CompuServe Thread

#ACAD

10 messages in this thread
#21554From: mike mulveyNov 22, 1991 11:24 PM
We just bought a second SUN Sparkstation used. I thought that one was allowed to run AutoCAD on any station on the net as long as one did not exceed the registered number of users (1 in this case) but whenever I try to enter the drawing editor on the "new" machine I get a FATAL ERROR message that says something like "AutoCAD not authorised to run on this machine". As we bought this machine second-hand, not from our original VAR, they will probably be not too keen to help us. Am I correct in assuming that we can run one ACAD at a time or is it limited to one station only ? Please advise
#21585From: David GariNov 23, 1991 2:14 AM
There are two ways to authorize AutoCAD for the Sun SparcStation. 1. You buy one copy of AutoCAD. You tell your dealer the hostid of one machine, and the serial number of the AutoCAD. He gives you an authorization code. That AutoCAD can be run on that station and that station only. 2. You buy one copy of AutoCAD. You connect two or more Suns together with network cable. You say "Yes" to "Do you want to use the Elan Licence Manager (ELM)?" You give your dealer the ELM network license manager id code. He gives you a network authorization code. That AutoCAD can be run on any one station on the network. If you had two AutoCAD licences and four Suns, you could run AutoCAD concurrently on any two of the four machines. Who is your AutoCAD dealer? He should be happy to help you if you buy an AutoCAD from him.
#21691From: Dieter Schlaepfer [AdeskNov 23, 1991 11:35 PM
David, Mike's AutoCAD dealer should be happy to help him get a network authorization code even if he doesn't immediately buy another copy of AutoCAD from him <grin>. The dealer will need to charge a service fee, however, to cover costs. Dieter
#21751From: mike mulveyNov 24, 1991 2:36 PM
What I am after is to run ONE copy of ACAD on EITHER of two machines i.e. never more than one ACAD session at a time but from either machine. While on the subject, if you guys introduced site licences at somewhat reduced costs you'd encourage a lot more people to buy more stations and probably make honest men out of a lot of "pirates" especially these days when AutoCAD costs more than a fully configured 486/33 clone !
#21752From: mike mulveyNov 24, 1991 2:39 PM
Oops on second look, I see you answered my question, do I need another auth code? the first machine is up and running. I tried enabling the network manager but got the same "this machine is not authorised to run AutoCAD " message
#21918From: David GariNov 25, 1991 5:26 PM
Please have your dealer contact Autodesk Customer Service for a network authorization code. He will need to supply them with the network licence manager id code that "elmadmin -c" returns.
#22100From: mike mulveyNov 26, 1991 3:29 PM
Thanks, I eventually discovered that all by myself. One other question, in the printcap entries you sent me for the HP LJ III, the baud rate is listed as 38400 are these really LJ III entries. Our printer lists 19200 as max. I haven't been able to get ANY graphics out of it yet no matter what baud rate I use. Someone said that one needs to have two printcap entries for the LJ, one for text, the other for graphics. I tried this and can get text from the local machine to print, but no text from remote machines and no graphics from ANYWHERE !! (we have a mix of SUN's and PC 386/33 clones running NFS/PCNFS) I still think that site licences are a GREAT idea even if DataCAD did it first !!)
#22111From: David GariNov 26, 1991 5:01 PM
The printer is a big ol' industrial strength 12 page/min HP LaserJet IIIsi. We also have a regular LaserJet III. I didn't see any entries with multiple :ms=… statements. The printcaps are from our Sun network in Product Support and they work, so what can I tell you?
#22226From: mike mulveyNov 27, 1991 9:04 AM
OK thanks, to be honest, I haven't had much time to mess with the printcap but what I DID try didn't work ! Do you find that a seperate printcap entry IS req'd for text and graphics ?
#22298From: David GariNov 27, 1991 4:46 PM
I don't think so.