I have a progam this is a converter for .NET that can be used in other .NET projects.
I have two kinds of license:
Developer license for DESKTOP software
Developer license for WEB server deployed software.
How I can protect my program if client buy (1) license he CAN NOT use it on the SERVER.
Disclaimer: I don't know anything about .Net, other than how to spell it, and I'm not completely sure about that.
It seems like one difference between a person using your file converter on their desktop and using it on a web server is that only a single instance will be running at a time on the desktop; a web page will probably have multiple instances, once per concurrent request. This seems like something you could enforce in software, and also something you could easily write into a license agreement.
Does IIS run with a graphical console on Windows? If it doesn't, and your desktop version does, maybe you could detect that?
Ultimately, though, if someone wants to get around your server/desktop distinction enough, they're going to; they could, for example, have the web server send the document to a desktop machine, and have the desktop send it back to the server. So, at some point, you'll have to give in and either ignore it or to say that's a problem for legal to handle.
If it is desktop software (I'm not sure by the question with the tag), you could use the Environment object to check what OS the code is running on and stop it running on Server Technology. This won't help if they run a server using XP or the like though, but it's a start.
Related
I am developing an application in Java on a local machine. This is my first project, and I am afraid I started it in a wrong way, since I will have to install it on every machine, which can reveal such issues as Java versions incompatibility or even its absence on some machines. Besides, I would like to write the GUI in HTML.
So, I've decided it'd be better to write a server side application and open it in the browser. All users are connected to the server via LAN.
I would like to use something like WAMP, but in Java. I've never written web applications in Java.
Could you please help me with advice, which technology I should use (JSP, Apache Tomcat, something else), what kind of problems I can meet transferring the existing code into the server (I use a lot of external libraries, like Apache POI, Jsoup, HttpClient, etc), and tutorials on Java server programming (I've found so many information, I just do not know where I should start learning).
Thank you!
I am currently developing using spring. I think it's a good tool.
http://static.springsource.org/spring/docs/3.2.x/spring-framework-reference/html/index.html
http://static.springsource.org/spring/docs/3.2.x/spring-framework-reference/html/mvc.html
good luck in your app
I want to ship a piece of hardware to clients that they plug in to their network via Ethernet or USB. This device contains an ASP.NET web application that they access via a web browser on any PC in their network.
This needs to be a small device that costs less than $500, meaning it can't be a full server with a Win2008 server license. This would be repeated hundreds or thousands of times - once for each new customer.
Are there external hard drives or NAS devices that can run as an IIS/ASP.NET web server?
Thanks,
Roger
If you stick with a PC setup, you might be able to use a desktop OS and IIS Express. It should support everything you want, you might even be able to get this on a cheap netbook.
I'm sure you could build a small PC based an an embedded motherboard, or even a mini-itx board. But, this is a programming Q&A site and not really the place to ask about building servers.
If you're looking into keeping it cheap I would highly recommend looking into Mono which is free and runs ASP.Net very well. If you have any Windows-specific things you'd need to possibly change those but hopefully you wouldn't have those on a website.
You should look into converting your app to Mono.Net running on a virtualized environment. The OS and the runtime environment would be open source and would allow you to freely distribute it.
Mono.Net
Virutal Box - VM Enviornment
Ubuntu Linux OS
Buy a netbook with windows 7 home premium on it as that bundles IIS7. If you need any more "capacity", then you should look at bigger hardware anyway.
I have the same problem as the poser of this question:
System.Data.OracleClient requires Oracle client software version 8.1.7
I have made the changes to the security settings on the oracle folder, and have to wait for the server to reboot overnight.
My question is why is this reboot necessary? I am getting the same error after making the changes without rebooting, so I don't doubt that it is. Is there an alternative to rebooting the server, like IISRESET? (Although I wouldn't be allowed to run IISRESET during the day either)
Perhaps not an answer to your specific question, but for the record it is for this kind of reasons that I always favor Oracle Instant Client :
You don't have to install anything on the target machines (including dev boxes !). So no tricky manual setup and goat sacrificing.
You can make sure that your application will run with the specific client you picked (version, x86/x64).
You could even easily have multiple applications work with different client versions on the same computer.
As a downside, it adds a significant weight to your application (~19Mb minimum), and you can't participate in distributed transactions.
If you still can switch, this is the way to go IMHO. Check What is the minimum client footprint required to connect C# to an Oracle database? for more information.
Starting with Server 2003 (hosting IIS6) it is enough to restart the service to bring environment changes and security changes into effect.
But this is done with iisreset. What is not allowed too.
Thats a pity, I see no other way as wait.
It's one of those things I see a lot but never really think of. Do you think for the purpose of web application development (specifically ASP.NET WebForms/MVC). Do you think it's advantageous to do such a thing and if so, what kind of advantages come out of it?
By virtualization I mean using products like Hyper-V to separate the server context like your SQL and Web Server, etc.
First question is, virtualization of what? Do you mean server virtualization? Do you mean running VMWare on each dev's laptop with multiple OSes? Do you mean moving everything to the cloud?
Virtualization of servers, in web app context, is not really different from that in general IT - most of the servers on the Internet, including StackOverload's, are bought to handle peak loads and spend most of the time idling away the cycles, so virtualizing them makes sense when you have more than a certain amount.
VMWare on the desktop (or other parallels on other operating systems) is superb because a) your devs can run a full instance of your server environment, including multiple virtual servers connnected in a virtual network - this is about as close to the real thing that you can get, minus hardware costs and minus devs messing with each other's servers. For clients, you can use Linux and multiple Windows installs to test various browsers, font sizes, etc. quickly - also a big win.
Moving everything to the cloud makes sense in many cases, but is probably a topic for a separate full-sized question :)
One big advantage I see is, that every developer can have his/her own sandbox to work on. If someone messes up his/her sandbox he/she can take a clean image and all is OK again. So I guess that means that there is room to experiment without losing valuable time getting back to the normal setup, you can simply do a rollback.
I'm in doubt a bit on whether you should use virtualisation for production environments. Depending on the application of course.
The only time I would use a virtual for ASP.Net development was if the app required specific setup, such as relying on installed software, wierd settings or particular shares. Every developer has their own webserver and can run their own database so if it's a "basic" webapp I don't see much value in virtuals.. it's pretty hard to break anything with a basic web app deployment :)
With a virtual server, you can test your code in a production-like environment. It is also possible to quickly revert back to the original setup. For many applications, it is useful in that time period just after you write the code, but before it goes to production.
I'm a fan of virtualizaion and use it in testing and production (VMWare and Hyper-v) but over the last year I find it less important on a dev machine. TFS provides me with all the backup/rollback ability that I need, multiple versions of .net can now exist on the same machine and VS2008 can target all those versions.
In a development environment a virtual environment is useful to put several different servers on one box, you can have an instance for your web app, one for your services, one for database, etc. That way it mimics your production environment if you are using separate servers.
One of the benefits of using virtualization in production is that your application is not tied to a specific machine. If you wanted to move your web server instance to another box, it is trivial to do so. You don't need to install or configure things on the new server and hope that everything is set up properly.
One problem I have had though in testing virtual instances is that it can run slower for some applications, specifically engineering apps that like running the CPU at 100%. So test before you leap.
I'm currently using a linux server, we run a couple of web sites of it, PHP apps with MySQL, the usual. Since the server is privately owned by some friends and myself (we do have it hosted at a professional datacenter though), from time to time we also use it to host our smallish counter-strike source and call of duty 4 matches by running the released dedicated game server packages.
I've recently subscribed to DevExpress' excellent WinForms and ASP.Net component suite, and is contemplating moving to Windows to make use of those ASP.Net components. I'm currently trying to decide between the Web and Standard editions of Windows Server, since there is a difference of nearly a thousand bucks (where I come from)
For Windows Web Server 2008, Microsoft has softened the database server restrictions and made it clear there is no need for CALs. But would one be able to run the above mentioned web servers? I've been googling and searching through forums to no avail.
Need some help before I plunk in the cash.
Thanks.
Before I give any opinion, I'll start by answering your core questions:
Yes, you can run dedicated game servers on Windows Server Web ed.
The differences between web and standard:
Web only supports 2 gigs of ram. Standard in 64bit mode can support 32gigs (and more?).
Standard comes with more things that are better suited to local server environments (eg: active directory). If you want LDAP controlled Exchange email, you'll need Standard. Most web server don't need these.
Web (apparently) won't support full-on SQL server versions. Express should run though.
Opinion time.
Dedicated and virtual dedicated monetary overheads on Windows servers are a lot... To the degree where you're paying more for the software than the hardware costs, at least for the first year.
Renting the software (as part of a managed dedicated server or VPS) is initially a lot cheaper, but over the course of a couple of years, will cost you about the same and if you run it longer, it'll eventually cost you more.
Shared Windows hosts can be good. I've been with a company called Hostek (Florida-based) and they've bent over backwards to make hosting a fairly busy site (around 6000 uniques a day) very cheap for me. It can also be atrocious. I've had bad hosting companies too. Shop around.
About a year ago, I dropped Windows at home in favour of Linux. I'm not going to enumerate the many benefits and drawbacks; I'll just tell you that that's when I stopped doing .NET in favour of more open Frameworks. I'm not using Django (a Python-based web framework). While you might not like it (or other frameworks - eg Ruby on Rails), I plead that you do check out what's happening in the open-source world before you plonk for anything Windows related since you already have the infrastructure available for hosting Django/Rails/et al.
If you wanted your own Linux server, VPSs start from around $20pcm. As I said before, severely cheaper than Windows counterparts. I now use Linode to host everything new I make. Highly affordable and they'll easily run dedicated games like your current set-up does.
Mono isn't an option for you. Not yet anyway. It does go some length to help people migrate their applications but it's still pretty sketchy on the ASPNET front. And as a comment says on another answer: the controls you want to use are strictly Windows-only for the moment.
Linux will consume fewer baseline resources than Windows will. On an old server (Windows 2000, IIRC) I had to administer, the core of Windows would consume anywhere from 100-200 megs of RAM. My current Ubuntu server eats 40megs. I'm not sure how much RAM you have to play with on your server but if it's a lower amount, you're going to fit a lot more on a Linux host. (Remember that if you have more than 2gigs, you don't have the choice of the Web Server edition)
It's clear from this that I'm a complete Linux super-enthusiast, but I know my needs differ from yours. ASP.NET is a great platform but it costs a lot of money even if you're splitting it between friends. You could opt for Windows... Or you could go Linux, donate a bit to the projects you use and buy a new plasma or something shiny for the lady.
SPLA? Isn't that for service providers? My friends and I use the hosted services for ourselves (games, email and web), though of course our web sites are publicly viewable by all; but I think that hardly qualifies as "providing a service"?
Unfortunately, staying with Linux would make it such that I would not be able to use my DevExpress components, which is my reason for considering Windows Server in the first place. .NET may be partially supported by Mono, but not fully, and DevExpress makes use of certain features of .NET that aren't (at least as yet) supported by Mono.
We also already own our own dedicated server, so are only looking for a suitable OS.
Still, your reply is appreciated.