Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!news.musoftware.de!wum.musoftware.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: Robert Klemme Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: Local vs. network file Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2012 19:33:54 +0200 Lines: 24 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: individual.net tVeUjxTWeG74vufuRrUbhQq1jgl54XDjGHkXosGyERQ1gbuGe7oZWt2JuOPUff/T4= Cancel-Lock: sha1:zBn7w8SGdH0obG8rho0XSA52lwM= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; WOW64; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120614 Thunderbird/13.0.1 In-Reply-To: Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:15787 On 28.06.2012 11:10, Qu0ll wrote: > The situation is that I have developed some software which the client > wishes to license as either a stand-alone product or with a network > model. The network license permits a fixed maximum number of concurrent > users to load the software from a single network share. The stand-alone > license permits a fixed maximum number of concurrent users to run the > software on their local machine (the maximum controls the number of > concurrent machines on which it is running). It's a pricing and > marketing thing; the network license is more expensive but doesn't > really offer any extra functionality or benefit. Err, why would anyone want to pay more for the network share license? Maybe I am missing something but I don't understand the business case here. Kind regards robert -- remember.guy do |as, often| as.you_can - without end http://blog.rubybestpractices.com/