Creating distribution for QuarkXPress... All versions

Ken-

You can work with Quark to get all of your individual licenses rolled up into a site license, if that is something you wish to pursue. From there you can create a single package that will check out a license when opened from your Quark QLA server.

Thanks,

Justin
https://serinocoyne.thruinc.net/dropboxcommon.aspx?toemail=JStanford@serinocoyne.com

I was trying to stay away from needing a qla. Not too keen on thier
licensing model.

Sent from Ken's iPhone

InDesign.

:)

</snarky>
---
Jared F. Nichols
Desktop Engineer, Infrastructure & Operations
Information Services Department
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
244 Wood Street
Lexington, Massachusetts 02420
781.981.5436

Hahaha, I agree with that!

Sent from Ken's iPhone

You may want to stay away from the QLA, but it will save you a ton of time
and effort in this. I ran one at my last job and while it was a little
cumbersome at first, they upgraded the software and it got a little (I
stress little) easier to run. But, once installed, I was able to install
Quark on every machine in the office and it worked perfectly.

In fact, the QLA will work across subnets and across WAN links, so if you
have multiple locations you can run everything thru one QLA server. And,
for redundancy you can have a backup QLA server in a different location.

Steve Wood
Director of IT
swood at integer.com

The Integer Group | 1999 Bryan St. | Ste. 1700 | Dallas, TX 75201
T 214.758.6813 | F 214.758.6901 | C 940.312.2475

Funny thing...I just had to restart my Quark license service about 5 minutes ago...it was hung on “Starting”...I guess it never really wanted to be totally “Started” after reboot for patches...

But yeah, we deploy it using a server for licensing. It works decent.

Craig E

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 13:14:04 -0500

Not to keen on their licensing model?

With a QLA server, you're legally allowed to install QuarkXPress on as many
machines as you choose without worrying about per seat licensing. That's
fantastic!

We've used QLA for the past few years and for the most part it just runs.
It's serving both our Mac and Windows clients in more than a dozen sites
around the world. If one server becomes unavailable then the backup takes
over. If both are unavailable (such as a network outage) then each
workstation can run up to 120 hours before having to reconnect.

I won't say we haven't had problems a couple of times with the servers but
they've been worth maintaining compared to having to maintain 80+ individual
serial numbers. Plus, we've actually been able to reduce the number of
licenses we'd have to maintain individually because not everyone uses
QuarkXPress at the same time.

The downside? Yes, you have to pay an additional fee to convert one of your
stand-alone licenses to the QLA server license. It's been very worth it for
us.

I strongly suggest looking into it.

--

bill

William M. Smith, Technical Analyst
MCS IT
Merrill Communications, LLC
(651) 632-1492

Everything William said and then some.
"Smith, William" <William.Smith at merrillcorp.com> wrote:

Having QLA also allows you to package QuarkXPress, along with the QLAClient.properties license file (which should have DNS names for the main and failover servers). Can't do that with individual licenses (unless you create one pkg installer for each licensed copy.

QLA servers can (and should) be set up with main/failover servers so clients can continue to work if the main server goes down. If both servers go down, you can push emergency keys out to the users so they can continue to work.

I can agree with the original poster if by "licensing model", they meant the upgrade price, lack of cross upgrade offerings, etc. But one thing Quark has their act together on is QLA. If Adobe followed their lead, there would be a lot less "Adobe CS installer stinks" threads and articles circulating on the internet. :)

Don

I agree that the QLA makes it easier... however what other software requires
a machine or more for volume licensing to work? This to me is ridiculous.
As much as I don't care for Adobe's installers... atleast I can re-package
or setup a silent installer. Microsoft... just install or re-package and it
works... Quark... too bad, Install one or more QLA servers which cost extra
money and require some maintenance... or individually install.

I was just hoping there was a way to get around it... for now I think I will
stick with individual installs as painful as it is. We have people running
6.x 7.x and 8.x... all at different sites. I don't think QLA would make
sense.

I think there is an assumption made that in an environment that needs to support multiple licenses in a central location they would have some infrastructure in place to deal with this. We have several pieces of software that we host hardware hasps (even MORE fun) for on a Windows server. It’s a bit more common than I’d like.

Regardless...I do agree, and although Adobe’s installer is a huge pain...at least they don’t also do mother ship license servers!

Craig E

Sibelius network requires a server

As do some other network versions of software

Criss