Zugg Software :: View topic

Newbie Joined: 21 Nov 2003 Posts: 1 Location: USA

Today I figured I'd try connecting to my home computer from work to MUD for a bit. Imagine my disappointment when eLicense said "This product is not enabled for remote sessions." Sad

Was this done intentionally? If not, could it be changed to work with Remote Desktop?

Apprentice Joined: 28 Oct 2003 Posts: 164

Can't comment on how to get Remote Desktop to work with it, but you do get three licenses when you buy zMUD, so you could install it on both computers. If you didn't want to hassle of separate configurations, maybe you could have them work off the same files, just mapping a drive when you connect remotely.

Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2003 8:01 pm

There is not way for zMUD to support Remote Desktop with the way Microsoft implemented it. Unlike programs like VNC (which is free, btw) or PC Anywhere, Remote Desktop doesn't just try to redirect the screen display, but actually tries to run the code on your local machine.

But zMUD is encrypted by the registration code installed on the server, not your local machine. So there is no way for your local machine to run it.

Try using VNC if you don't want to actually install zMUD on your other machine. It works even if it's slow.

GURU Joined: 15 Jun 2001 Posts: 654 Location: USA

Actually, that isn't true... Remote Desktop uses the RDP protocol which really just sends keystrokes/mouse clicks one way and display information the other (plus some more advanced redirects like sounds, clipboard & printer ports). All of the code is run on the remote computer.

Microsoft Webcast Transcript about Remote Desktop and some other things

Description of RDP

However, while Windows XP has a limit of user interactively logged in at a time whether remotely or locally (as far as I know), Windows Server 2003 does not have this same restriction. So if eLicense weren't restricted in this manner, it would either have to detect other copies of zMUD running under other user sessions and abort if it found any (and thus remove the ability to have zMUD running in both in the current logon and in disconnected ones using fast user switching in XP) or else a single computer with a licensed version of zMUD could serve it up concurrently to many remote users. This isn't something that would be possible with VNC and its ilk.

I know it would require a code change on eLicense's part, but perhaps you could float the idea of changing it to allow it to run concurrently on as many local users as you want and at most one remote user? That would solve all the issues that I can see while providing additional convenience.

Novice Joined: 10 Oct 2000 Posts: 43

I use a specialized version of VNC called TightVNC - http://www.tightvnc.com/
It has a better compression (tight) implementation than vanilla VNC.
Make sure you select 8-bit color, and you can play with the jpeg compression levels.

For me, it is much faster than PC Anywhere.

Using a program like, putty, you can also port foward via SSH, the VNC connection, through a firewall.

I install it on every customer PC, I ship. Use putty to port forward through thier firewall, straight to the PC.

Put it into fullscreen mode, and at times you forget you are remote.

The only issue I have using it is, selecting text... The highlighting is rarely displayed correctly, if at all.

GURU Joined: 15 Jun 2001 Posts: 654 Location: USA

Oh, I forgot that it actually is possible to use zMUD through remote desktop currently... you just start it up locally and then connect to the session remotely and keep on using it. It's just a little bit of a hassle.

Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2003 8:48 am

Wierd...sounds like I got the wrong explanation from eLicense. They had said the problem was because the needed Service isn't running on the local machine and that the system ID wouldn't match.

In any case, given the possibilies for Remote Desktop to allow someone to run a single copy on a server machine with unlimited access, I guess I'm glad it doesn't work. There are plenty of other alternatives already mentioned in this thread.

Thanks for clarifying my understanding of this however.

Beginner Joined: 14 Sep 2002 Posts: 24

This behavior of zmud enrages me, and I feel extremely cheated. Not being upfront about Zmud not running via Remote Desktop at the time of purchase I view as fraudulent and dishonest. I paid for use of this software. The 3 installed copy restriction is bad enough, but now I'm being restricted in how I can *run* the software?

Yes and let me clarify some more. XP comes with "Remote Desktop" which allows exactly 1 (one) user to log on to an XP machine remotely. If there is a local user logged on, then the local user is logged off at the time the remote user logs on. So is it possible for someone to buy 1 copy of zmud and have two people remote desktop into a Windows XP computer and use it simultaneously? absolutely not. So the idea that not allowing Zmud to start via Remote Desktop is preventing license violations is false and it is a lie.

Now, Remote Desktop is really just the consumer version of Terminal Services for 1 user at a time. However, Terminal Services only comes with Windows 2000/2003 Server. Terminal Services does not install by default. If you do install it, there are two ways to install it. One is in 'Remote Administration Mode' which basically allows the administrator account to access the server. Only 3 Administrator level accounts can log on concurrently. Are you likely to give administrator access to your entire server people so they can use your Zmud? I didn't think so.

You could also go get Windows 2000/3 Termnical Server Edition and install that (gee that's like how many thousands?), and then you can have as many remote users as your hardware and internet connection can support. So that could be a risk of zmud license violations. Of course, you'll need 30-70MB of Ram for each user you grant access to, plus the requisite bandwidth, plus some serious processor power.

So basically, Zugg, what you are doing is keeping legitimate, paying customers from using their paid for software because someone might happen to have 1) Windows Terminal Server software 2) at least a 512kbps upstream net connection 3) server class hardware in the range of dual P3 with at least 1GB of ram. 4) Have a number of friends they are willing to grant local account access to people on their server. Somehow, I feel very comfortable betting that that is not your usual customer.

I sit behind a firewall most of my time that does not allow me to access the non standard ports that muds usually run on. Nor do I want to install Zmud at work. However, I can set Remote Desktop on my home machine to run on port 23 (telnet) instead of its usual port of 3389 and then I can Remote Desktop through the firewall into my home machine and mud from there. This is the kind of use you are disallowing to your paying customers. You are 'glad' it doesn't work to stop people with server class hardware and T1s from serving out Zmud in exchange for stopping home users with Windows XP and a laptop from using Zmud remotely. Shame on you.

As a side note, you can use Zmud via Remote Desktop as long as you start Zmud locally first. If you connect to a computer via Remote Desktop with the same user that is already logged on (ie if you logged in at home and left the computer locked with user Joe) then you will just be given Joe's current logged in session which has Zmud already running. Don't logoff, reboot, or close zmud though, because if you do, Zmud will stop you from pirating Zugg's software when you try to start it back up.

I think you need to fix this issue.
TC

Oh yes, and as far as TightVNC, VNC, UltraVNC, PCAnywhere, or any other Remote Control software being a comparable alternative to Remote Desktop I will strongly disagree. Obviously you have not used Remote Desktop or any of these other products very much. I use them all on a daily basis, and there is no comparison. Besides all of the VNCs being a huge security risk, and PCAnywhere being a hog, they cannot compare to the integration of Remote Desktop.

Novice Joined: 10 Oct 2000 Posts: 43

I have to disagree with you on a few points.

As I understand it, it is an eLicense issue. So Zugg fixing it is not a possibility. Complaining about not liking eLicense, will also not fix this issue. A nicely worded letter to eLicense, may fix the issue at some point in the future.

I do not see my use of VNC as anymore of a security risk, than you leaving port 23 open. I SSH-tunnel the VNC port through a firewall. It's as secure as SSH can make it.

I feel Zugg is more than generous with his 'free updates for life' policy, and his very generous 3 license policy. Both COST him a large number of sales. 'Free updates for life' means he NEVER gets a second sale from a user, unless they wish to donate money to the cause, and several do. His '3-license' policy, means I could buy one and let my 2 friends mooch off of me.

I've bought a great program call Army Builder. It is used to make army lists for table top war games, WarHammer, etc. You can buy a cheap license that will only EVER work for one version, on one PC, under that specific hardware/OS load. Good luck if you ever have to swap out a HD or upgrade OS. OR - You can buy the $40 CD version, that you can run on any PC, with the CD inserted. And when they decide that the major version number is to be bumped, you can just send them some more money.

Of all the models Zugg could of chosen, I am more than happy with it. I paid him $20 for zMud YEARS ago, and I'm still getting updates.

Now, it's not all roses. I don't like Zugg's new policy on lost reg codes, since I can't find my zMapper code, but I do understand and accept his business decisions for making the change.

And you are lucky zMud even runs at all under XP. Last I knew Zugg did not officially support it. :) I bought zMud to run on Win98, the rest has been gravy.

I'm not sure if I have used the 'Remote Desktop' feature of XP. Is it the same as the 'Remote Assistance'? I've tried to use 'Remote Assistance' to help clients, but to many things I need to do require the ESC key, and that closes 'Remote Assistance'

Anyhow, to each his own. We all have our own requirements. Zuggsoft has always worked for me. If you are a New User, you can always take advantage of the 30-day return policy, and get your money back.

Beginner Joined: 14 Sep 2002 Posts: 24

Remote assistance is the same technology as Remote Desktop, but of course the way you initiate the connection is different. It does use the same RD Protocol.

As far as it being eLicense and not Zmud, I disagree with your premise. They are one and the same as far as a paying customer goes. Zugg chooses to use them, so Zugg fixing it (it being the situation of limited and poorly disclosed restrictions) is a definite possibility.

I agree that SSH tunneling VNC is not a security risk as long as your PC running VNC is behind a firewall. VNC exposed to the world is a *much* higher security risk than Remote Desktop exposed because VNC authentication is extremely weak; the encryption is not good, and the password length is too short.

I agree that the updates for life is very generous. If I were him, I'd charge 5 bucks for updates at major versions or something. But whether or not he provides updates for free has nothing to do with my complaint.

The fact that Army Builder has crappy licensing also has nothing to do with whether or not zmud should or should not work with Remote Desktop, or that this usage restrictions is not shown anywhere but deep inside of the eLicense FAQ. (that I have found)

I'm not a new user, I've been using zmud since version 4 something and have purchased 2 licenses codes, as well as successfully encouraged some of my friends and mudders to purchase it as well.

The basic deal is this: I bought a license to use Zmud. I want to use it no matter where I am at. While visiting my parents over Christmas, I want to use it at the internet cafe while on vacation in Spain, I want to use it at the office, I want to use it at my friends' houses, etc. I paid for that right and I expect to be able to exercise it. By allowing only 3 installed copies, and also restricting Remote Desktop use the end result is that I can basically use it at home.

That wasn't in the license agreement.

GURU Joined: 24 Sep 2000 Posts: 1237 Location: USA

Bear in mind that Remote Desktop wasn't a feature anybody used when Zugg picked Elicense (thus, when Elicense was developed). Terminal Services was really only available with Windows 2000 Server and for the most part, only server managers used it. Average users sure weren't paying Server prices to have win2k on their desktops.

Remote Desktop came into wider popularity with WinXP's release, and while it's been a while and a very nimble company might have had time to respond and allow for it in their licensing product (and I'm not saying eLicense/Viatech isn't nimble), eLicense just hasn't made it that far yet. I don't think it'll never happen, I just don't think it's driving their development direction - It's a relatively new offering, and not THAT many people use it.

I think with some respectful, tactfully worded suggestions to Elicense, adoption of Remote Desktop as a supported method for using a computer in cooperation with their product will happen, it's just a matter of time, patience and persistence.

GURU Joined: 23 Dec 2000 Posts: 4834 Location: USA

quote:

His '3-license' policy, means I could buy one and let my 2 friends mooch off of me.

I thought I remembered seeing Zugg officially put this down as a no-no. He for sure said that if the mentioned condition was found he'd revoke your order ID and ask eLicense to wipe out all associated licenses in the offender's name. Dang if I can find it, though.

quote:

As far as it being eLicense and not Zmud, I disagree with your premise. They are one and the same as far as a paying customer goes.

It goes without saying that it's usually in Zugg's best interest to field most/all questions regarding any third-party tools and components he incorporates into his products, since complaints about those will definitely affect his sales. However, if some problem with eLicense caused a complete prevention of us using ZMud starting tomorrow, there's nothing Zugg could do for us short of a rewrite (even if the change itself is spectacularly easy, Zugg has to find, research, test, and implement another security service to protect his work). This greatly impacts ZMud and Zuggsoft, but there's nothing else Zugg is able to do in that case.

Wizard Joined: 25 Mar 2003 Posts: 1113 Location: USA

Just to clarify further...

Remote Assistance works similary to VNC, allowing one session only.
Remote Desktop (the full version, with Windows XP Pro) allows multiple sessions. It makes perfect sense to me that licensed software wouldn't run on remote machines when you don't have a license that allows concurrent usage on that many desktops.

It's a very low price, with free updates for life. Try getting either of those from Microsoft.

Beginner Joined: 14 Sep 2002 Posts: 24

Larkin,
You are absolutely incorrent that Remote Desktop for XP Professional allows multiple concurrent sessions. XP will show 1 Desktop at a time period. If you connect remotely, then log in locally your remote connection is killed. If you log in locally and then log in remotely, your PC becomes locked locally. Please don't come here and spread FUD like that.

And since I cannot drag you over to my desktop and show you, I'll give you a logical reason why. If MS allowed multiple concurrent sessions, you could purchase 1 copy of XP for 2 people. You could run Windows 2000 on all of your PCs but really work with XP as long as you had 1 copy. (this is what Zugg is attempting to avoid as well) Just like Zugg doesn't want people doing it, neither does MS. The same reason it 'makes perfect sense' to you that Zugg's software won't run via Remote Desktop is the same reason it would 'make perfect sense' that MS would not allow you to have multiple concurrent connections.

And it's also laughable that you think MS would include an enterprise server feature that you pay about 2k for plus a license for each terminal service user (desktop served up) for free in their home product.

You can no more run two simultaneous copies of Zmud or have two simultaneous XP desktops/users than fly to the moon. Anything else is pure FUD.

Apprentice Joined: 11 Apr 2003 Posts: 119 Location: Sweden

tcrown007: I know for a fact that you can't be logged in as the same user simultaneously with remote desktop (the current user gets locked out when the new connects) but what about 2 different user accounts?

Posted: Sat Dec 06, 2003 10:40 am

Remote Desktop is based upon Terminal Services, to allow multiple concurrent logins you need something like win2k server or win2k3 server. These are the products that have the full terminal services software, not the license-crippled versions we have in XP. To run w2k server as a remote desktop server, you need a beefy server machine, as all the programs run on IT and come down to you over your fast lan connection (hopefully 100mbs). (A celeron 733 and 768mb of ram is not beefy, for example.)

Regardless of how many different usernames there are, only one user can be actively using the computer at a time. Any amount of users can be logged on in XP/2k (fast user switching), but only one user can actually use the system. Again, the more users logged in at a time, the beefier the dektop you need before performance takes a hit.

Apprentice Joined: 27 Apr 2001 Posts: 110

quote:
I paid for use of this software. The 3 installed copy restriction is bad enough, but now I'm being restricted in how I can *run* the software?

Most software only legally allows for installation on one machine at a time. Purchasing a normal copy of windows for instance only legally entitles an individual/company to install that copy on one machine at a time. I think a 3 copy installation restriction, along with free updates for life, is above and beyond current software practices. Zmud never advertised use with remote desktop. It is unfortunate that the two do not work due to the licencing software, however you are attempting to use the program in a way that was not the intention of the software when designed. I think the offered alternatives are more than fair. You were hardly cheated.

Wanderer Joined: 16 Dec 2003 Posts: 77 Location: USA

I agree with Ins0mniak here. Zugg spends a lot of time and energy to make it easy to get, use, and keep zMUD. If you were to buy, for example, a game by Blizzard, and then complain to them that you couldn't use Remote Desktop to play their game online (don't know/care if you can or can't, just using the example), they would tell you tough luck. Maybe you could come up with some sort of plug in that would allow you to connect remotely if you don't like the suggestions used above. Of course, that plugin might require you to work around the eLicense code, which would be a bad idea.