Ben McKeegan wrote:
On Tue, 9 Jan 2001, Peter Byström wrote:> > 3) Has anybody gone through the microsoft license with a fine-toothed
> > comb? Will they send their thugs to beat us up for using this? (a year
> > from now, I'd like to see Linux-based thin clients all over the place at
> > the college)
> >
>
> not me, but it wouldn't surprice me if you still have to pay the NT 4 Wkstn
> licence + terminal client licence, plus the server licence, even if you run
> linux and rdesktop, you do, if you got an older version of windows, i.e. if
> you run win 3.11, or win95/98 you will have to pay for an upgrade licence to
> nt 4 wkstn...As I understand it, for NT 4:
Whereas the original microsoft licence did require you to have a
workstation licence + a NT CAL (client access licence) for each terminal,
they did subsequently introduct an alternative Terminal Services CAL.
You are entitled to use it if either:i) You have a WS licence + an NT CAL for the terminal
ii) You have a TS CAL + an NT CAL for the terminalMy understanding is that provided you meet either of these conditions it
should be okay, but I could quite possibly be wrong!I've no idea about W2K.
Ben.
-- Douglas J Nordwall http://rex.nmhu.edu/~musashi Scientist Pacific Northwest National Labs