Posts made by Deleted74295

Straight off a cliff, Let's blame Scott.

Moving back to Pertino, how many people here are using it as a paid service in production?

@scottalanmiller said:

I am. I'm everywhere.

Creepy...

@thanksajdotcom said:

Welcome to the norm of posting on the same community at @scottalanmiller ...lol

So basically, don't post anywhere on the internet. He's everywhere it seems

I think the thread doubled in size since scott's arrival.

I as Breffni Potter have a user cal.

That enables me to use my desktop/laptop/IPhone/Printer/VOIP Phone/Network controllable LED light.

If anyone else uses my devices for work, then my user cal is void and we now need 2x user cals.

http://blogs.technet.com/b/volume-licensing/archive/2014/03/10/licensing-how-to-when-do-i-need-a-client-access-license-cal.aspx

Have a read of this.

According to Microsoft, any feature of the server, whether DNS/DHCP you need a CAL.

Most organisations get around that with user cals rather than device cals.
Just because everyone is doing it, does not mean they can keep doing it That's why these audits are so profitable for Microsoft.

What? They stopped doing that? Surprised they stopped at all.

@scottalanmiller said:

@Breffni-Potter said:

I'm coming for the first time. Should be good.

I'll be speaking. Come hear me.

Should I wear a tin-foil hat?

I'm coming for the first time. Should be good.

Well the alternative is I'm just crazy I'll go back to my padded cell.

@scottalanmiller said:

It's closer to a CAL than to anything else, right? Why call it something else?

Because MS decided it is not a CAL, it's a per user license

@scottalanmiller Sure, yet they are different products, with a different pricing structure and distribution method, MS never refer to 365 licenses or services as CALs, so why would we keep the terms the same when the products are very different.

@scottalanmiller said:

Azure is neither a loophole nor a financial windfall for large companies.

Actually instead of larger capital costs of CALS & licenses, you only pay for what you use/need in terms of capacity? Surely that's a big benefit to any organisation in terms of finance, different model.

@scottalanmiller ...Right, you are just being awkward

Server 2012, you buy one product and you need to buy multiple products called CALS as a separate purchase depending on user/device number.

@scottalanmiller said:

How do you define a CAL differently than that? What is a CAL except for a per user license?

Because the 365 license is not just an access license for one product/service, it pays for multiple services on 365 as a single billable item, I don't need to buy 50 E3 licenses, then buy 50 E3-cals as a separate purchase, that would be crazy for MS but that's what I'm saying.

Does that make sense?

@scottalanmiller Huh?, Never needed to buy 365 cals, we buy licenses per user.

Could you explain?

@scottalanmiller I think you've just described another reason why I'd dislike CALS for Azure or other MS hosted services.

Imagine if they decided "Hey, you now need CALS for every 365 user, pay up"

@scottalanmiller said:

Seems an odd place to be upset had that benefit not have been provided since you didn't balk when they had you do it on site for no reason either.

Surely the reason was rampant software piracy, that's why we have the ever popular third party software audits. How can you pirate 365 or Azure? You either have the right license/billing amount or they switch you off.

@scottalanmiller

It would be really strange to eschew Windows now because they didn't drop the requirement after it's been acceptable for so long.

Dropping the need to worry about CAL tracking is only a plus. Windows 95 was acceptable for awhile but we've since moved onto better things (hopefully) Why would MS not drop CAL tracking if it makes life easier? What benefit does it have to anyone?

@scottalanmiller said:

The only thing that you have to know is.... Azure is not a loophole.

I'm not trying to cheat MS, Just trying to figure out their product.

@scottalanmiller said:

There is only one way that it could possibly work.

Tell us more

@scottalanmiller said:

Why? How would you be affected? You have to CAL track now. What new effort would be involved?

Because if we're all going to move to hosted, then let's see if we can drop the back and forth of cal tracking and just focus on doing IT with these products.

@scottalanmiller said:

You need CALs IF you have ANY Windows servers of your own. Azure is not a free pass to skip CALs.

I know that, not implying that.
What I am trying to understand is how I can actually use Azure to do the AD, whether 100% Azure with no on site server OR a hybrid option.

@scottalanmiller said:

There is no SaaS AD from any cloud, any vendor. That's disallowed by Microsoft and you just can't do it and that is what every asked about and means when they say that someone has AD on the cloud.

Does that mean, if I spin up an Azure 2012R2 VM, I cannot install AD/DC services, then use that as my hosted domain controller? Slightly confused.

@thecreativeone91 said:

I've never seen that before. You need CALS not matter where the server is located.

I think I'd balk if MS said we needed to start doing CAL Tracking on Azure. Glad that's not the case.