Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?
-
@PhlipElder said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:
@CCWTech said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:
@PhlipElder said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:
@CCWTech said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:
@PhlipElder said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:
@Obsolesce said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:
@PhlipElder said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:
@Obsolesce We're going to have to agree to disagree.
The peer-to-peer setup has been around since Token Ring that I can think of off the top and abides by Microsoft's licensing.
We've been through audits in peer-to-peer settings, as mentioned SMB was our bread and butter, with nary an issue with setups like the p2p mentioned in AVIMark for their tiny setup. We're usually the ones schooling the auditors anyway.
TTFN
So you're saying Microsoft licensing terms do not apply if installed on devices on peer to peer networks?
You've got a lot of theft under your belt, then. Willful ignorance of terms. MVP of SBS means shit... as does (wrongfully) convincing auditors of theft.
As mentioned, let's agree to disagree. TTFN
EDIT: If you really think you have a case then report it to the BSA.
Accusing someone of theft based on an subjective interpretation of terms and conditions is a pretty serious accusation.
Suffice it to say, put up or shut up.
It is theft. There is no other way to look at it. The fact that you have to interpret it subjectively and not objectively speaks volumes.
And it's not the BSA that investigates. Microsoft works with a different company. One of the vet clinics that I am personally aware of that believes you can do this is being audited because they got caught.
BSA is in Canada.
As I've mentioned, peer to peer has been around for a very long time.
What I'm being told here is that every peer to peer setup was illegal and thus theft. Yet, in the audits we've participated in when a peer to peer was involved none were knocked for it.
It's pretty easy to sling the mud and armchair quarterback like this.
Show me some Microsoft based resources that clearly interpret things they way that is being stated here. Since the semantics and legalese seem to be the catch let's see a clear statement from Microsoft that a peer to peer setup where folks are sharing files and a printer or two is indeed illegal and thus "theft" as it's being called here.
Show me the money.
A high school student could understand this. You can not use it to host a server with certain exceptions. Because AVImark is not using just file share services, it doesn't fit the exceptions. That's it. So easy to understand.
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/UseTerms/Retail/Windows/11/UseTerms_Retail_Windows_11_English.htm
It just boggles my mind that the plain English, or the Queen's English if you're a Canucklehead like me, is right freaking there.
Seriously.
Dude, let's break it down (starting to feel like I'm explaining things to a 2 year old)...
The following services _ ONLY _: file services, print services, IIS
AVImark is not those ^ (additionally, the limit is 20 devices)
...synchronize data between devices
AVImark does not fall under synchronizing data between devicevs.
FURTHER MORE:
You may not use the software (Windows 10/11) on the device to operate the device as a server. (exceptions above, but we already covered them as a no-go)
This is what installing AVImark on Windows 10/11 does to the device. It turns the operation of the device into a server (peer to peer or whatever bullshit you're spewing doesn't matter). It's a database. It's a server. It does not fall under the exceptions noted.
EVEN FURTHER MORE:
you may not install the software (Windows 10/11) on a device for use only by remote users
AVImark is this. It's meant to be installed on a "server" from which all access is done remotely.
-
@Obsolesce said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:
@PhlipElder said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:
@CCWTech said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:
@PhlipElder said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:
@CCWTech said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:
@PhlipElder said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:
@Obsolesce said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:
@PhlipElder said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:
@Obsolesce We're going to have to agree to disagree.
The peer-to-peer setup has been around since Token Ring that I can think of off the top and abides by Microsoft's licensing.
We've been through audits in peer-to-peer settings, as mentioned SMB was our bread and butter, with nary an issue with setups like the p2p mentioned in AVIMark for their tiny setup. We're usually the ones schooling the auditors anyway.
TTFN
So you're saying Microsoft licensing terms do not apply if installed on devices on peer to peer networks?
You've got a lot of theft under your belt, then. Willful ignorance of terms. MVP of SBS means shit... as does (wrongfully) convincing auditors of theft.
As mentioned, let's agree to disagree. TTFN
EDIT: If you really think you have a case then report it to the BSA.
Accusing someone of theft based on an subjective interpretation of terms and conditions is a pretty serious accusation.
Suffice it to say, put up or shut up.
It is theft. There is no other way to look at it. The fact that you have to interpret it subjectively and not objectively speaks volumes.
And it's not the BSA that investigates. Microsoft works with a different company. One of the vet clinics that I am personally aware of that believes you can do this is being audited because they got caught.
BSA is in Canada.
As I've mentioned, peer to peer has been around for a very long time.
What I'm being told here is that every peer to peer setup was illegal and thus theft. Yet, in the audits we've participated in when a peer to peer was involved none were knocked for it.
It's pretty easy to sling the mud and armchair quarterback like this.
Show me some Microsoft based resources that clearly interpret things they way that is being stated here. Since the semantics and legalese seem to be the catch let's see a clear statement from Microsoft that a peer to peer setup where folks are sharing files and a printer or two is indeed illegal and thus "theft" as it's being called here.
Show me the money.
A high school student could understand this. You can not use it to host a server with certain exceptions. Because AVImark is not using just file share services, it doesn't fit the exceptions. That's it. So easy to understand.
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/UseTerms/Retail/Windows/11/UseTerms_Retail_Windows_11_English.htm
It just boggles my mind that the plain English, or the Queen's English if you're a Canucklehead like me, is right freaking there.
Seriously.
Dude, let's break it down (starting to feel like I'm explaining things to a 2 year old)...
The following services _ ONLY _: file services, print services, IIS
AVImark is not those ^ (additionally, the limit is 20 devices)
...synchronize data between devices
AVImark does not fall under synchronizing data between devicevs.
FURTHER MORE:
You may not use the software (Windows 10/11) on the device to operate the device as a server. (exceptions above, but we already covered them as a no-go)
This is what installing AVImark on Windows 10/11 does to the device. It turns the operation of the device into a server (peer to peer or whatever bullshit you're spewing doesn't matter). It's a database. It's a server. It does not fall under the exceptions noted.
EVEN FURTHER MORE:
you may not install the software (Windows 10/11) on a device for use only by remote users
AVImark is this. It's meant to be installed on a "server" from which all access is done remotely.
You can reverse this as well. You are showing (correctly) that Avimark is not the exception. But there is an opposite situation. Avimark is the exact "rule". It is the EXACT case for which Windows Server licensing is required. It's not a fringe case, not a maybe, not a "kind of like", it is EXACTLY the type of workload for which server licensing is currently, and has always required. It's a perfect example of "as far from an exception as one can possibly be." It's a full client / server database backed server application in the traditional sense.
It is, and I truly mean this, our most commonly used example here of "what does an application that requires server licensing look like." Because it's so simple, no IT person should be able to be confused when using this as the example because there's no grey area, nothing to misunderstand, nothing complex. By the book server application with nothing new or confusing, nothing that would ever give it any hope of an exception.
-
@PhlipElder said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:
It just boggles my mind that the plain English, or the Queen's English if you're a Canucklehead like me, is right freaking there.
Seriously.
Exactly. You just listed why in zero possible way can you be confused. It's plain as day that there is nothing that applies to Avimark.
Why are you arguing that it can be used and showing that it can't?
-
@JaredBusch said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:
@PhlipElder said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:
We've gone through plenty of audits where QuickBooks has a company file on one PC while there are two or more other PCs accessing that company file. No issues there.
Historically, QuickBooks has only used file sharing for this. The remote users are opening the QuickBooks data file over the network. This matches the restrictions last I knew.
AVImark is connecting to a database server running on the host computer to my understanding. This is not file services, print services, IIS, or ICS.
historically this was true - but at some point QB expanded this to using ports other than file sharing to get the job done
Once QB did that - QB no longer qualified under the fileshare exception.
Here's a pretty easy way to test for this.
If you install a firewall between the instance hosting the AviMark software and the client and block all but 139 and 445, as well as 80 and 443 - and AviMark stops working - then you're 99% sure that it's not a legal use of Windows non-server edition.
of course this isn't 100% because software could attempt to use these ports as a bypass to the licensing.. -
@scottalanmiller said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:
@PhlipElder said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:
It just boggles my mind that the plain English, or the Queen's English if you're a Canucklehead like me, is right freaking there.
Seriously.
Exactly. You just listed why in zero possible way can you be confused. It's plain as day that there is nothing that applies to Avimark.
Why are you arguing that it can be used and showing that it can't?
I'm done with this.
I've verified my interpretation as well as AVIMark's mini-setup as being valid.
Cognitive Dissonance. I suggest looking it up.
-
@PhlipElder said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:
@scottalanmiller said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:
@PhlipElder said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:
It just boggles my mind that the plain English, or the Queen's English if you're a Canucklehead like me, is right freaking there.
Seriously.
Exactly. You just listed why in zero possible way can you be confused. It's plain as day that there is nothing that applies to Avimark.
Why are you arguing that it can be used and showing that it can't?
I'm done with this.
I've verified my interpretation as well as AVIMark's mini-setup as being valid.
Cognitive Dissonance. I suggest looking it up.
"My interpretation". It reminds me of people saying this is 'my truth'. Instead of 'the truth'.
-
The story of morals vs morals and Risk vs Reward
Guy A - It must be run Sever OS
Well, Guy A then just offer that service. Quote the Microsoft licensing as you know it, and let the customer decide. No need to be a crusader and convince everyone to have the same moral standard of black and white. It's admirable that you have a strict moral standard and won't perform the work. In reality, though alot of the world functions in gray.
Guy B - Save the customer money
Microsoft is a bully and my customer is small and working on thin margins. You know the risk is super low for an audit and probably even lower if they buy windows OS elsewhere. You probably end up doing what's best for customer, but also potentially risk your own neck. Nothing will happen to a customer with 6 employees. They will get a warning at best
-
@Florida_man said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:
The story of morals vs morals and Risk vs Reward
Guy A - It must be run Sever OS
Well, Guy A then just offer that service. Quote the Microsoft licensing as you know it, and let the customer decide. No need to be a crusader and convince everyone to have the same moral standard of black and white. It's admirable that you have a strict moral standard and won't perform the work. In reality, though alot of the world functions in gray.
Guy B - Save the customer money
Microsoft is a bully and my customer is small and working on thin margins. You know the risk is super low for an audit and probably even lower if they buy windows OS elsewhere. You probably end up doing what's best for customer, but also potentially risk your own neck. Nothing will happen to a customer with 6 employees. They will get a warning at best
The world functions in gray. When is that a justification for acting immorally?
So the justification is, Microsoft is a big corporation with evil people so it's okay to steal from them or you won't get caught and if you do the trouble you will be in is small.
Please remind me to never let you in my house... Honestly, working with clients who justify stealing based on the fact that they either have a crappy business plan or who they are stealing from is a big faceless corporation will bite you in the ass when they pull the same dishonestly with you.
-
Amazingly, the OP of the secret post actually followed up and said he misunderstood what they were discussing and thought Avimark was files, not a server product. He apologized and said yes, for sure, Avimark (and applications like it) definitely violat the EULA and require a Server License and CALs for deployment.
-
-
@CCWTech said in Can you run a Windows desktop OS as a server to run AVImark Veterinary Software?:
Very impressive, so few people are actually looking to research and learn, just to argue. Kudos to him.
