Jump to content

 
Photo

CS3 from CS, is upgrade worthwhile?

- - - - -

  • Please log in to reply
19 replies to this topic

#16
Sky Schemer

Sky Schemer

    Master Contributor

  • Validated Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 119 posts
  • Location:Hillsboro, OR
  • United States

I'm running both 32-bit versions of XP & Vista on my machine here at work and it has the same host ID for both. As near as I can figure without installing Vista 64-bit, it should be the same on that version too, understanding as I do how it gets the host ID. I'm not sure why it would give you a different host ID in your case. So long as no hardware changes, you should theoretically be able to switch to any OS on the same machine and still have it work. In fact, if it wasn't for windows & mac versions of MAPublisher having different feature names you should theoretically be able to use the same license for both OSes on a Boot Camp'd Mac running XP/Vista & OSX


Interesting. I did a fresh install when going to Vista x64 vs. doing an in-place upgrade. Might that have made a difference? And perhaps being in a 64-bit mode makes the processor look different than when in 32-bit mode (just as 32 bit protected mode appears differently than the old 16 bit mode)?

I've also noticed that MAPublisher won't execute inside a Remote Desktop Connection, a situation where the hardware ID hasn't changed (I've checked), though if you launch it from inside a VNC session it works just fine. Is that normal/expected behavior?

Should we take this discussion off line? I don't want to hijack this thread.

Any more than I already have. :blink:

#17
Richard

Richard

    Key Contributor

  • Validated Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 52 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tasmania
  • Interests:Surveying, Bushwalking<br />As a kid mapping has always interested me.<br />Main mapping is for a local rivercare group - Mount Roland Rivercare Catchment Inc.<br />Use Manifold, AICS with MAPublisher and CanvasX GIS and field book and pencil.
  • Australia

Should we take this discussion off line? I don't want to hijack this thread

I'm all ears. happy to sit in on this one and observe from afar.
regards, Richard

#18
Andrew Patterson

Andrew Patterson

    Key Contributor

  • Validated Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 99 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toronto, ON
  • Canada

Interesting. I did a fresh install when going to Vista x64 vs. doing an in-place upgrade. Might that have made a difference? And perhaps being in a 64-bit mode makes the processor look different than when in 32-bit mode (just as 32 bit protected mode appears differently than the old 16 bit mode)?


The host ID actually has nothing to do with the processor; it's your MAC address, at least for MAPublisher. So Vista or XP, 32-bit or 64-bit, none of that should change your MAC address or, therefore, your host ID.

That said, it does seem to happen from time to time! There are oddball cases but they're usually related to the addition of a new piece of hardware that for whatever reason occludes the original MAC address. One of our support guys once plugged in his digital camera and suddenly found that his host ID was being reported as 00000000! Fortunately, unplugging the camera restored the ID; in most cases where we hear people report this it ends up being some piece of temporary hardware that can confuse the host ID function of the 3rd part security library we use.

Changing the ID permanently really requires a hardware change. Adding a second network card, or replacing a motherboard (most motherboards nowadays have built in networking) are the most common causes, but there are probably others. There are software methods of changing your MAC address, but that's never a wise idea; MAC addresses are supposed to be globally unique, and if you change yours you might end up colliding with someone else and causing network issues. And anyways, all that would do is make you have to contact a number of vendors for new licenses :) That would probably include Adobe, by the way, because I believe they use the same library we do!

Assuming you added or took away nothing during your upgrade, I'm not sure what could cause the host ID to change. The only thing I can think of is maybe something like a native network card on your motherboard was disabled under XP but Vista activated it when it installed? Something like that might cause it to change, but it would really require a MAC address from a different source than you were getting it from under XP.

I've also noticed that MAPublisher won't execute inside a Remote Desktop Connection, a situation where the hardware ID hasn't changed (I've checked), though if you launch it from inside a VNC session it works just fine. Is that normal/expected behavior?


I actually went and tried this and found that the reason is quite simple: the security library detects & automatically fails any attempt at licensing under what's called "Windows Terminal Services" -- which includes RDC. Since VNC uses a very different method of connection (I believe it literally just sends mouse clicks & keystrokes one way and graphics output the other), the library doesn't detect & quash it like it does with RDC. So I guess that's expected behaviour, though I'm not sure it's really come up (other than us using VNC, so we knew that worked).

Should we take this discussion off line? I don't want to hijack this thread.

Any more than I already have. :blink:


Well, we do have the OP's blessing ;)
Andrew Patterson
Lead Software Architect
Avenza Systems Inc.

email: andrew@avenza.com
phone: 416.487.5116

#19
Sky Schemer

Sky Schemer

    Master Contributor

  • Validated Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 119 posts
  • Location:Hillsboro, OR
  • United States

The host ID actually has nothing to do with the processor; it's your MAC address, at least for MAPublisher. So Vista or XP, 32-bit or 64-bit, none of that should change your MAC address or, therefore, your host ID.

That said, it does seem to happen from time to time! There are oddball cases but they're usually related to the addition of a new piece of hardware that for whatever reason occludes the original MAC address.


Aha...interesting. One of the big problems with a 64-bit upgrade is driver availability. While I did not muck with the on-board NIC, I did have two peripherals that had no 64-bit support. Given your camera story, I wonder if one of those devices was mucking up the works, and when removed after going 64-bit, made the world look different from the software's point of view.

My most recent change (just two weeks ago) was a motherboard change due to hardware failure. That was no fun, and I can see where even exact replacement hardware (which I couldn't get in a reasonable amount of time) would cause a problem. Even Vista made me re-activate after that incident.

Oh well. It was a good excuse to go up to a Core 2 Quad. I figured that if I had to go through this pain, anyway, I may as well get something good out of it.

That would probably include Adobe, by the way, because I believe they use the same library we do!


Actually, it did not. The Vista upgrade required a re-activation of CS2, but my motherboard change did not. Oddly enough, Manifold was fine with the motherboard swap, too.

Oh well. Software protection may be frustrating, but at least it's inconsistent. :huh:

#20
Andrew Patterson

Andrew Patterson

    Key Contributor

  • Validated Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 99 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toronto, ON
  • Canada

Aha...interesting. One of the big problems with a 64-bit upgrade is driver availability. While I did not muck with the on-board NIC, I did have two peripherals that had no 64-bit support. Given your camera story, I wonder if one of those devices was mucking up the works, and when removed after going 64-bit, made the world look different from the software's point of view.


Actually, that sounds quite likely. I should have considered that -- I know Vista drivers are a pain! I had some trouble getting the sound on my new Dell here at the office up & running on the RTM of Vista back in early January, though I suppose one can't really complain when the OS isn't officially out yet ;) Still, it makes sense that driver trouble could cause something things to be present or not present.

My most recent change (just two weeks ago) was a motherboard change due to hardware failure. That was no fun, and I can see where even exact replacement hardware (which I couldn't get in a reasonable amount of time) would cause a problem. Even Vista made me re-activate after that incident.


Yes, if it's got a network card on it, it won't matter if the part is an exact match -- the MAC address will still be different. I don't know what Vista uses for their 'host ID' methodology, but I'm guessing the MAC address is in there somewhere -- probably other IDs that are a pain to get as well, maybe some embedded in chips on the board.

Actually, it did not. The Vista upgrade required a re-activation of CS2, but my motherboard change did not. Oddly enough, Manifold was fine with the motherboard swap, too.


Interesting. I know they use the same library, but you tell the library how you want to identify the machine. In our case, we chose 'ethernet' or the MAC address. I assumed Adobe had done so as well, but obviously not. It's also possible to specify your method of generation; e.g. we could tell it to use a function we provide that, say, used available disk space to generate the ID. This would be a terrible idea, but you could use anything you wanted. I guess they're using their own custom brewed ID generator and it sounds like the MAC address isn't part of it. I wonder what they use? Processor ID perhaps?
Andrew Patterson
Lead Software Architect
Avenza Systems Inc.

email: andrew@avenza.com
phone: 416.487.5116




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

-->