Does anyone know how licensing work for Visual Studio 2010 from MSDN? I noticed it doesn't require a key. Does that mean that I can install it on multiple computers?
Go to the source :) MSDN Subscription Software Use Rights:
MSDN subscriptions are licensed on a per-user basis. One person can use the software to design, develop, test, or demonstrate his or her programs on any number of devices. Each person who uses the software this way needs a license.
So yes, as long as you're the one using it, it may be on multiple computers. Two different Microsoft licensing reps have confirmed this for me over the years, and it was a conscious decision since many developers have multiple machines. This applies to other MSDN downloads as well, Windows 7, Windows Server, etc.
It is "pre-pidded", which means the key is baked in. You can install it on any computer you like, but that doesn't mean you should - you still have to abide by the licence agreement imposed by your subscription.
By itself, this does not mean that you have a license for multiple computers. Quite a few Microsoft products have built-in license keys for certain license types which allow only a single installation. Look at your license agreement. If it's still unclear, call Microsoft or ask a lawyer.
Related
I want to develop a commercial win32 desktop application using Visual Studio Community edition 2015. It's good to say that I'm the only developer. Nobody else is going to join me. And I don't want to sell it in the windows store. Rather, distribute it commercially in my own website. Am I allowed to do this? I can't fully understand the vs community license.
Additionally, if two of my friends join me(team of three), will that be allowed?
The following clause from the Microsoft Software License Terms for Microsoft Visual Studio Community 2015 is applicable:
Individual license. If you are an individual working on your own applications to sell or for any other purpose, you may use the software to develop and test those applications.
In other words, as an individual developer you can use Visual Studio Community 2015 to develop commercial software distributed through any distribution channel (including your own web site).
The next clause may be applicable, if you run a non-enterprise organization:
Organization licenses. If you are an organization, your users may use the software as follows:
...
If none of the above apply, and you are also not an enterprise (defined below), then up to 5 of your individual users can use the software concurrently to develop and test your applications.
...
In your specific case (team of 3) it would be legal to use Visual Studio Community 2015 to develop commercial applications, provided that you are a non-enterprise organization. An "enterprise" is defined as:
An "enterprise" is any organization and its affiliates who collectively have either (a) more than 250 computers or users or (b) more than one million US dollars (or the equivalent in other currencies) in annual revenues, and "affiliates" means those entities that control (via majority ownership), are controlled by, or are under common control with an organization.
More details are available in the Visual Studio 2015 Licensing White Paper.
On the Visual Studio 15 CTP download page, it says this:
This release is unsupported and are not intended for use on production computers, or to create production code. We strongly recommend only installing this release in a virtual machine, or on a computer that is available for reformatting.
So... why can't I install it on a production machine? I'm not talking about creating production code (obviously not that!). But I can't even install it?
Is this because all pre-release software tends to come with the "it might explode your PC" caveat? Or is there something more to it, like the new compiler is just unable to live side-by-side with the old one from VS 2013?
The "we strongly recommended only installing this release in a VM, or on a computer that is available for reformatting" warning falls into the "it might explode your PC" bucket. However, that said, this release does not have a Go-Live license (which is different).
What is this Go-Live thing?
The license terms for Visual Studio pre-releases come in 2 buckets - Go-Live and, well, not Go-Live. The terms for a Go-Live license are basically the same as the released product: some amount of support (though not the full MS 10-year support policy), and no specific restrictions on what you do with your projects created with that prerelease build. Go-Live licenses are generally used for the RC releases that come shortly before general availability (aka RTM).
However, a non Go-Live license (such as the one applicable in this case) has the following clauses (emphasis added):
INSTALLATION AND USE RIGHTS.
•You may install and use any number of copies of the software solely for evaluation purposes to design, develop and test your programs. If you use the software on Microsoft Azure, additional charges and terms may apply.
•You may not deploy or distribute any program you design or develop with the software, except that you may deploy your programs internally solely to evaluate any deployment technologies contained in the software.
•You may not test the software in a live operating environment or public website unless Microsoft permits you to do so under another agreement.
Based on these restrictions, the recommendation is more strong that you don't install these on a production machine as it is solely intended for evaluation purposes.
I'd be the only one using the product, but I'll need to install VS on 4 different computers: My office Desktop, one virtual machine, my home desktop and my laptop.
I've been using the MSDN Operating Systems subscription for a number of years so I have a general idea of what I'm allowed to do, but I don't understand if a Visual Studio Professional with MSDN allows me to install multiple copies of VS Pro.
To give you an idea of what I'm looking for, I'm currently using Delphi 2010 Named User: this allows me to install Delphi on multiple computers, given I'm the only one using those Delphi installations.
The license is per-user, so you can install it on any number of devices, but it is licensed only for you to use. This is printed in clear text in the Visual Studio 2010 and MSDN Licensing White Paper:
Any team member can install and use
MSDN software on as many devices as
they like. The license does not
restrict where the device is located
(at work, at home, at school, at a
customer’s office, etc.). However,
each user of that MSDN software must
have an appropriate MSDN subscription.
I have been looking at whether our MSDN Premium Subscriptions would cover upgrading our developer’s machines from Vista OEM to Win 7 RTM MSDN.
The assumption here is that "design, develop, test, or demonstrate" covers the developer’s day job, so should cover the OS.
I have found that other development shops seem to make this same assumption.
Having looked at the MSDN Subscription Software Use Rights page this does not seem to be the case.
from the page :
"Many MSDN subscribers use a computer for mixed use—both design, development, testing, and demonstration of your programs (the use allowed under the MSDN Subscription license) and some other use.
Using the software in any other way, such as for doing email, playing games, or editing a document is another use and is not covered by the MSDN Subscription license.
When this happens, the underlying operating system must also be licensed normally by purchasing a regular copy of Windows such as the one that came with a new OEM PC"
So if you are not using the operating software install to purely "design, develop, test" read "use your visual studio license" and you answered a company email you are in violation of the license.
Is this indeed the case?
Is there a way that MSDN OS licenses can cover your day to day dev machine?
Did you make the same assumption as I did?
Yes that's the case. No you can't change the license.
MSDN license has always been a "technical" license that restricts the usage to development "sandbox" only. Your primary workstation must be covered by a regular non-dev license. Although I heard of some shops that (purposefully or not) violate this license and are very happy with the savings.
Based on this document the accepted answer no longer appears to hold true (at least for licensed users of Visual Studio Enterprise with MSDN).
Relevant excerpt (p13) says:
Production use of Office Professional Plus 2016
Office Professional Plus 2016 can be used by licensed users of Visual Studio Enterprise with MSDN or Visual Studio Enterprise – annual on
one device for production use
From this page the Office Professional Plus SKU contains Outlook, and although IANAL it would seem that use of Outlook is now allowed with an MSDN subscription.
With regard to the underlying OS this remains excluded. The relevant text from the licensing document says:
When there is mixed use the underlying operating system must be licensed normally by purchasing a regular copy of Windows such as the
one that came with a new OEM PC.
With the upcoming release of Visual Studio 2010, and all the lovely new features in C# 4.0, I would really love to update from 2008. However, over the last few years, I've managed to get student pricing, or even free versions via the MSDN Academic Alliance.
Now I am no longer a student.
I can't seem to justify the $AU500 pricetag of even the Standard version for what is at the moment, essentially a hobby. As much as I may like for it to be, it just isn't paying the bills.
So, I've read on the Microsoft site that there's no non-commercial clause in the Express version EULA which is good because I do the occasional bit of paid work in it. How much is missing from the Express version though, compared to Professional (what I use currently, and what the 2010 beta is)? Am I likely to go through withdrawal pains as I reach for something that just isn't there?
As far as addons go, the only one I've really played with is VisualSVN, and I can live with just using TortoiseSVN manually. Anything else I should be aware of?
Version comparisons can be found here: (For 2008) (Edit: A far more in depth document can be downloaded from here)
The things that leap out to me as features I wouldn't want to be without are:
Extensibility (no plugins like VisualSVN or Resharper)
Source Code Control
Remote debugging
64-bit compiler support (x64) (from the first link, though the document implies you can make 64bit apps...)
SQL Server 2005 integration
No setup projects (for making MSI installers)
Limited refactoring
Some missing debugging tools (especially the threads window)
If you can live without those (and the other limitations that wouldn't bother me personally) then I guess that you'll get by with Express just fine.
Final thought: Express isn't your only option for free .net development, there is also SharpDevelop which has some advantages (SVN integration, compact framework support) over Express. Though I'm sure it has many limitations too.
Do you do any entrepreneurial work? If you're building the next killer app, check out BizSpark: http://www.microsoft.com/bizspark/
There is new program now available from Microsoft to allow web developers to access the Microsoft Stack similar to the BizSpark program.
It is called Website Spark. VS 2008 Professional Edition and SQL Server 2008 Web Editon are some of the tools available through the program.
Of all things I would probably miss the ability to install extensions. Especially tools like AnkhSVN and TestDriven.NET have grown invaluable to me...
I would seriously consider investing some money in purchasing VS especially if you can get some of that back by using it for jobs.
Maybe switching to Eclipse and Java is an option for you?
EDIT:
By the way, investing a few hundred dollars is common among ex-students. If you were a designer you would probably have to invest $1000 on Adobe software.
You won't be able to have solutions with multiple project types (so no mixed language solutions), or solution folders either.
The main thing that is missing is the ability to build an installer for a solution.
The work-around is to build the installer using some open source installer for .NET, e.g. WiX.
And multi-language solutions are more cumbersome (e.g. mixed C# and VB.NET).
I use the Professional version, but I didn't experience any problems with opening and building my project/solution in the Express Edition.