I've just had a very lengthy email from Bentley regarding the above. To be honest I'm not sure that I understand most of it and would be grateful if someone could explain. How is this likely to effcet our company which has 7 MicroStation licences and one MXSite on SELECT and a couple of non SELECT MicroStation licences.
What if we don't want to opt in to SELECT OPen Access, as the chances of use buying additional licences are slim?
Why do individuals have to be identified? I have access to SELECT and can download and install updates to all our users as required.
What project level information do you require and why?
The use of 'Quarterly Term LIcensing' will alienate the smaller companies especially if they start getting invoices for over usage.
Any help with the above would be appreciated.
As we continue to expand the Be Communities support forums, this is definitely the appropriate place to discuss SELECT Open Access.
With the introduction of SELECT Open Access and our continuing commitment to User Satisfaction,additional experts are now monitoring the SELECTserver and Product Activation support forum (this forum). We are here and ready to address your questions regarding SELECT Open Access.
In the near future, additional documentation will be made available within the Wiki section of this Community to further expand upon this new and exciting SELECT Program.
Feel free to ask your questions, we will respond individually as soon as possible!
Unknown said:As we continue to expand the Be Communities support forums, this is definitely the appropriate place to discuss SELECT Open Access. With the introduction of SELECT Open Access and our continuing commitment to User Satisfaction,additional experts are now monitoring the SELECTserver and Product Activation support forum (this forum). We are here and ready to address your questions regarding SELECT Open Access. In the near future, additional documentation will be made available within the Wiki section of this Community to further expand upon this new and exciting SELECT Program. Feel free to ask your questions, we will respond individually as soon as possible!
Unknown said: And stuartw, I love the idea of defaulting everyone to Open Access. From my perspective, a 2% difference in invoicing is 2% regardless of how much or little an account uses in excess of what they own. However, we prefer to give our accounts a choice since as you can tell from this thread, everyone has a differing opinion.
And stuartw, I love the idea of defaulting everyone to Open Access. From my perspective, a 2% difference in invoicing is 2% regardless of how much or little an account uses in excess of what they own. However, we prefer to give our accounts a choice since as you can tell from this thread, everyone has a differing opinion.
Could you confirm that the cost of SELECT renewal is the same for Open Access and standard SELECT, as reported by our Account Manager.
SELECT renewal is not changing and I can confirm that there is no difference between Open Access and Basic Access in regards to the SELECT renewal cost.
Unknown said: SELECT renewal is not changing and I can confirm that there is no difference between Open Access and Basic Access in regards to the SELECT renewal cost.
OK and thanks. So why the difference in over usage costs then? Why are you making it more attractive for companies to go to Open Access? As I have said before perhaps I'm being cynical about this but there must more to this..
Unknown said: If you provided a mechanism to lock the number of license in use, you would in-turn have one less company to process a billing for, less paper and less mail. Everyone of our other products running license managers, limited the number of application which can run, first one in gets a license, last one in does not. I believe this is a bad model for organization's like our which have a specific need with no tools or options from Bentley to limit the usage. And, you model forces the users to pay quarterly or purchase more licenses, both of which we had to do.
If you provided a mechanism to lock the number of license in use, you would in-turn have one less company to process a billing for, less paper and less mail. Everyone of our other products running license managers, limited the number of application which can run, first one in gets a license, last one in does not. I believe this is a bad model for organization's like our which have a specific need with no tools or options from Bentley to limit the usage. And, you model forces the users to pay quarterly or purchase more licenses, both of which we had to do.
Lots of users have been asking for this licence restriction but so far Bentley have not entertained the idea. THe overusage capability they see has an advantage. Well it use to be but is not going to be when they start sending out quarterly bills fro over usage. Give with the one hand and take with the other!
You are right as I don't know any other software provider that has this licence arrangement. Bentley seriously need to reconsider this.
Another question that came out of my conversation with my Accounts Manager. There io lots of talk about over usage but what about under usage of licence. We have 7no. MicroStation licences but over the last 3 months our average use was 4no, although we did have some over usage as well.
Hopefully Bentley will take this into account when working out usage and billing.
stuartw said: Another question that came out of my conversation with my Accounts Manager. There io lots of talk about over usage but what about under usage of licence. We have 7no. MicroStation licences but over the last 3 months our average use was 4no, although we did have some over usage as well. Hopefully Bentley will take this into account when working out usage and billing.
Elisabeth Please could you confirm Bentleys position on under usage of licences. It obviously wouldn't be fair to penalisae us for the few times we are over when most of the time we are well under or licence allocation.