We use cookies to give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to browse, then you agree to our privacy policy and cookie policy. (Last updated on : Nov 16th 2018).
Unfortunately, activation email could not send to your email. Please try again.
Syncfusion Feedback

All troubles caused by license manager.

Thread ID:

Created:

Updated:

Platform:

Replies:

43953 May 9,2006 03:39 PM UTC May 10,2006 04:19 PM UTC General Discussion 1
loading
Tags: General Discussion
Qingjun Wei
Asked On May 9, 2006 03:39 PM UTC

We just purchased licenses of Essential studio. The reason I chose SyncFusion is the 64 bit support. I don''t know if Infragistics supports 64 bit but at least they did''t advertise it. So I didn''t bother to check. I managed to install it on my Windows XP 64 machine. Some of the demo work but most of them don''t. OK, it has been addressed by SyncFusion that some utilities don''t work. So I can patiently wait while trying to explore the modules that work. However after I upgraded my license from trial version to licensed version. I started to have all kinds of problems. My Visual Studio stopped working. It couldn''t even create new project because it always complains failure to copy license file. Now I realize that most of the troubles in SyncFusion on 64 bit machines are caused by the licensing module! And now I learned that it will take a long time (2 week after the release of version 4.2, which is 1 month from now) to fix it. I start to wonder what is the purpose of the licensing module at all. I understand that the company wants to protect its copy right and I see nothing wrong with it. However, if SyncFusion products are popular, which we assume is already the case, people could get pirate version everywhere, not to mention that the company is also selling the source code. You can not really stop piracy. People who want to steal will always find a way. The license scheme will only create troubles for legitmate customers and potential customers. And SyncFusion does have competitors. I don''t see any reason to bring unnecessary to customers even if the competitors are doing the same thing. My company is a big company. We will definately buy software if we think it''s good. Individual programmers who have tight budget may prefer to pay for it only if they''ve made a sale. So if it''s your profit you will finally earn it. If you can not make the profit it''s simply not your money. So spending time and effort on the license scheme that the company can not benefit whatsoever is a total waste of time and completely illogical. Of course it''s just my opinion. And I might be wrong. I would be gald to be enlightened how the licensing restriction will help SyncFusion, as a company, make one penny extra profit.

Daniel Jebaraj [Syncfusion]
Replied On May 10, 2006 04:19 PM UTC

Hi Qingjun, We apologize for the trouble that you have experienced. Licensing serves a simple purpose. Our controls are licensed for royalty free redistribution. Without licensing this would mean that anyone who obtains the controls as part of an application package can then turn around and develop with the controls. We have a very simple licensing model. Only one line of text is required in the licx file. The standard .NET model of licensing requires one line for each licensed control in any application. With the licensing issue that you have mentioned (license files not being copied when new projects are generated), this is actually a result of the Licensing Enabler utility being run on the Visual Studio .NET installation folder. The easiest way to fix this is to navigate to the ${install drive}:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio 8\Common7\ide\ProjectTemplatesCache\{CSharp or VisualBasic}\Windows\1033\WindowsApplication.zip and delete windowsapplication.csproj. Then rename windowsapplication.csproj.bak to be windowsapplication.csproj. This will fix this issue. With 4.2, we detect if the Licensing Enabler is being run on the root installation folder and do no harm. With 64 bit the controls do work and we will fix the utility issues right after 4.2. Thank you for using Syncfusion Essential Studio. Best regards, Daniel >We just purchased licenses of Essential studio. The reason I chose SyncFusion is the 64 bit support. I don''t know if Infragistics supports 64 bit but at least they did''t advertise it. So I didn''t bother to check. > >I managed to install it on my Windows XP 64 machine. Some of the demo work but most of them don''t. OK, it has been addressed by SyncFusion that some utilities don''t work. So I can patiently wait while trying to explore the modules that work. > >However after I upgraded my license from trial version to licensed version. I started to have all kinds of problems. My Visual Studio stopped working. It couldn''t even create new project because it always complains failure to copy license file. Now I realize that most of the troubles in SyncFusion on 64 bit machines are caused by the licensing module! > >And now I learned that it will take a long time (2 week after the release of version 4.2, which is 1 month from now) to fix it. > >I start to wonder what is the purpose of the licensing module at all. I understand that the company wants to protect its copy right and I see nothing wrong with it. However, if SyncFusion products are popular, which we assume is already the case, people could get pirate version everywhere, not to mention that the company is also selling the source code. > >You can not really stop piracy. People who want to steal will always find a way. The license scheme will only create troubles for legitmate customers and potential customers. And SyncFusion does have competitors. I don''t see any reason to bring unnecessary to customers even if the competitors are doing the same thing. > >My company is a big company. We will definately buy software if we think it''s good. Individual programmers who have tight budget may prefer to pay for it only if they''ve made a sale. So if it''s your profit you will finally earn it. If you can not make the profit it''s simply not your money. So spending time and effort on the license scheme that the company can not benefit whatsoever is a total waste of time and completely illogical. > >Of course it''s just my opinion. And I might be wrong. I would be gald to be enlightened how the licensing restriction will help SyncFusion, as a company, make one penny extra profit.

CONFIRMATION

This post will be permanently deleted. Are you sure you want to continue?

Sorry, An error occured while processing your request. Please try again later.

Warning Icon You are using an outdated version of Internet Explorer that may not display all features of this and other websites. Upgrade to Internet Explorer 8 or newer for a better experience.Close Icon

;