Font Agent Pro

[Kevin]

We currently have a large (300 user) installation of Universal Type Server, managing just under 9,000 fonts. We sync with our Active Directory server that has around 2,000 users in over 1,000 groups. The program has had huge issues with AD integration, has issues when you have over 100 users connecting to the server and Extensis has been slow to keep their software and plugins updated to maintain compatibility with the Mac OS and the Creative Suite updates (usually months for both). I am ready for change…

Insider Software has been courting us for a long time. Are any of you guys using Font Agent Pro in an environment that has more than 100 concurrent users?

[donmontalvo]

We've got UTS3 running in several environments, using AD accounts, no issues. There is a delay in getting auto-activation for Photoshop CS6 but it's due to a bug (Adobe is working on a fix). It's been bullet proof for us. :)

When you say "we sync with AD", is there a reason you're not letting UTS3 communicate directly with AD? The whole cylinder-of-destiny thing is overrated...

[Kevin]

UTS is communicating directly with AD. HOWEVER, we have to have it set to update once per day. If we turn on live updating, UTS runs out of memory and locks. This is on a dedicated box with 24GB of Ram, of which 16GB is allocated to UTS. Before v. 3, we only had 1GB allocated and it worked OK. Extensis says "3.x requires a lot more memory." My response "MORE THAN 16x MORE?"

Don,
How many UTC users do you have, how many fonts do you sync, and how many AD accounts?

[donmontalvo]

We're running UTS3 on Windows Server 2008 R2 (virtualized) with 8G of RAM. Several environments, one with 800+ UTS3 users, all AD accounts. We've got several libraries hosted, my guess is 4,000+ fonts per server per environment.

I remember reading the release notes on UTS 3.2; it addressed some of the AD performance issues:

http://www.extensis.com/downloads/release-notes/universal-type-server-3/

What’s new in Universal Type Server 3.2.0 The Universal Type Server 3.2 release focuses on bug fixes and performance enhancements. Server Administration Improved synchronization performance and upgrade reliability for Directory Services Users and Workgroups Administration Improved Directory Services synchronization and performance Improved performance when retrieving or updating large numbers of users

Don

[Kevin]

We were one of the customers early on that identified the AD bug in 3.1. So we moved to 3.2 specifically to address the issue. Now Extensis is telling us that we have to move to an external database because we have "more than 100 users." Of course they want to charge me to move to a SQL database (that I provide). I am not sure I understand why they should get more money to "allow me" to connect to an external database–that I have to provide, license and maintain on my server.

• I have never been happy with license tracking in UTS. It is kludgy to enter data, and reporting is terrible. • My users have no love for the client interface. • Plugin releases for InDesign are usually 3-5 months after Adobe updates the app. • OS compatibility updates are usually slow. (To their credit, they seem to have gotten that right with ML.) • Their customer service has been lacking over the years and seems to be getting worse. • They are our second highest-priced maintenance contract. I do not get that level of service from them.

I am looking for alternatives.

[hbon]

Hey Kevin,
Did your team ever go with Font Agent Pro?

HB

[Matt]

We use FAP here. 50 users though only.

The way we have been doing it is packaging a DMG with the serializer and server info and deploying to an AD Group via Self Service. So far has been awesome!!!!

[donmontalvo]

The trick in packaging FAP5 for deployment to existing CS/QXP users is to script installation of the plug-ins/Xtensions, and to point users to the server, and to suppress EULA/registration/etc. We worked with Insider Software engineers to get them to provide proper enterprise management capability to their product. For now zero-touch deployment requires a bit of scripting, and launchd acrobatics...unless your users have admin rights to finalize the install. ;)

[Kevin]

Hillary, we did not. We wound up staying with Extensis. They reached out to us and helped us work through our issues. Additionally, they communicated with us some of their roadmap and we felt hanging in there was the best course of action.

We got some much-needed attention from them. Good communication made a big difference.