Questions About AutoUpdate Subscription

I have been evaluating SpywareBlaster 3.1 and generally like what it offers. I am now considering purchasing an auto-update subscription, but have some pre-sales questions first:

1. Does the subscription apply to a single machine only?
2. I run a small company network: what licensing arrangements are available to us?
3. The subscription order process requires a machine ID. I presume this means that a subscription is valid for a single machine, but ...
a. What hardware (and software) changes would invalidate the machine ID?
b. How would we obtain a replacement licence key when replacing a machine?
c. Would there be any costs associated with this?

 

These questions of mine appear to have been ignored. Do please answer, so that I can decide whether to purchase one or more subscriptionss.

 

Mmm, I don't understand why Javacool seems not to want to answer these questions. Don't you *want* to sell subscriptions?

 

Hi spm, and welcome.

Your questions are not being ignored, but as you can see the Javacool Software Forum can become quite busy, and there are time zone differences involved too.

I am sure Javacool will answer your questions as soon as time permits.

Thank you for your patience.

Best regards,

snap

 

Well, I don't think his time zone is 4 days different , but I'll wait a short while longer, until I become bored...

 

Sorry about the delay. Things are always busy around here.

Yes - each AutoUpdate subscription applies to a single machine.

At the moment just the same licensing procedures available for home users. But a special Network Version of SpywareBlaster is being worked on.

It should require fairly extensive hardware changes to invalidate the key you install on your system - but if you do encounter problems just e-mail us at the AutoUpdate support address (on the Support webpage as well as in the e-mail sent with your license key).

I hope this helps.

Best regards,

-Javacool

 

OK, Javacool, I appreciate your response. I'm afraid our company policies do not permit the use of such copy-protection mechanisms. Experience shows that there is too much of an admin overhead and inconvenience caused by them, and having to contact a vendor every time a protection key changes (for whatever reason).

I'm not getting at you, but your near 5-day turnaround for your response here is a case in point.

If you ever offer an auto-update scheme which does not use hardware-based copy-protection let me know, and we will reconsider. In the meantime, I will continue to work with SB on a single machine (without the subscription) and see how things go.

Thanks anyway.