whitwer
    >> >> > Puget Sound Data Systems, Inc.
    >> >> > 19501 144th Ave. NE Suite D-100
    >> >> > Woodinville, WA =A098072
    >> >> > e-mail =A0 =A0mailto:l...@psds.com
    >> >> > Internet:http://www.psds.com
    >> >> > Toll Free: (866)857-0710
    >> >> > Tel: (425) 488-0710
    >> >> > Fax: (425) 488-6414- Hide quoted text -

    >>
    >> >> - Show quoted text -

    >>
    >> >The first user of Basic works just fine. (No Problems) Show license
    >> >indicates the license is loaded with a units of "1". But then again
    >> >when you so a show license on OVMS "FOE" it also has a units
    >> >of "1". (Unlimited license) I'm still not convinced that this BASIC
    >> >license shouldn't be unlimited.

    >>
    >> >Any other ideas or should I just BUCK UP??

    >>
    >> $ SHOW LICENSE/USAGE
    >>
    >> Some licenses have a unmber of UNITS associated with them and an ACTIVITY
    >> charge for using it (ie. CONSTANT=#). So, if you have a license with two
    >> units and an activity charge of CONSTANT=1, the licensed product can be
    >> used by, for example, two processes. What is the "ACTIVITY" on you VMS
    >> FOE license?
    >>
    >> In your case, the license has UNITS 1 and an ACTIVITY charge of 1; how-
    >> ever, I think it is bad form to have the compiler dump because of a lic-
    >> ence issue -- it should return a resonable error status and message in-
    >> dicating the problem.
    >>
    >> --
    >> VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM
    >>
    >> ... pejorative statements of opinion are entitled to constitutional protection
    >> no matter how extreme, vituperous, or vigorously expressed they may be. (NJSC)
    >>
    >> Copr. 2008 Brian Schenkenberger. Publication of _this_ usenet article outside
    >> of usenet _must_ include its contents in its entirety including this copyright
    >> notice, disclaimer and quotations.

    >
    >It does indeed seem like very bad form to have a stack dump because of
    >a "simple" licensing issue. So, asking a perhaps dumb question, are
    >there any likely system configuration issues (y'know, along the lines
    >of "insufficient GBPAGES", etc) which could lead to the licensing
    >issue ending up in the unclean-exit symptoms we see here, issues which
    >might arise when someone new to this kind of thing (as Len appears to
    >be) has a go at installing and using the BASIC compiler?


    I didn't bother to look into the stack info you posted as it was all
    quoted-pukeable here. Let me go back to the original post and see if
    I can output it to my Mac or Linux box for readability.
    --
    VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM

    .... pejorative statements of opinion are entitled to constitutional protection
    no matter how extreme, vituperous, or vigorously expressed they may be. (NJSC)

    Copr. 2008 Brian Schenkenberger. Publication of _this_ usenet article outside
    of usenet _must_ include its contents in its entirety including this copyright
    notice, disclaimer and quotations.

  3. Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of$2400.00???

    On Nov 5, 9:59*am, "Richard Brodie" wrote:
    > "Len Whitwer" wrote in message
    >
    > news:dccc0c6d-516e-4c1c-96ae-2cbf83253aee@f40g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
    >
    > >Was able to come up with this info which sounds "CLOSE" and might lead
    > >me down the resolution path. *What do you think?????

    >
    > This is probably better:http://licensing.hp.com/swl/view.slm?page=ltype


    Thanks Richard. I will pass on the sad news!!!!

    Len

  4. Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of$2400.00???

    On Nov 4, 5:45*pm, David J Dachtera
    wrote:
    > Len Whitwer wrote:
    >
    > > Ordered HP Basic LTU for integrity BA347AC "concurrent license" at a
    > > list price of $2400.00. Installed on rx2620 system and can only get
    > > "ONE
    > > USER" on system.

    >
    > > Get following error when second user tries to use basic.

    >
    > > $ BAS OE001A

    >
    > > %LICENSE-F-NOAUTH, DEC BASIC use is not authorized on this node

    >
    > > -LICENSE-F-NOLICENSE, no license is active for this software product

    >
    > > -LICENSE-I-SYSMGR, please see your system manager

    >
    > > %TRACE-F-TRACEBACK, symbolic stack dump follows

    >
    > > image * * module * *routine * * * * * * * line * * *rel PC
    > > abs PC

    >
    > > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * * * *0 FFFFFFFF80BBEA10
    > > FFFFFFFF80BBEA10

    >
    > > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * * * *0 FFFFFFFF80BC3960
    > > FFFFFFFF80BC3960

    >
    > > BASIC *BASICLICENSE *BASIC$LICENSE * * * * 250 0000000000000420
    > > 00000000002C1380

    >
    > > BASIC *BASTARTUP *ENV_BASIC_INIT * * * * *1185 0000000000000030
    > > 0000000000280650

    >
    > > BASIC *DBASIC_DRIVER *GEM_XX_INIT * * * * *639 0000000000000140
    > > 0000000000280140

    >
    > > BASIC *GEM_CP_VMS *GEM_CP_MAIN * * * * * *2505 0000000000002270
    > > 0000000000641F40

    >
    > > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * * * *0 FFFFFFFF80C03700
    > > FFFFFFFF80C03700

    >
    > > DCL * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * * *0 000000000006BA90
    > > 000000007AE27A90

    >
    > > %TRACE-I-END, end of TRACE stack dump

    >
    > > Having hard time believing that cost for ONE USER basic license is
    > > $2400.00.

    >
    > > Has anyone ever seen this??? Say it isn't so!!!!

    >
    > Hhmmm... Doesn't look right. I'd expect "attempted usage exceeds
    > available license units" or some similar message.
    >
    > The message you got seems to indicate that the license is not even
    > loaded. If you registered the PAK, did you then do a LICENSE LOAD to
    > reload all the available PAKs?
    >
    > What does SHOW LICENSE say about the BASIC PAK?
    > $ SHOW LICENSE BASIC
    >
    > What does the output of this command look like:
    > $ SHOW LOGICAL/TABLE=LMF$* *BASIC*
    >
    > D.J.D.- Hide quoted text -
    >
    > - Show quoted text -


    Results of commands: What do you think???

    $ show license basic



    Active licenses on node I64VMS:



    ------- Product ID -------- ---- Rating ----- -- Version --

    Product Producer Units PCL Activ Version Release
    Termination

    BASIC HP 1 0 1 0.0 (none)
    (none)



    $ show logical/table=lmf$* *basic*



    (LMF$LICENSE_TABLE)



    "LMF$HP_BASIC" =
    "..........................Ō.....PÚ................ ........."

    = "."

    = "."

    $


    Len


  5. Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00???

    In article , johnwallace4@yahoo.co.uk writes:
    >{...snip...}
    >It does indeed seem like very bad form to have a stack dump because of
    >a "simple" licensing issue. So, asking a perhaps dumb question, are
    >there any likely system configuration issues (y'know, along the lines
    >of "insufficient GBPAGES", etc) which could lead to the licensing
    >issue ending up in the unclean-exit symptoms we see here, issues which
    >might arise when someone new to this kind of thing (as Len appears to
    >be) has a go at installing and using the BASIC compiler?


    It looks like the license error was signalled and not returned, and that
    the BASIC compiler image was linked /TRACEBACK. I just pulled the BASIC
    compile .EXE off of the DVD and check it for /TRACEBACK.

    --
    VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM

    .... pejorative statements of opinion are entitled to constitutional protection
    no matter how extreme, vituperous, or vigorously expressed they may be. (NJSC)

    Copr. 2008 Brian Schenkenberger. Publication of _this_ usenet article outside
    of usenet _must_ include its contents in its entirety including this copyright
    notice, disclaimer and quotations.

  6. Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of$2400.00???

    On Nov 4, 6:09*pm, Len Whitwer wrote:
    > Ordered HP Basic LTU for integrity BA347AC "concurrent license" at a
    > list price of $2400.00. Installed on rx2620 system and can only get
    > "ONE USER" on system.


    Somewhat counterintuitively, that's pretty much the definition of a
    concurrent use license for which you have not purchased extra units.
    Technically it's an activity license that allows a certain number of
    simultaneous uses and the default number of uses allowed is whatever
    quantity you ordered. Naturally you ordered a quantity of one since
    you thought you were buying a compiler, but what you actually bought
    was the rights for one use of the compiler at a time. If you had
    ordered a quantity of two, you'd be allowed two concurrent uses, and
    so on.

    You can read up on license types here:

    http://h71000.www7.hp.com/doc/83fina..._lic_types_sec

    Selling something called a "concurrent use" license where the default
    number of concurrent uses allowed is one is kind of like advertising
    an all-you-can-eat buffet where you have to pay again every time you
    go through the line. There's no rational way an uninitiated customer
    can figure out what they need by reading the product names. Whoever
    is selling you this stuff should do a better job of explaining how the
    licensing works and making sure you get what you need.

  7. Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00???

    Len Whitwer wrote:
    > On Nov 5, 9:59 am, "Richard Brodie" wrote:
    >> "Len Whitwer" wrote in message
    >>
    >> news:dccc0c6d-516e-4c1c-96ae-2cbf83253aee@f40g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
    >>
    >>> Was able to come up with this info which sounds "CLOSE" and might lead
    >>> me down the resolution path. What do you think?????

    >> This is probably better:http://licensing.hp.com/swl/view.slm?page=ltype

    >
    > Thanks Richard. I will pass on the sad news!!!!
    >
    > Len


    What is sad ?
    You've got what you bought, as far as I can tell.

    You have bought one (1) copy of a Concurrent Use License
    for HP BASIC (order number BA347AC). If you actualy need
    to have two active compiles at the same time (probably not
    if you do not have 5 or more developers, they spend most
    of their time in the editor and reading compiler listings
    anyway :-) ), you can simply get another copy and double
    the "compile throughput".

    The SPD (Software Product Description) for HP BASIC is
    reasonable clear on the licensing options. In IA64, the
    "Concurrent Use License" is the only option available,
    and you buy as many as you need *concurrent* compiles
    to run.

    The HP BASIC SPD:
    http://h71000.www7.hp.com/commercial...SIC017_SPD.pdf


    Jan-Erik.

  8. Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00???

    Jan-Erik Söderholm wrote:

    > The SPD (Software Product Description) for HP BASIC is
    > reasonable clear on the licensing options. In IA64, the
    > "Concurrent Use License" is the only option available,


    Then $2400 for a single concurrent use is pretty expensive.

    I know that HP apologists will point to DSPP where compilers are dirt
    cheap. But for people who do development in-house, they don't qualify
    for DSPP and forcing them to pay those horrendous prices is not right.

  9. Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00???

    Jan-Erik Söderholm wrote:
    (snip)

    > The SPD (Software Product Description) for HP BASIC is
    > reasonable clear on the licensing options. In IA64, the
    > "Concurrent Use License" is the only option available,
    > and you buy as many as you need *concurrent* compiles
    > to run.


    Except for the case when the license manager gets confused
    and thinks it is in use when it isn't.

    Maybe they have gotten better.

    I remember cases of programs that crash and don't release
    the license.

    -- glen


  10. Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00???

    JF Mezei wrote:
    > Jan-Erik Söderholm wrote:
    >
    >> The SPD (Software Product Description) for HP BASIC is
    >> reasonable clear on the licensing options. In IA64, the
    >> "Concurrent Use License" is the only option available,

    >
    > Then $2400 for a single concurrent use is pretty expensive.


    I took a quick look at prices for PC/Windows compilers
    (yes, some might include an IDE and so on, but anyway)
    at a large swedish distributor. And if you need "PRO"
    development tools, they are priced at similar levels.

    It would be interesting to see the difference on Alpha
    for "Personal Use" (I think it was called "Named User"
    at some time) vs. "Concurrent Use". "Personal Use" is
    more like what you get when you buy PC compilers, at
    least from a licensing point of view. Concurrent Use
    is actualy a wider license then standard PC-type licenses.

    No, I do not think it's particular expensive.

    And, as an hobbyist, you can use it will full
    functionality for free.

    >
    > I know that HP apologists will point to DSPP where compilers are dirt
    > cheap. But for people who do development in-house, they don't qualify
    > for DSPP and forcing them to pay those horrendous prices is not right.


    But then, what *is* "right" ??

    Jan-Erik.


  11. Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00???

    "Jan-Erik Söderholm" wrote in message
    news:UopQk.3885$U5.24340@newsb.telia.net...
    > JF Mezei wrote:
    >> Jan-Erik Söderholm wrote:
    >>
    >>> The SPD (Software Product Description) for HP BASIC is
    >>> reasonable clear on the licensing options. In IA64, the
    >>> "Concurrent Use License" is the only option available,

    >>
    >> Then $2400 for a single concurrent use is pretty expensive.

    >
    > I took a quick look at prices for PC/Windows compilers
    > (yes, some might include an IDE and so on, but anyway)
    > at a large swedish distributor. And if you need "PRO"
    > development tools, they are priced at similar levels.


    You are comparing apples to oranges. The HP BASIC compiler is a command
    line tool. The command line C# and VB .NET compilers are free. In fact,
    the Express edition of Visual Studio is also free and it is way better than
    LSE ever was. You don't need to buy the high end editions of Visual Studio
    unless you need things like source code control, multi language environments
    etc. You can compare the various editions of Visual Studio here:

    http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/vsts.../cc149003.aspx

    They range in price from zero to around $10,000 (per person). If you want
    to try and compare that with HP products, you have to compare it to a bundle
    of BASIC, C, C++, LSE, CMS, DTM, PCA, Rdb and web development tools that HP
    doesn't even have.

    >
    > It would be interesting to see the difference on Alpha
    > for "Personal Use" (I think it was called "Named User"
    > at some time) vs. "Concurrent Use". "Personal Use" is
    > more like what you get when you buy PC compilers, at
    > least from a licensing point of view. Concurrent Use
    > is actualy a wider license then standard PC-type licenses.
    >
    > No, I do not think it's particular expensive.
    >
    > And, as an hobbyist, you can use it will full
    > functionality for free.


    You can use the Express Edition of Microsoft products to develop commercial
    products.

    >
    >>
    >> I know that HP apologists will point to DSPP where compilers are dirt
    >> cheap. But for people who do development in-house, they don't qualify
    >> for DSPP and forcing them to pay those horrendous prices is not right.


    I hear this all the time but, has anyone ever been turned down for
    membership in DSPP?



  12. Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00???

    John Vottero wrote:
    > "Jan-Erik Söderholm" wrote in message
    > news:UopQk.3885$U5.24340@newsb.telia.net...
    >> JF Mezei wrote:
    >>> Jan-Erik Söderholm wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> The SPD (Software Product Description) for HP BASIC is
    >>>> reasonable clear on the licensing options. In IA64, the
    >>>> "Concurrent Use License" is the only option available,
    >>>
    >>> Then $2400 for a single concurrent use is pretty expensive.

    >>
    >> I took a quick look at prices for PC/Windows compilers
    >> (yes, some might include an IDE and so on, but anyway)
    >> at a large swedish distributor. And if you need "PRO"
    >> development tools, they are priced at similar levels.

    >
    > You are comparing apples to oranges. The HP BASIC compiler is a command
    > line tool. The command line C# and VB .NET compilers are free. In
    > fact, the Express edition of Visual Studio is also free and it is way
    > better than LSE ever was. You don't need to buy the high end editions
    > of Visual Studio unless you need things like source code control, multi
    > language environments etc. You can compare the various editions of
    > Visual Studio here:
    >
    > http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/vsts.../cc149003.aspx
    >
    > They range in price from zero to around $10,000 (per person). If you
    > want to try and compare that with HP products, you have to compare it to
    > a bundle of BASIC, C, C++, LSE, CMS, DTM, PCA, Rdb and web development
    > tools that HP doesn't even have.
    >
    >>
    >> It would be interesting to see the difference on Alpha
    >> for "Personal Use" (I think it was called "Named User"
    >> at some time) vs. "Concurrent Use". "Personal Use" is
    >> more like what you get when you buy PC compilers, at
    >> least from a licensing point of view. Concurrent Use
    >> is actualy a wider license then standard PC-type licenses.
    >>
    >> No, I do not think it's particular expensive.
    >>
    >> And, as an hobbyist, you can use it will full
    >> functionality for free.

    >
    > You can use the Express Edition of Microsoft products to develop
    > commercial products.
    >
    >>
    >>>
    >>> I know that HP apologists will point to DSPP where compilers are dirt
    >>> cheap. But for people who do development in-house, they don't qualify
    >>> for DSPP and forcing them to pay those horrendous prices is not right.

    >
    > I hear this all the time but, has anyone ever been turned down for
    > membership in DSPP?
    >
    >


    Does it matter if anyone has been turned down?

    I suppose that you could lie and say that you were developing VMS
    software for commercial sale and get the DSPP pricing. If you get
    caught, is HP just going to grin and bear it? Or will they take you to
    court for the $200,000 you cheated them out of? I suspect that the
    latter is more probable.

    What does Argent Software do if they discover that someone is using JAMS
    for commercial purposes without paying the requisite license fees?

  13. Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00???

    Len Whitwer wrote:
    >
    > On Nov 4, 5:45 pm, David J Dachtera
    > wrote:
    > > Len Whitwer wrote:
    > >
    > > > Ordered HP Basic LTU for integrity BA347AC "concurrent license" at a
    > > > list price of $2400.00. Installed on rx2620 system and can only get
    > > > "ONE
    > > > USER" on system.

    > >
    > > > Get following error when second user tries to use basic.

    > >
    > > > $ BAS OE001A

    > >
    > > > %LICENSE-F-NOAUTH, DEC BASIC use is not authorized on this node

    > >
    > > > -LICENSE-F-NOLICENSE, no license is active for this software product

    > >
    > > > -LICENSE-I-SYSMGR, please see your system manager

    > >
    > > > %TRACE-F-TRACEBACK, symbolic stack dump follows

    > >
    > > > image module routine line rel PC
    > > > abs PC

    > >
    > > > 0 FFFFFFFF80BBEA10
    > > > FFFFFFFF80BBEA10

    > >
    > > > 0 FFFFFFFF80BC3960
    > > > FFFFFFFF80BC3960

    > >
    > > > BASIC BASICLICENSE BASIC$LICENSE 250 0000000000000420
    > > > 00000000002C1380

    > >
    > > > BASIC BASTARTUP ENV_BASIC_INIT 1185 0000000000000030
    > > > 0000000000280650

    > >
    > > > BASIC DBASIC_DRIVER GEM_XX_INIT 639 0000000000000140
    > > > 0000000000280140

    > >
    > > > BASIC GEM_CP_VMS GEM_CP_MAIN 2505 0000000000002270
    > > > 0000000000641F40

    > >
    > > > 0 FFFFFFFF80C03700
    > > > FFFFFFFF80C03700

    > >
    > > > DCL 0 000000000006BA90
    > > > 000000007AE27A90

    > >
    > > > %TRACE-I-END, end of TRACE stack dump

    > >
    > > > Having hard time believing that cost for ONE USER basic license is
    > > > $2400.00.

    > >
    > > > Has anyone ever seen this??? Say it isn't so!!!!

    > >
    > > Hhmmm... Doesn't look right. I'd expect "attempted usage exceeds
    > > available license units" or some similar message.
    > >
    > > The message you got seems to indicate that the license is not even
    > > loaded. If you registered the PAK, did you then do a LICENSE LOAD to
    > > reload all the available PAKs?
    > >
    > > What does SHOW LICENSE say about the BASIC PAK?
    > > $ SHOW LICENSE BASIC
    > >
    > > What does the output of this command look like:
    > > $ SHOW LOGICAL/TABLE=LMF$* *BASIC*
    > >
    > > D.J.D.- Hide quoted text -
    > >
    > > - Show quoted text -

    >
    > Results of commands: What do you think???
    >
    > $ show license basic
    >
    > Active licenses on node I64VMS:
    >
    > ------- Product ID -------- ---- Rating ----- -- Version --
    >
    > Product Producer Units PCL Activ Version Release
    > Termination
    >
    > BASIC HP 1 0 1 0.0 (none)
    > (none)


    O.k. That definitely looks like a 1-user license. As long as its not a
    personal use license, the single threaded approach should work.

    That said, do you have a support contract?

    Looks like the license check returned the wrong status. The license is
    definitely loaded and active; so, that's wrong. It should have returned
    "attempted usage exceeded license limit".

    Best to log a case with support.

    If the BASIC maintainer is lurking, you'll want to contact this user
    off-list and get the remaining details. The trace-back and stack dump
    are already here.

    D.J.D.

  14. RE: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00???



    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: JF Mezei [mailto:jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca]
    > Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2008 5:28 PM
    > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com
    > Subject: Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of
    > $2400.00???
    >
    > Jan-Erik Söderholm wrote:
    >
    > > The SPD (Software Product Description) for HP BASIC is
    > > reasonable clear on the licensing options. In IA64, the
    > > "Concurrent Use License" is the only option available,

    >
    > Then $2400 for a single concurrent use is pretty expensive.
    >
    > I know that HP apologists will point to DSPP where compilers are dirt
    > cheap. But for people who do development in-house, they don't qualify
    > for DSPP and forcing them to pay those horrendous prices is not right.


    So I guess the Enterprise Oracle licensing at $40K USD/cpu (not system)
    or BEA at $10K per cpu must really upset you then?

    :-)



    Regards

    Kerry Main
    Senior Consultant
    HP Services Canada
    Voice: 613-254-8911
    Fax: 613-591-4477
    kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom
    (remove the DOT's and AT)

    OpenVMS - the secure, multi-site OS that just works.




  15. Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00???

    In article ,
    "John Vottero" writes:
    > "Jan-Erik Söderholm" wrote in message
    > news:UopQk.3885$U5.24340@newsb.telia.net...
    >> JF Mezei wrote:
    >>> Jan-Erik Söderholm wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> The SPD (Software Product Description) for HP BASIC is
    >>>> reasonable clear on the licensing options. In IA64, the
    >>>> "Concurrent Use License" is the only option available,
    >>>
    >>> Then $2400 for a single concurrent use is pretty expensive.

    >>
    >> I took a quick look at prices for PC/Windows compilers
    >> (yes, some might include an IDE and so on, but anyway)
    >> at a large swedish distributor. And if you need "PRO"
    >> development tools, they are priced at similar levels.

    >
    > You are comparing apples to oranges. The HP BASIC compiler is a command
    > line tool. The command line C# and VB .NET compilers are free. In fact,
    > the Express edition of Visual Studio is also free and it is way better than
    > LSE ever was. You don't need to buy the high end editions of Visual Studio
    > unless you need things like source code control, multi language environments
    > etc. You can compare the various editions of Visual Studio here:
    >
    > http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/vsts.../cc149003.aspx
    >
    > They range in price from zero to around $10,000 (per person). If you want
    > to try and compare that with HP products, you have to compare it to a bundle
    > of BASIC, C, C++, LSE, CMS, DTM, PCA, Rdb and web development tools that HP
    > doesn't even have.
    >
    >>
    >> It would be interesting to see the difference on Alpha
    >> for "Personal Use" (I think it was called "Named User"
    >> at some time) vs. "Concurrent Use". "Personal Use" is
    >> more like what you get when you buy PC compilers, at
    >> least from a licensing point of view. Concurrent Use
    >> is actualy a wider license then standard PC-type licenses.
    >>
    >> No, I do not think it's particular expensive.
    >>
    >> And, as an hobbyist, you can use it will full
    >> functionality for free.

    >
    > You can use the Express Edition of Microsoft products to develop commercial
    > products.
    >
    >>
    >>>
    >>> I know that HP apologists will point to DSPP where compilers are dirt
    >>> cheap. But for people who do development in-house, they don't qualify
    >>> for DSPP and forcing them to pay those horrendous prices is not right.

    >
    > I hear this all the time but, has anyone ever been turned down for
    > membership in DSPP?


    That is actually irrelevant. If one knows one doesn't meet the defined
    requirements for membership but joins and uses the facilities anyway, that
    is dishonest. No different than using the Hobbyist Program to develop
    in-house software for your business. Some people's personal moral code
    doesn't allow this. It was the biggest problem I had with the official
    HP Education Program. I was constantly being told, "Don't worry about
    what the license actually says, what you want to do is OK".

    bill


    --
    Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
    billg999@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
    University of Scranton |
    Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include

  16. Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00???

    "Richard B. Gilbert" wrote in message
    news:GPGdnUPhRbwx0o_UnZ2dnUVZ_gOdnZ2d@giganews.com ...
    > John Vottero wrote:
    >> "Jan-Erik Söderholm" wrote in message
    >> news:UopQk.3885$U5.24340@newsb.telia.net...
    >>> JF Mezei wrote:
    >>>> Jan-Erik Söderholm wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>> I know that HP apologists will point to DSPP where compilers are dirt
    >>>> cheap. But for people who do development in-house, they don't qualify
    >>>> for DSPP and forcing them to pay those horrendous prices is not right.

    >>
    >> I hear this all the time but, has anyone ever been turned down for
    >> membership in DSPP?
    >>
    >>

    >
    > Does it matter if anyone has been turned down?
    >
    > I suppose that you could lie and say that you were developing VMS software
    > for commercial sale and get the DSPP pricing. If you get caught, is HP
    > just going to grin and bear it? Or will they take you to court for the
    > $200,000 you cheated them out of? I suspect that the latter is more
    > probable.
    >


    Sorry, I misunderstood the statement. The original statement that
    developers of in-house applications have to pay ridiculous prices is indeed
    correct. I thought they were saying they didn't qualify for DSPP because
    they were a small developer (in their house).

    > What does Argent Software do if they discover that someone is using JAMS
    > for commercial purposes without paying the requisite license fees?


    I'll let you know if it ever happens!


  17. Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00???


    "Bill Gunshannon" wrote in message
    news:6ngcfbFli3o0U1@mid.individual.net...
    > In article ,
    > "John Vottero" writes:
    >> "Jan-Erik Söderholm" wrote in message
    >> news:UopQk.3885$U5.24340@newsb.telia.net...
    >>> JF Mezei wrote:
    >>>> Jan-Erik Söderholm wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> The SPD (Software Product Description) for HP BASIC is
    >>>>> reasonable clear on the licensing options. In IA64, the
    >>>>> "Concurrent Use License" is the only option available,
    >>>>
    >>>> Then $2400 for a single concurrent use is pretty expensive.
    >>>
    >>> I took a quick look at prices for PC/Windows compilers
    >>> (yes, some might include an IDE and so on, but anyway)
    >>> at a large swedish distributor. And if you need "PRO"
    >>> development tools, they are priced at similar levels.

    >>
    >> You are comparing apples to oranges. The HP BASIC compiler is a command
    >> line tool. The command line C# and VB .NET compilers are free. In fact,
    >> the Express edition of Visual Studio is also free and it is way better
    >> than
    >> LSE ever was. You don't need to buy the high end editions of Visual
    >> Studio
    >> unless you need things like source code control, multi language
    >> environments
    >> etc. You can compare the various editions of Visual Studio here:
    >>
    >> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/vsts.../cc149003.aspx
    >>
    >> They range in price from zero to around $10,000 (per person). If you
    >> want
    >> to try and compare that with HP products, you have to compare it to a
    >> bundle
    >> of BASIC, C, C++, LSE, CMS, DTM, PCA, Rdb and web development tools that
    >> HP
    >> doesn't even have.
    >>
    >>>
    >>> It would be interesting to see the difference on Alpha
    >>> for "Personal Use" (I think it was called "Named User"
    >>> at some time) vs. "Concurrent Use". "Personal Use" is
    >>> more like what you get when you buy PC compilers, at
    >>> least from a licensing point of view. Concurrent Use
    >>> is actualy a wider license then standard PC-type licenses.
    >>>
    >>> No, I do not think it's particular expensive.
    >>>
    >>> And, as an hobbyist, you can use it will full
    >>> functionality for free.

    >>
    >> You can use the Express Edition of Microsoft products to develop
    >> commercial
    >> products.
    >>
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>> I know that HP apologists will point to DSPP where compilers are dirt
    >>>> cheap. But for people who do development in-house, they don't qualify
    >>>> for DSPP and forcing them to pay those horrendous prices is not right.

    >>
    >> I hear this all the time but, has anyone ever been turned down for
    >> membership in DSPP?

    >
    > That is actually irrelevant. If one knows one doesn't meet the defined
    > requirements for membership but joins and uses the facilities anyway, that
    > is dishonest. No different than using the Hobbyist Program to develop
    > in-house software for your business. Some people's personal moral code
    > doesn't allow this. It was the biggest problem I had with the official
    > HP Education Program. I was constantly being told, "Don't worry about
    > what the license actually says, what you want to do is OK".
    >


    Sorry, I misunderstood the statement. I am NOT advocating dishonesty. What
    I am saying is that if you are a developer hoping to create a commercial
    product on OpenVMS, sign up for DSPP. Don't get the idea that you're too
    small for DSPP or that they only take people that already have a product to
    sell.

    If you are a developer of applications for in-house use, keep complaining
    (you're right). Hopefully I'll read more carefully the next time.

    John Vottero



  18. Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of$2400.00???

    On Nov 5, 11:56*am, VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
    > In article , johnwalla...@yahoo.co.uk writes:
    >
    > >{...snip...}
    > >It does indeed seem like very bad form to have a stack dump because of
    > >a "simple" licensing issue. So, asking a perhaps dumb question, are
    > >there any likely system configuration issues (y'know, along the lines
    > >of "insufficient GBPAGES", etc) which could lead to the licensing
    > >issue ending up in the unclean-exit symptoms we see here, issues which
    > >might arise when someone new to this kind of thing (as Len appears to
    > >be) has a go at installing and using the BASIC compiler?

    >
    > It looks like the license error was signalled and not returned, and that
    > the BASIC compiler image was linked /TRACEBACK. *I just pulled the BASIC
    > compile .EXE off of the DVD and check it for /TRACEBACK.
    >
    > --
    > VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker * * *VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM
    >
    > ... pejorative statements of opinion are entitled to constitutional protection
    > no matter how extreme, vituperous, or vigorously expressed they may be. (NJSC)
    >
    > Copr. 2008 Brian Schenkenberger. *Publication of _this_ usenet article outside
    > of usenet _must_ include its contents in its entirety including this copyright
    > notice, disclaimer and quotations.


    Where do you think I should go from here??

    Len

  19. Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00???

    Len Whitwer wrote:
    > On Nov 5, 11:56 am, VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
    >> In article , johnwalla...@yahoo.co.uk writes:
    >>
    >>> {...snip...}
    >>> It does indeed seem like very bad form to have a stack dump because of
    >>> a "simple" licensing issue. So, asking a perhaps dumb question, are
    >>> there any likely system configuration issues (y'know, along the lines
    >>> of "insufficient GBPAGES", etc) which could lead to the licensing
    >>> issue ending up in the unclean-exit symptoms we see here, issues which
    >>> might arise when someone new to this kind of thing (as Len appears to
    >>> be) has a go at installing and using the BASIC compiler?

    >> It looks like the license error was signalled and not returned, and that
    >> the BASIC compiler image was linked /TRACEBACK. I just pulled the BASIC
    >> compile .EXE off of the DVD and check it for /TRACEBACK.
    >>
    >> --
    >> VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM
    >>
    >> ... pejorative statements of opinion are entitled to constitutional protection
    >> no matter how extreme, vituperous, or vigorously expressed they may be. (NJSC)
    >>
    >> Copr. 2008 Brian Schenkenberger. Publication of _this_ usenet article outside
    >> of usenet _must_ include its contents in its entirety including this copyright
    >> notice, disclaimer and quotations.

    >
    > Where do you think I should go from here??
    >
    > Len


    About the unclean exit from BAS ? You can always report it.

    Or with the license as such ? I do not think anyone here can tell
    based on the information provided by you. Where do you *want*
    to go ?

    Jan-Erik.



  20. Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00???

    craig.a.berry@gmail.com wrote:
    > On Nov 4, 6:09 pm, Len Whitwer wrote:
    >
    >>Ordered HP Basic LTU for integrity BA347AC "concurrent license" at a
    >>list price of $2400.00. Installed on rx2620 system and can only get
    >>"ONE USER" on system.

    >
    >
    > Somewhat counterintuitively, that's pretty much the definition of a
    > concurrent use license for which you have not purchased extra units.
    > Technically it's an activity license that allows a certain number of
    > simultaneous uses and the default number of uses allowed is whatever
    > quantity you ordered. Naturally you ordered a quantity of one since
    > you thought you were buying a compiler, but what you actually bought
    > was the rights for one use of the compiler at a time. If you had
    > ordered a quantity of two, you'd be allowed two concurrent uses, and
    > so on.
    >
    > You can read up on license types here:
    >
    > http://h71000.www7.hp.com/doc/83fina..._lic_types_sec
    >
    > Selling something called a "concurrent use" license where the default
    > number of concurrent uses allowed is one is kind of like advertising
    > an all-you-can-eat buffet where you have to pay again every time you
    > go through the line. There's no rational way an uninitiated customer
    > can figure out what they need by reading the product names. Whoever
    > is selling you this stuff should do a better job of explaining how the
    > licensing works and making sure you get what you need.


    I had the exact same issue when specing a customer system. Arrived,
    installed, lo and behold, the 2nd user gets an error... (Don't remember
    if it was a stack dump - that part of it sounds bogus.) Since we only
    do compiling at installation time and when fixing bugs, we decided to
    live with it. (We have DSPP on our development systems.)

    It was totally unclear that we were being quoted a single user license
    when we ordered the systems. We've only been using DEC/Compaq/HP
    software for 37 years, so we don't have all the terminology down yet.

    I think there might be multiuser bundled prices that are significantly
    cheaper, but don't know. (For example, 5 users is much cheaper than
    one user.)

    Last time we bought compiler licenses was for an Alpha, and IIRC,
    the single user license for both BASIC and C was about $1500 and the
    unlimited licenses were about $3500, so we went with unlimited.

    I thought $2400 was steep for a single user of a mature compiler,
    but cheap for an unlimited license. And we are also paying for
    support as well, so not all the developer time comes out off the
    license purchase pot. Gee, we'd like to pay less. Is there anyone
    out there who wants to pay *more* for software? :-) :-) :-)

    So we whinge a bit and live with it.

    --
    John Santos
    Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc.
    781-861-0670 ext 539

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast