Mike Szt

Hm, I don't see a relevance regarding 150€ per year that can be written off in comparison to the value generated by a working solution. I agree that both Parallels and Windows 10/11 are relatively cheap, but such solution includes more deeper inefficiencies - e.g. even if Parallels+Windows licences were free, the users will have to share theirs MacBooks RAM between host OS a guest OS, which will decrease the amout of avaliable RAM. Despite the fact that if they ran PVSol on a server, they could use a more powerful processor. Bottom line - Parallels is a functional and relatively cheap, but fundamentally inefficient solution (More CPU load due to virtualization overhead, more battery wear due increased power consumptions, which leads to more completely unnecessary CO2 emissions and more frequent battery waste). The enterprise trend is to extend usage of green/renewable energy powered datacenters/servers, not to burn more energy on regular grid-powered ineffective desktop solutions. (Previous arcitle may seen funny, but at a time when the EU is dealing with energy labels for electrical appliances, this is reasonable consideration - if energy labels were awarded to IT architecture, what label would be awarded to IT architecture/software which makes it impossible to use the renewable power in a green powered data center?) But OK, somehow I will choose one of two suboptimal, but feasible solutions - operation on Parallels or operation on a Windows server. If I decided to operate on a Windows server, would it be please possible to explicitly write in the EULA that the author of the software grants the customer consent to operate on such operating system? The current EULA ( https://valentin-software.com/en/licensing-provisions/ ) only allows operation on "Microsoft Windows" ("in a software environment corresponding to the MS-WINDOWS ® operating system. This right shall not extend to any further use."), which when strictly interpreted excludes the legality of use on Windows Server - it is necessary to keep in mind that "Windows" and "Windows server" are two different/separate products. I would like to be sure that operation on Windows Server is fully compliant with the licence terms (albeit at the cost of losing the right to support-I fully respect that you are a small company). Thanks a lot, Mike

Hello Frederik, thanks for your response. ad "When there is a server running, just setup one or more additional VMs (VPN-RDP sessions) with PV*SOL where your employees could connect to (1...3 shared licenses)" Could you please clarify which operating system do you mean to run on my scenario on that additional VM? I believe i shall not use Windows Server nor Windows 10/11 in such scenario, because: -Windows Server is not enlisted as supported operating systems (please see https://valentin-software.com/en/products/pvsol-premium/ - this page states "Operating system: Windows 10 (64 bit, latest service pack required), Windows 11 (64 bit)" in the System requirements section. -Windows 10/11 is not allowed to use in such scenario (VM solely for remote users) by Microsoft - please see https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/Useterms/Retail/Windows/10/UseTerms_Retail_Windows_10_English.htm . section 2/c/v. ("this license does not give you any right to, and you may not: install the software on a device for use only by remote users"). About Virtual Box - the page https://www.virtualbox.org/wiki/Downloads claims that it is avaliable only as "Developer preview". The customer's company policy does not allow running developer preview/beta versions in production environment. Parallels could be an option, even cost ineffective (additional cost of Parallels itself plus additional Windows 10/11 licence). Could you please consider adding the Windows Server to the list of supported operating systems? This would be cost effective (the customer owns Windows Server Datacenter edition licence, so additional Windows Server VM does not mean any additional costs for the customer, and it would be energy efficient too). Mike

Hi all, My customer is a company which is very concerned about reducing the environmental burden. They run one Windows Server located in the data center powered entirely by renewable energy and they only use MacBooks in their office because Macbooks are energy efficient. They run all Windows applications run on that Windows Server remotely on that green energy powered terminal server.. Now they would need to start using PVSol (for 3 employees). I understood that PVSol cannot be run on a MacBooks and that the PV*Sol license does not allow operation on Windows Server, nor that WIndows Server is not a supported operating system. This means that the customer would therefore have to buy three new computers just for running PVSol, which would increase the company's CO2 emissions and the amount of e-waste produced. In this situation, the company's environmental compliance manager rejected such a purchase, pointing out that it is not environmentally responsible to buy a desktop computer when the company has an existing Windows Server at its disposal. Can please anybody give me arguments to present to the environmental manager why it is necessary to buy three new computers and run them in an office solely for PV*Sol? Eg. why is running PV*Sol on Windows Terminal Server not allowed? Thanks, Mike