XYplorer Beta Club

RalphM wrote:Downloading exe's is in many company environments restricted, whereas zip packages seem to be more tolerated, which might be a reason to stick to the way it is right now.

RalphM wrote:I've installed XY approximately 800 times so far using the install package and haven't been annoyed so far by unzipping the package, nor the extra enter needed for the first message, maybe I'm a bit too tolerant?!
Anyway, if I ever would become tired of it, there are easy solutions available, either using the noinstall package or even better the Autoupdate script from the scripts section.

ivan wrote: Also, using XY within a corporate environment isn't allowed because that wouldn't be classified as personal use You'd need a volume/enterprise license for that

As an individual person, you need a license to use XYplorer. This license grants you a non-exclusive and non-transferable right to use XYplorer on any number and kind of devices. As an employer, you need a license for each employee using XYplorer.

j_c_hallgren wrote:There is no standard "personal use" vs "business use" clause AFAIK...If you have a personal license, you can use it wherever you may be (home/work/etc)...now only if the system is used by more than one employee and XY can be used by them, and XY is provided by the employer vs the personal prop of the employee, then a multi-user license is needed.

j_c_hallgren wrote:

ivan wrote: Also, using XY within a corporate environment isn't allowed because that wouldn't be classified as personal use You'd need a volume/enterprise license for that

Don will be the final authority on this, but having been around while the verbiage was being reworked, I would say that you're wrong on this...from the XY site:

Code: Select all

As an individual person, you need a license to use XYplorer. This license grants you a non-exclusive and non-transferable right to use XYplorer on any number and kind of devices. As an employer, you need a license for each employee using XYplorer.

There is no standard "personal use" vs "business use" clause AFAIK...If you have a personal license, you can use it wherever you may be (home/work/etc)...now only if the system is used by more than one employee and XY can be used by them, and XY is provided by the employer vs the personal prop of the employee, then a multi-user license is needed.

serendipity wrote:To add to that, since XYplorer is a portable app many (including me) use it from USB too. Which means one is not confined to use it only at home, you can use it anywhere as long as its only you using it. If at any point if there is a second person involved then a second license is needed.

ivan wrote:Anyway, I think that nitpicking through XY's license terms and work ethics of corporate environments is straying from answering those questions. Hopefully Don will be kind enough to shed some light.

j_c_hallgren wrote:I was simply pointing out that license terms do not appear to support your contention about personal/corporate requirements

As an employer, you need a license for each employee using XYplorer. 

ivan wrote:

j_c_hallgren wrote:I was simply pointing out that license terms do not appear to support your contention about personal/corporate requirements

I understand and, as you said, Don will be able to clarify this better, but this phrase in license definition throws me off:

Code: Select all

As an employer, you need a license for each employee using XYplorer. 

To me that sounds like "If you are an employer and one of your employees is using XYplorer (intentionally because they have a personal license or otherwise) while carrying out their work responsibilities then it is your duty to buy a license for that individual". The definition doesn't seem to take into account the possibility of that employee already having a personal license and how to proceed in that case.

ivan wrote:If you're in a company environment and downloading EXEs is restricted then it is usually for a reason and you (not you per se, just in general) shouldn't try to overcome that rule.

PeterH wrote:Many people have display of filetype supressed. And after receiving a mail with madonna.jpg they click it and don't understand, why a .exe is run. To disable this uncontrolled behavior it's often disallowed (disabled) in a company to download .exe-files.
But if our DP-team want's to send me an exe for some reason, they pack it in a .zip! As .exe isn't possible. And when I needed to send an exe to someone else they advised me to do the same! And they and I and others think, that's ok! (As this tends to be something both sides think about and know what they are doing.)

PeterH wrote:So please stop to say what "should" be done by others, or should not, if you cannot imagine the reason. For example, if a company disallows something, and allows another thing. This can be bad, or this can be good - you just don't know.

PeterH wrote:And if Don does it for this reason, you can think it's good or bad - but it's his decision. You can tell you don't like it - but don't say what I or others should do. Neither private nor @work.
(Sorry to say it this way, but for several times I had the impression you want to decide what others should do. I don't know if it's just yourway of saying it, or if it's the way you think...)

admin wrote:ivan, I've warned you before. Please confine your contributions to the sort of stuff everybody else here is contributing. One more irrelevant post and you're banned.