I recently did a test to see if Lightwave still works if you pull out
the USB dongle once it's loaded and it *seems* to be OK....I could load
and render scenes at any rate.

Does this mean I can install LW on 2 machines, and set one off
rendering and use the other for carrying on with something else? or
have both rendering the same scene's frames but set one to render odd
frames and one to render even?

I know I could use screamernet for this, but I've never really liked it
and if you use plugins it can be a bit of a mare.....

Would this be legal? If not, how naughty is it?

Nicko

Nicko wrote:
> I recently did a test to see if Lightwave still works if you pull out
> the USB dongle once it's loaded and it *seems* to be OK....I could load
> and render scenes at any rate.
> 
> Does this mean I can install LW on 2 machines, and set one off
> rendering and use the other for carrying on with something else? or
> have both rendering the same scene's frames but set one to render odd
> frames and one to render even?
> 
> I know I could use screamernet for this, but I've never really liked it
> and if you use plugins it can be a bit of a mare.....
> 
> Would this be legal? If not, how naughty is it?
> 
> Nicko
> 

It's illegal since you are using LW on two machines when you're only 
licenced to use it on one at a time ( hence the reason we have dongles )

You'd wear out your USB ports swapping dongles all the time too...

Screamer isn't too hard to set up, Lightnet and Spider are free render 
controllers and take the pain out of network rendering, and if you use a 
shared drive to load your plugins your network should have any trouble 
finding them.

jw.

James Willmott <eatspam@mcdonalds.com> wrote in news:C3ymg.14376$ap3.3875
@news-server.bigpond.net.au:

> Nicko wrote:
>> I recently did a test to see if Lightwave still works if you pull out
>> the USB dongle once it's loaded and it *seems* to be OK....I could 
load
>> and render scenes at any rate.
>> 
>> Does this mean I can install LW on 2 machines, and set one off
>> rendering and use the other for carrying on with something else? or
>> have both rendering the same scene's frames but set one to render odd
>> frames and one to render even?
>> 
>> I know I could use screamernet for this, but I've never really liked 
it
>> and if you use plugins it can be a bit of a mare.....
>> 
>> Would this be legal? If not, how naughty is it?
>> 
>> Nicko
>> 
> 
> It's illegal since you are using LW on two machines when you're only 
> licenced to use it on one at a time ( hence the reason we have dongles 
)
> 
> You'd wear out your USB ports swapping dongles all the time too...
> 
> Screamer isn't too hard to set up, Lightnet and Spider are free render 
> controllers and take the pain out of network rendering, and if you use 
a 
> shared drive to load your plugins your network should have any trouble 
> finding them.
> 
> jw.
> 


 I can use LW on a dual processor machine and use two monitors and open 
two instances of LW, yet I can't use LW for myself on two seperate 
machines. 

The whole deal is ridiculous. 

"Gene" <What@Me.com> wrote in message 
news:Xns97EB6CAF54471Freelance@216.77.188.18...
>
> I can use LW on a dual processor machine and use two monitors and open
> two instances of LW, yet I can't use LW for myself on two seperate
> machines.

Yes and you can use LW on an 8-CPU system with a separate instance for each 
CPU run to separate node workstations via Win Terminal Service Edition and 
then it's like 8 people running their own copy at their own desk... 
Although it's cheaper to buy 8 separate workstations and 8 separate LW 
licenses.

> The whole deal is ridiculous.

It is, but I'm sure if there were a better way short of not trying to 
protect their software at all, they would.

It's a tricky one.

Luxology are trying a variation on the model by licensing the software
to the user, not the machine. On their site I think they say something
about it being ok to install and use on all of *your own* machines. I
think they're going full tilt on being nice guys and expecting the same
back....Certainly there seems to be a good feeling in the industry
about Modo.

The whole dongle thing throws back to when 3D software cost thousands
instead of hundreds (of UK pounds) like it does now. I wonder if the
different figures today still justify the effort? I don't know of any
other software (except Maya I think?) that still uses them.

Then again, if that's what it takes....






Dark Science wrote:
> "Gene" <What@Me.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns97EB6CAF54471Freelance@216.77.188.18...
> >
> > I can use LW on a dual processor machine and use two monitors and open
> > two instances of LW, yet I can't use LW for myself on two seperate
> > machines.
>
> Yes and you can use LW on an 8-CPU system with a separate instance for each
> CPU run to separate node workstations via Win Terminal Service Edition and
> then it's like 8 people running their own copy at their own desk...
> Although it's cheaper to buy 8 separate workstations and 8 separate LW
> licenses.
>
> > The whole deal is ridiculous.
>
> It is, but I'm sure if there were a better way short of not trying to
> protect their software at all, they would.

"Dark Science" <Jeff at Applied Visual dot Com> wrote in
news:YdCdnehdwdG48QHZnZ2dnUVZ_rKdnZ2d@speakeasy.net: 

> "Gene" <What@Me.com> wrote in message 
> news:Xns97EB6CAF54471Freelance@216.77.188.18...
>>
>> I can use LW on a dual processor machine and use two monitors and
>> open two instances of LW, yet I can't use LW for myself on two
>> seperate machines.
> 
> Yes and you can use LW on an 8-CPU system with a separate instance for
> each CPU run to separate node workstations via Win Terminal Service
> Edition and then it's like 8 people running their own copy at their
> own desk... Although it's cheaper to buy 8 separate workstations and 8
> separate LW licenses.
> 
>> The whole deal is ridiculous.
> 
> It is, but I'm sure if there were a better way short of not trying to 
> protect their software at all, they would.
> 
> 

Yep, Protection is required in every aspect of life in this world these 
days and I dislike piracy as most artist do. But I'm  certain the reason 3D 
Max is Numero Uno in the Game biz and moving into most other areas is that 
just about every net savy youngster today that wants one has a pirated copy 
and I'm fairly certain it's compliments from the company that made it.  

With the price of a full LW package so close to an uppgrade's price, I have 
no idea why Lightwave doesn't give it away just to get loyal customers.

I'd much rather get a LW cd in the mail that that stinking AOL disk:)

Gene wrote:
> Yep, Protection is required in every aspect of life in this world these 
> days and I dislike piracy as most artist do. But I'm  certain the reason 3D 
> Max is Numero Uno in the Game biz and moving into most other areas is that 
> just about every net savy youngster today that wants one has a pirated copy 
> and I'm fairly certain it's compliments from the company that made it.  
> 
> With the price of a full LW package so close to an uppgrade's price, I have 
> no idea why Lightwave doesn't give it away just to get loyal customers.
> 
> I'd much rather get a LW cd in the mail that that stinking AOL disk:)

I love getting AOL disks in the mail, I'm always in need of colourful 
drink coasters or brick wall frisbees :-)

Regards Charles

Licensing to the individual isn't a new concept and one company that 
surprised me the most (we're talking ancient history here) was Microsoft.

A gentleman at a financial institution, I once worked at, wanted to work 
at home, and as the OS was out of date he couldn't buy it anywhere 
(Microsoft no longer sold it either).  He wanted close to 100% 
compatibility.

He contacted Microsoft about his problem, here was their answer :-

"Microsoft has a policy that if you run an operating system at work you 
can install it at home".

Oh course I almost fell off my seat, and then I almost had heart failure 
as this was added :-

"This applies to current operating systems also".

Things have certainly changed with Microsoft.

---------------------------

I like the usb dongle approach, as an ex-programmer (as if you ever 
really give it up), I can appreciate people wanting to protect their 
hard efforts.

However I do admire people that provide free versions of their software.

"Art Rage 2 Free" is a good example, it's an excellent soft sell.  Art 
Rage 2 Free is a wonderful paint program... that actually acts like 
textured art mediums... it simulated painting and drawing.

The full program costs about $19 USD, and after playing with the free 
version (that doesn't have all the brushes), I'm inclined to buy the 
full version.


Regards Charles


Nicko wrote:

> It's a tricky one.
> 
> Luxology are trying a variation on the model by licensing the software
> to the user, not the machine. On their site I think they say something
> about it being ok to install and use on all of *your own* machines. I
> think they're going full tilt on being nice guys and expecting the same
> back....Certainly there seems to be a good feeling in the industry
> about Modo.
> 
> The whole dongle thing throws back to when 3D software cost thousands
> instead of hundreds (of UK pounds) like it does now. I wonder if the
> different figures today still justify the effort? I don't know of any
> other software (except Maya I think?) that still uses them.
> 
> Then again, if that's what it takes....

Chilla <charlesanderson@optushome.com.au> wrote in
news:449caff5$0$3986$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au: 

> Gene wrote:
>> Yep, Protection is required in every aspect of life in this world
>> these days and I dislike piracy as most artist do. But I'm  certain
>> the reason 3D Max is Numero Uno in the Game biz and moving into most
>> other areas is that just about every net savy youngster today that
>> wants one has a pirated copy and I'm fairly certain it's compliments
>> from the company that made it.  
>> 
>> With the price of a full LW package so close to an uppgrade's price,
>> I have no idea why Lightwave doesn't give it away just to get loyal
>> customers. 
>> 
>> I'd much rather get a LW cd in the mail that that stinking AOL disk:)
> 
> I love getting AOL disks in the mail, I'm always in need of colourful 
> drink coasters or brick wall frisbees :-)
> 
> Regards Charles
> 

I wonder if there is any artist out there working in discarded cd's/dvd's 
?

-- 
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, 
that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, 
that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. � That 
to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving 
their just powers from the consent of the governed, � That whenever any 
Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of 
the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, 
laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in 
such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and 
Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long 
established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and 
accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to 
suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing 
the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses 
and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to 
reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their 
duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their 
future security."

Chief wrote:

> I wonder if there is any artist out there working in discarded cd's/dvd's 

My father-in-law makes clocks out of them. :)

jw.

James Willmott <eatspam@mcdonalds.com> wrote in
news:Bm3ng.15142$ap3.6792@news-server.bigpond.net.au: 

> Chief wrote:
> 
>> I wonder if there is any artist out there working in discarded
>> cd's/dvd's 
> 
> My father-in-law makes clocks out of them. :)
> 
> jw.
> 

Now that's is a great idea. I bet they are pretty much bio undegradable. 

I predict the end of man will be due to all the disgarded discs reflecting 
back the suns heat into space, causing a unending ice age. The last disc 
that is the straw that broke the camels back will be an AOL disc delivered 
to the last man on earth to get an address - a pigmy in the amazon rain 
forrest.

"Nicko" <genericsubscriptions@hotmail.com> wrote in message 
news:1151104104.264792.76530@b68g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> It's a tricky one.
>
> Luxology are trying a variation on the model by licensing the software
> to the user, not the machine. On their site I think they say something
> about it being ok to install and use on all of *your own* machines. I
> think they're going full tilt on being nice guys and expecting the same
> back....Certainly there seems to be a good feeling in the industry
> about Modo.

Yeah, I think Luxology has a good approach in terms of user-friendliness. 
Although I'm not sure what protection it really offers them...  But I truly 
admire what they're doing. There's lots of different copy protection 
approaches out there and some of the best I've seen are still dongle-based. 
I really like the floating, dongle-based FlexLM server approach.  It's cool 
where you can have one or more USB keys and they don't have to be on the 
system you're running the software on... Just accessible via 
network/internet/etc..  So you may have licenses for 3 seats of XSI or 
whatever and you can run them on any three systems you own at any given 
time.  And if you're going on the road where connection to the license 
server isn't a possibility, you can get a passport license from the server 
for that system for a certain amount of time (days/weeks/etc...).  All 
pretty cool and a lot more secure than Luxology's approach.

In the end though, there's no such thing as a copy protection that can't be 
broken.  Everything including Sentinel Pro, HASP, FlexLM, etc..  has all 
been broken and the hackers/crackers are never more than a few days behind 
the copy protection companies.  And the harder the copy protection companies 
try, the more inconvenient for the end-user it all becomes and also 
increases software bloat and costs and yet they gain nothing more than the 
ability to stop the casual copy or some average Joe from putting a second 
copy on his notebook.  In the end, those who want a free copy are going to 
get it (without much effort), so why make it a hassle for the legit users? 
We're starting to see the over the top means of copy protection now coming 
out of large movie and music studios with all the new copy protection 
schemes for HD-DVD and BluRay as well as DRM being integrated right into 
Windows Vista and MacOS Leopard.  Even with all that, people will still be 
ripping musing and copying HD movies and all that.  And we get to listen to 
large companies claim that their industry is "losing billions in sales each 
year to piracy" when the posted sales for that given industry don't even 
reach more than a couple $B anyway (music industry, <cough>).  When in 
reality we should all be pissed off that we're going to be paying extra for 
our music and movies because these companies want to incorporate and develop 
new means to stop piracy when in fact, that just isn't going to happen no 
matter what they do short of just not selling a product for pirates to 
steal.

> The whole dongle thing throws back to when 3D software cost thousands
> instead of hundreds (of UK pounds) like it does now. I wonder if the
> different figures today still justify the effort? I don't know of any
> other software (except Maya I think?) that still uses them.

Lots of software still uses dongles or some other form of hardware keying... 
Not just 3D software, but just about everything out there that isn't 
directly targeted at the general consumer.  In the 3D software world, MAX is 
still using dongles unless they dropped them with the latest release.  XSI, 
Houdini, Messiah and several others do to.

I'm in that grey area too in that I'm a freelacer who would like to run LW 
on my two machines at once, e.g. work on one, and render on the other. I use 
Screamernet all the time but that still obviously doesn't allow me to do 
this. Another complication is that I'm now using FPrime a lot for radiosity 
rendering which has no network rendering and again requires 2 LW's to do two 
renders at once on two different machines.

Anyway, I've finally bitten the bullet and bought a second seat of LW 
(�327+VAT) and a second FPrime (approx �220). I figure that �550 is a pretty 
reasonable investment to double my workflow.

What I would seriously love to see is total co-operative rendering where you 
would lanch a simple little exe on all networked machines making their 
processors 'available', and then your main workstation would access their 
processing power for every F9 and F10 render! No Screamernet setups, your 
scene files could be wherever you want on your main workstation, and F9 
renders would be like lightening...

Alex



"Nicko" <genericsubscriptions@hotmail.com> wrote in message 
news:1151104104.264792.76530@b68g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> It's a tricky one.
>
> Luxology are trying a variation on the model by licensing the software
> to the user, not the machine. On their site I think they say something
> about it being ok to install and use on all of *your own* machines. I
> think they're going full tilt on being nice guys and expecting the same
> back....Certainly there seems to be a good feeling in the industry
> about Modo.
>
> The whole dongle thing throws back to when 3D software cost thousands
> instead of hundreds (of UK pounds) like it does now. I wonder if the
> different figures today still justify the effort? I don't know of any
> other software (except Maya I think?) that still uses them.
>
> Then again, if that's what it takes....
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Dark Science wrote:
>> "Gene" <What@Me.com> wrote in message
>> news:Xns97EB6CAF54471Freelance@216.77.188.18...
>> >
>> > I can use LW on a dual processor machine and use two monitors and open
>> > two instances of LW, yet I can't use LW for myself on two seperate
>> > machines.
>>
>> Yes and you can use LW on an 8-CPU system with a separate instance for 
>> each
>> CPU run to separate node workstations via Win Terminal Service Edition 
>> and
>> then it's like 8 people running their own copy at their own desk...
>> Although it's cheaper to buy 8 separate workstations and 8 separate LW
>> licenses.
>>
>> > The whole deal is ridiculous.
>>
>> It is, but I'm sure if there were a better way short of not trying to
>> protect their software at all, they would.
>