CAL questions

These probably get asked all the time :-(

After looking at this article () it
looks like there's no reliable method for determing the number of purchased
(and in use) CALs, by looking on the server. True?

Are the CALs specific to the server version? In other words, are 2003 CALs
legal for 2008?
I'm finding a lot of paper NT CALs here where I work, but not many 2003
CALs, and no Server 2000 CALs. They don't have NT. They have Server 2000
and 2003. I'm guessing we have a problem?

The servers are setup as Per Seat.

The reason I ask, I am looking into a new Dell server, I would like to order
it with 2008. But then I saw the option for the 2008 CALs. So then I
thought I'd use the 2003 CALs we have, and get Server 2003, to save some
money on CALs. But I just found that what they have is quite a bit less
than the normal number of concurrent users.

I'm guessing I can't use the CALs we have for a 2008 server?

 

AFAIK CALs are backward compatile, you can use Win 2k8 CALs on a Win 2k or
2k3 domain but not 2k or 2k3 CALs on a Win 2k8 domain.
I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong.


And no there is no reliable way to determin the number of CALs in use from
looking at the server.


hth
DDS

"JohnB" <jbrigan@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Of4a9PgPKHA.4656@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
> These probably get asked all the time :-(
>
> After looking at this article ()
> it looks like there's no reliable method for determing the number of
> purchased (and in use) CALs, by looking on the server. True?
>
> Are the CALs specific to the server version? In other words, are 2003
> CALs legal for 2008?
> I'm finding a lot of paper NT CALs here where I work, but not many 2003
> CALs, and no Server 2000 CALs. They don't have NT. They have Server 2000
> and 2003. I'm guessing we have a problem?
>
> The servers are setup as Per Seat.
>
> The reason I ask, I am looking into a new Dell server, I would like to
> order it with 2008. But then I saw the option for the 2008 CALs. So then
> I thought I'd use the 2003 CALs we have, and get Server 2003, to save some
> money on CALs. But I just found that what they have is quite a bit less
> than the normal number of concurrent users.
>
> I'm guessing I can't use the CALs we have for a 2008 server?
> <!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->

 

So in our case, the NT CALs are not valid for 2003 servers?


"Danny Sanders" <dsanders@NOSPAMbrakesplus.com> wrote in message
news:%23bqEJjiPKHA.3540@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
> AFAIK CALs are backward compatile, you can use Win 2k8 CALs on a Win 2k or
> 2k3 domain but not 2k or 2k3 CALs on a Win 2k8 domain.
> I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong.
>
>
> And no there is no reliable way to determin the number of CALs in use from
> looking at the server.
>
>
> hth
> DDS
>
> "JohnB" <jbrigan@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:Of4a9PgPKHA.4656@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...<!--coloro:green--><span style="color:green <!--/coloro-->
>> These probably get asked all the time :-(
>>
>> After looking at this article ()
>> it looks like there's no reliable method for determing the number of
>> purchased (and in use) CALs, by looking on the server. True?
>>
>> Are the CALs specific to the server version? In other words, are 2003
>> CALs legal for 2008?
>> I'm finding a lot of paper NT CALs here where I work, but not many 2003
>> CALs, and no Server 2000 CALs. They don't have NT. They have Server
>> 2000 and 2003. I'm guessing we have a problem?
>>
>> The servers are setup as Per Seat.
>>
>> The reason I ask, I am looking into a new Dell server, I would like to
>> order it with 2008. But then I saw the option for the 2008 CALs. So
>> then I thought I'd use the 2003 CALs we have, and get Server 2003, to
>> save some money on CALs. But I just found that what they have is quite a
>> bit less than the normal number of concurrent users.
>>
>> I'm guessing I can't use the CALs we have for a 2008 server?
>><!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->
>
> <!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->

 

Nope


DDS

"JohnB" <jbrigan@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:OzZM1VEQKHA.1512@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
> So in our case, the NT CALs are not valid for 2003 servers?
>
>
> "Danny Sanders" <dsanders@NOSPAMbrakesplus.com> wrote in message
> news:%23bqEJjiPKHA.3540@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...<!--coloro:green--><span style="color:green <!--/coloro-->
>> AFAIK CALs are backward compatile, you can use Win 2k8 CALs on a Win 2k
>> or 2k3 domain but not 2k or 2k3 CALs on a Win 2k8 domain.
>> I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong.
>>
>>
>> And no there is no reliable way to determin the number of CALs in use
>> from looking at the server.
>>
>>
>> hth
>> DDS
>>
>> "JohnB" <jbrigan@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:Of4a9PgPKHA.4656@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...<!--coloro:darkred--><span style="color:darkred <!--/coloro-->
>>> These probably get asked all the time :-(
>>>
>>> After looking at this article
>>> () it looks like there's no
>>> reliable method for determing the number of purchased (and in use) CALs,
>>> by looking on the server. True?
>>>
>>> Are the CALs specific to the server version? In other words, are 2003
>>> CALs legal for 2008?
>>> I'm finding a lot of paper NT CALs here where I work, but not many 2003
>>> CALs, and no Server 2000 CALs. They don't have NT. They have Server
>>> 2000 and 2003. I'm guessing we have a problem?
>>>
>>> The servers are setup as Per Seat.
>>>
>>> The reason I ask, I am looking into a new Dell server, I would like to
>>> order it with 2008. But then I saw the option for the 2008 CALs. So
>>> then I thought I'd use the 2003 CALs we have, and get Server 2003, to
>>> save some money on CALs. But I just found that what they have is quite
>>> a bit less than the normal number of concurrent users.
>>>
>>> I'm guessing I can't use the CALs we have for a 2008 server?
>>><!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->
>>
>><!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->
>
> <!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->

 

In message <OzZM1VEQKHA.1512@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl> "JohnB"
<jbrigan@yahoo.com> was claimed to have wrote:
<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
>So in our case, the NT CALs are not valid for 2003 servers?<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->

My understanding is that Windows CALs are never valid for future
versions of Windows, only for previous versions.

 

Makes sense.
thanks



"Dave Warren" <dave-usenet@djwcomputers.com> wrote in message
news:srs1c5hvdctjsn9ca502masrin5ubk6v1k@4ax.com...<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
> In message <OzZM1VEQKHA.1512@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl> "JohnB"
> <jbrigan@yahoo.com> was claimed to have wrote:
><!--coloro:green--><span style="color:green <!--/coloro-->
>>So in our case, the NT CALs are not valid for 2003 servers?<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->
>
> My understanding is that Windows CALs are never valid for future
> versions of Windows, only for previous versions. <!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->