×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Microsoft eOpen Site Down For Nearly a Week

kdawson posted more than 4 years ago | from the service-available-but-not-to-you dept.

Businesses 133

mauriceh writes "Since Monday Dec. 7, the Microsoft eOpen license website has been mostly 'Down for Maintenance.' When we do not see this message, we still do not see most of the normal functionality. As this is Microsoft's main channel for managing and installing licenses for products such as Server, and for open license products for business, this makes the company effectively 'closed for business!' Attempts to connect to https://eopen.microsoft.com/ are redirected (after a bad certificate warning) to https://www.microsoft.com/licensing/servicecenter/sitemaintenance.html. For those who wish to activate Microsoft Business Solutions software need to obtain Software Registration keys, and these also can not be obtained, as the site http://www.microsoft.com/BusinessSolutions/MBSRegistration does not resolve; instead one gets a Microsoft Search page. Telephone calls to their support numbers for the licensing program yield either busy signals, or a message saying one should 'call back later.'"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

133 comments

Maybe it was running Vista... (4, Funny)

jkrise (535370) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430018)

and they are trying to upgrade it to XP instead...

Re:Maybe it was running Vista... (4, Funny)

ciaohound (118419) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430090)

... and they can't get the software registration key because the site is down!

Caring about the customers? No. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30430972)

eOpen is eClosed.

Re:Maybe it was running Vista... (5, Insightful)

runyonave (1482739) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430380)

Maybe they had a problem with Genuine Advantage. Are they using Genuine Microsoft software?

Re:Maybe it was running Vista... (4, Informative)

ElizabethGreene (1185405) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430862)

There has been a notification in BIG RED LETTERS on the eOpen site since October saying they were going to shut it down on 12-7. Maybe someone didn't get the memo about the upcoming stampede?

-ellie

Re:Maybe it was running Vista... (1)

Anachragnome (1008495) | more than 4 years ago | (#30433320)

How is it this is only modded +4 Informative?

This is a non-story, as Elizabeth points out.

I sure the FUCK hope it doesn't have anything to do with the fact that the post appears to be from a female.

Thanks for clearing things up, Ellie. /nextarticle

Re:Maybe it was running Vista... (3, Interesting)

ElizabethGreene (1185405) | more than 4 years ago | (#30433452)

As it turns out, my comment was premature. The site that is supposed to replace the eOpen site is broken. You can manage agreements or keys, but downloads aren't working.

$64 Moebius Question: Is it broken because of slashdot or slashdotted because it is broken?

Extended chistmas hollidy (3, Funny)

the_arrow (171557) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430020)

Don't worry, they will be back a couple of weeks after new year!

Re:Extended chistmas hollidy (2, Informative)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431278)

The site, or portions thereof, are down damned near every time I go to use it. Microsoft's own web services suck very badly.

XBOX site is the same (1)

mister_playboy (1474163) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431790)

I agree... I've been trying to send my 360 in for RROD repairs for the better part of a month, and the site is always down in some way. Right now, I can't even pull up the main page because of an "internal server error".

How convenient... my 3 year warranty expires in mid January.

Time for some free software zealotry... (3, Interesting)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430030)

Do I even need to rant, or does the story make it clear why proprietary software is a problem?

Re:Time for some free software zealotry... (5, Insightful)

Sarten-X (1102295) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430054)

Proprietary software is not the problem. Proprietary software whose functionality requires a given service to be infallible is the problem.

Re:Time for some free software zealotry... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30430082)

In this case, yes. But a 100% open service whose functionality required a given (open) server to work wouldn't be affected: just change the server and you're back.

Re:Time for some free software zealotry... (1)

TapeCutter (624760) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430108)

I know it's MS and all that but if it was as simple as swapping out a server I think they would have done it by now.

Re:Time for some free software zealotry... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30430170)

Let me rephase what I said. In an open ecosystem, you would have many different servers operating the same service. If one of them went offline, the user (or the software itself) would switch to a different server, and you wouldn't lose functionality. Is that better?

Re:Time for some free software zealotry... (2, Insightful)

Sarten-X (1102295) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430212)

No, because I'd expect the server to have some sort of data storage, which could still get corrupted. Perhaps a major flaw was discovered in the server software itself. The problem is obviously something big, that simply looking elsewhere won't fix.

Re:Time for some free software zealotry... (1)

darkpixel2k (623900) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432244)

No, because I'd expect the server to have some sort of data storage, which could still get corrupted. Perhaps a major flaw was discovered in the server software itself. The problem is obviously something big, that simply looking elsewhere won't fix.

I think you're still missing his point.

Take Ubuntu for example. It doesn't require activation servers, or license keys. But if for some reason they *did* decide to build that into an open source product, it would be very easy to:
a) take it out
b) dig through the code and write your own activation server
c) run your own activation server
d) tweak Ubuntu to look at your local activation server
e) tweak your firewall rules to redirect activation to your local server
f) switch to another distro without paying for new licenses

Time for some open systems zealotry (1)

argent (18001) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430330)

An open ecosystem is not the same as open source software. There are open source applications that depend on sole-source servers or services, and proprietary applications that work with open servers and use open protocols. While what you say is true, it's not really relevant to this incident.

This is about open systems, not open source... and while the two are related (and definitely good things) they're not the same thing and even, at times, have worked at cross-purposes.

Re:Time for some free software zealotry... (4, Insightful)

Sarten-X (1102295) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430174)

I meant that the problem is not caused by the fact that the software is proprietary. Yes, if it were open, it'd be easier to fix, but the original problem of failing services would still exist.

Re:Time for some free software zealotry... (1)

wwwillem (253720) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430784)

Yes, if it were open, it'd be easier to fix, ...

Proprietary software is not more difficult to fix than OSS. It's simply that in the case of open source there are more people working on it. The army is not better, just much bigger....

Re:Time for some free software zealotry... (1)

selven (1556643) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431092)

If the software is proprietary, you don't have the source so your options in terms of fixing it are limited. If the software is open source, there are no such problems. So proprietary software IS more difficult to fix.

Re:Time for some free software zealotry... (1)

Vectronic (1221470) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431816)

Yes, but in this case that's irrelevant... if you have the source to whatever software they are using on these servers, you still wouldn't be able to do anything about it, especially without the DB of licenses, you could tell it to look elsewhere, but it still wouldn't find it. Pretend it's YouTube, and forget about open/proprietary ranting... you could clone the site, and servers, but not the content.

It would be like, editing the source code to your web browser when you can't get online, and "fixing it" by simply removing all the code that tries to connect to the internet. Do you get your soldering iron out when your TV loses it's signal, and try to rewire it to run off AM signals through your power lines?

I'll try to be more redundant next time...

Re:Time for some free software zealotry... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30433128)

Pretty sure Microsoft has its own source code...

Re:Time for some free software zealotry... (1)

selven (1556643) | more than 4 years ago | (#30433174)

But YOU don't. This is about YOUR ability to fix something without having to wait until Tuesday for an official solution, if there is one.

No, all cases without a license server (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430270)

In this case, yes. But a 100% open service whose functionality required a given (open) server to work wouldn't be affected

I think you are mixing things up a little.

One, the original point was that proprietary systems without license servers would not be effected for installation. Since OS X has no licenses for example, you could install new versions all day long.

The second part of that sentence seems to be referring to the document DRM server... even in that case, a propritary solution where you hosted your own server (which you could restore) would work as well.

The problem seems to me to be the old "do you trust the cloud", i.e. having crucial functions handled by servers beyond your control.

Re:No, all cases without a license server (4, Informative)

GIL_Dude (850471) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430750)

This site isn't really a "license server" in the way that it sounds like you mean though. I use this site once in awhile myself as we have volume licenses through Microsoft. You go to the site to download software (then you have a copy and can use it without downloading again). You also go there for your volume keys. These are keys like a KMS (Key Management Server ) key. Once you have that, you can install as many copies as you want. Or, if you choose to use the MAK (Multiple Activation Key) - those are typically good for 5,000 or so activations. They don't activate against THIS site, so until you run out of activations on your key and need another key you don't need this site. Smaller companies get keys with less activations and may have 100, 500, 1000, etc. on their MAK key.

Re:No, all cases without a license server (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30431820)

I think you are missing the point to the parent post.... It is all well and good if you have already registered your old software, but if you are trying to install new software you are up shit creek without a paddle.

I am currently stuck in this situation, trying to get a copy of windows 2008 r2, I cannot order media kits from suppliers anymore because M$ is forcing everyone to do it through their site. I cannot register my licence keys with the site to unlock the install keys, which also means I cannot unlock the downloads to get around the missing media problems.

I have spent the past fortnight trying to get someone to respond to an email, only to have to throw my licence and contact details back and forward with some call centre lacky who doesnt seem to want to make any thing easier (first they asked for the details, then I need to fill in a form, then they cant locate the licence numbers and I have to re-supply the info I supplied a few days earlier, then the second form which I am filling in now .. ARG!!!).

Currently I am ordering the media from god knows where, for a delivery time god knows when. So I can install a server which is supposed to be operational before xmas. Now I notice that the licence call centre is apparently non-responsive so god alone knows how I am going to get the licence keys from M$ even if I do manage to get media.

Seriously this is insane. How exactly could M$ get itself in this mess?

Re:No, all cases without a license server (1)

bberens (965711) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430852)

The problem seems to me to be the old "do you trust the cloud", i.e. having crucial functions handled by servers beyond your control.

For most businesses I think the question is more "Do I believe the random guy I hired off the street is going to be able to keep the service going better than some outside vendor."

Re:No, all cases without a license server (1)

Ash-Fox (726320) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430934)

Since OS X has no licenses for example, you could install new versions all day long.

I thought OS X server came with an activation key requirement.

Re:Time for some free software zealotry... (2, Insightful)

dkf (304284) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430450)

In this case, yes. But a 100% open service whose functionality required a given (open) server to work wouldn't be affected: just change the server and you're back.

Depends on the nature of the service. If it involves large amounts of data and wasn't already set up to replicate the data to a backup system, bringing things back up (whether or not you've got the source code) might be very difficult simply because people don't just want the service itself, but they also want the state embodied by the service. After all, if you had a NAS box with lots of data on it, you wouldn't be able to bring the service provided by it back up just by plugging a new NAS box in. You'd still need to copy the files across, and if the old NAS is down and you've not been backing up properly, you're in trouble. The OS on the NAS boxes (or on the client systems) doesn't matter at all for that fundamental truth.

Services aren't software. Open source software can still form a closed ecosystem (a lot of Linux desktops feel rather that way) and an open ecosystem need not use any OSS. Of course, best of all is when there is an open ecosystem (so people can use anything they want) and OSS is full part of that ecosystem; the open software acts as an insurance against people trying to close things off, and sets a baseline that the closed providers have to do better than.

Re:Time for some free software zealotry... (1)

Nevynxxx (932175) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430774)

I think the idea is more like how ports/portage work.

You need a central rsync server, in a specific form. But being open, it gets replicated around the world. So if your current server is down, pick another.

Re:Time for some free software zealotry... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30430092)

And big companies think they are infalible.

Re:Time for some free software zealotry... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30430210)

Does Microsoft count as "too big to fail?"

Re:Time for some free software zealotry... (2, Interesting)

v1 (525388) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430350)

Proprietary software whose functionality requires a given service to be infallible is the problem

and just two stories down is another article [slashdot.org] telling how MS let a cert expire now and it's causing software written in 2003 to lock users out... MS is just flush with examples of this flawed concept today...

Re:Time for some free software zealotry... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30431070)

Maybe anyone who was any good has already left Microsoft.

Re:Time for some free software zealotry... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30430712)

eh, your phone calls require proprietary software that's infallible (probably backed by C or erlang). The problem is depending on Microsoft.

Re:Time for some free software zealotry... (4, Funny)

DoofusOfDeath (636671) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430250)

Do I even need to rant, or does the story make it clear why proprietary software is a problem?

This sounds like a trick question, but I'm not sure which answer I'm supposed to give.

I support Microsoft (5, Funny)

For a Free Internet (1594621) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430040)

The rest of the internet is like a sweatshop-slavery conditions! No time off not even on Chrismiss! But Microsoft allows the interent to take a vacations with its family and frineds in this holiday season, which promotes social justice and peace.

global conspiracy (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30430130)

It seems like a global conspiracy, or basically just downright bad management.
Other big players have problems with hardware distribution. For example Cisco has now over 4 month lead times on some common hardware, like it's datacenter Catalyst 4948.
And now this...
Also consider that my NetGear NAS has also been moved to backorder, because there is not one piece in my country and no supplier is able to get it.

It almost looks like businesses does not want to make money anymore.
Maybe in all the commotion, they cut their workforce so much, that they are not able to sustain critical business components.

Just deepens the crisis...

Re:global conspiracy (3, Insightful)

Bert64 (520050) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430154)

Hardware distribution is an entirely different and far more complicated matter, you need sufficient manufacturing capacity, combined with sufficient supply of the source components... Any of these failing will cause significant delays, a single tiny part being in short supply can scupper your entire production run.

Software on the other hand, once you have one copy distributing more is trivial.

I would have posted first (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30430136)

but somehow I couldn't get a license :(

It's a bad week for Microsoft... (2, Funny)

argent (18001) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430180)

I guess they were too busy trying to fix this problem [slashdot.org]?

[insert a whole bunch of DRM schadenfreude here]

Take these failures as a warning! (2, Insightful)

xmundt (415364) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430190)

Greetings and Salutations.
          This is the last of a number of massive infrastructure failures in the past few months. The issues with Gmail, T-Mobile, SwissDisk, etc and this should be a warning that the computing infrastructure is becoming baroquely fragile. Fragility and unreliability in the basic tools necessary to keep a business running are hard to deal with in good economic times. With the current, VERY stressed situation, it could easily cause marginal businesses to go toes up, throwing many more people out of work, and having a ripple effect that pushes hundreds of other support businesses closer to the edge.
          I would suggest that, instead of the creeping featuritis that has been so popular with software for the past decade that the focus should change towards making the foundations more secure, and, less likely to fail. Among other things, this WOULD require stopping this insane focus on having software "phone home" all the time, and, fail if it is unable to contact the appropriate servers. Another big step would be to focus back on quality of software rather than flashy features. There really should be no reason today for a piece of software to be exploited by a simple buffer overflow. The principles of excellent programming have been known and studied for 50 or more years now, and, should be fairly well understood. You MIGHT have heard of this fellow by the name of Knuth...he has said a thoughtful thing or two on the subject, and, it might well be worth reading some of his writings.
            More later
            Dave Mundt

Re:Take these failures as a warning! (2)

Sarten-X (1102295) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430256)

But what will the marketing departments do, if they can't show off the shiny buttons?

What will happen to all the unthinking programmers who can't muster anything better than a sliding panel?

What will happen to the hardware market when a 2ghz computer can actually do a thousand times the productive work of a 2mhz machine from the 1980s?

What will happen to our economy then? It's bad enough as it is. Can't you see that being intelligent will only make it worse?

Re:Take these failures as a warning! (1)

ConceptJunkie (24823) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431234)

Really! It takes longer for MS Word to load now than it did 15 years ago because it's more than a thousand times more powerful, right?

Typical... (1)

Lorien_the_first_one (1178397) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430238)

Just a private monopoly in progress.

In Microsoft's fantasy world, everyone is dependent on them. Everyone uses Microsoft operating systems, applications, and development tools. There is simply no competition.

Hence the busy signals.

New licensing portal (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30430268)

As a Microsoft reseller, we received notification on Tuesday Dec 8th that eOpen is supposed to be gone and replaced with:
www.microsoft.com/licensing/servicecenter/
Of course this new link doesn't work either, but at least we know that the eOpen portal itself not working is intentional.

Re:New licensing portal (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30430384)

same - I've known through the eOpen portal itself since November 1 that the site is no longer going to "exist" as of 8th Dec. So to all the MS bashers - the site going down has been public knowledge for well over a month.

The new one not working is a separate issue. GG failed migration.

Separating like bad velcro (4, Insightful)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430676)

The new one not working is a separate issue.

This is madness. You can't say "Oh well they were always going to shut down on this date" without an implied "the new server will be active". It's not separate in any way, the old server going down and the new server coming up were linked events, the new server being a precondition for the old to vanish.

Unless you were saying it makes any kind of sense to adhere to deadlines and damn the customers?

Re:Separating like bad velcro (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30432398)

This is madness.

madness?? this. is. a monopoly!!!

[damn slashdot filter... ALL CAPS is perfectly acceptable when paraphrasing 300 :P )

Re:Separating like bad velcro (1)

Gilmoure (18428) | more than 4 years ago | (#30433652)

We're Public Works. We don't make mistakes.

*CRASH*

They've gone back to Metric and didn't tell us.

Re:New licensing portal (1)

xmundt (415364) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430398)

Greetings and Salutations...
          Hum...back in the day, when I migrated a customer from one package to another one, I had this tendency to bring up the new software, and run in parallel for a week or so. I seem to have missed the memo about simply shutting off the old service then, at some time in the future bringing up the "new, Improved" version.
              But then, I have spent 30 years trying to actually HELP businesses make money....
              regards
            dave mundt

P.S. Hey! You kids! Get off my #$%^&*( Lawn!

Re:New licensing portal (1)

fermion (181285) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432510)

Which is just another case where MS does not use community standards. Community standards suggest that when one page is replaced with another, the first informs the user of the obsolete status, remind the user to change the bookmark, then redirect to the new page.

In MS customer service world, the old page is simply removed, and the user is left to wonder what to do.

Not for me (1)

Linker3000 (626634) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430358)

As much as I like to bash Mic..well, any organisation that deserves it really...I had no problems accessing the site or downloading ISOs of Win7 and Win7 upgrade Weds last week.

Not doing enough... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30430360)

I bet there is a server experiencing downtime every hour somewhere in the world causing customers pain. Lets post individual stories about it ! We can get to the next +100,000 milestone in no time.. :)

Nah, its M$, we need to bash them !! After all we have been pointlessly hating them since over a decade without any effect on their business ! That just means we aren't doing enough ! We need EVERY story to be about them so our concentrated circle jerk of hate will have some effect !!!! MS is going to crash and burn.. any minute now !! any minute !

Re:Not doing enough... (1, Troll)

MyLongNickName (822545) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431272)

I bet there is a server experiencing downtime every hour somewhere in the world causing customers pain. Lets post individual stories about it ! We can get to the next +100,000 milestone in no time.. :)

Hi. You have no clue. I am an IT manager for a mid-sized company. Microsoft FORCES me through their eOpen site for my licensing. Want to do site licensing? you use eOpen. And the site sucks. Features don't work. The navigation is a nightmare. And now, it is down. So, yes, it is a big deal.

Microsoft isn't the only company with this kind of problems. AT&T has a similar system for business contracts. We were negotiating to get a point to point T1 set up. And for a week their damn contract system was down. No one could (or would) circumvent the system. So as a consumer you are stuck. What is the commonality? In both cases it is a big company that you are practically forced to work with. So they can do whatever the hell they want and you are stuck.

So, no AC, this is not a Microsoft bash thing. it is really a big business bash thing.

Re:Not doing enough... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30432604)

Microsoft FORCES me through their eOpen site for my licensing.

And? You think you have a point? Waaah ! and apple FORCES me to buy their hardware to use their OS. Color me indifferent.

In both cases it is a big company that you are practically forced to work with. So they can do whatever the hell they want and you are stuck.

I constantly keep hearing from F/OSS cheerleaders that every software piece is in place to switch away from MS. Gee, I wonder if that's actually true...

Also, The point seeing as you missed it, as you probably always do, isn't that M$ customers are facing issues. Its that Slashdot has made a nice ad-money racket by bashing MS and increasing traffic to their website. I thought that was too obvious to state...

eOpen was replaced on the 6th with VLSC (4, Informative)

UnifiedTechs (100743) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430386)

eOpen was closed on december 6th and replaced by VLSC (Volume Licensing Service Center) at the following link: https://www.microsoft.com/licensing/servicecenter/home.aspx [microsoft.com]

Morte info can be found at: http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/existing-customers/manage-my-agreements.aspx [microsoft.com]

The VLSC site also appears to be down now, but maybe the swap is taking longer then planned or they are working out a bug on the week old site.

Not saying Microsoft doesn't screw up, but lets get all the facts, eOpen is closed for good and has been replaced.

Re:eOpen was replaced on the 6th with VLSC (1)

UnifiedTechs (100743) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430460)

I hate to comment on my own post, but I just found out that another service window for the VLSC site was planned on the 12th, it actually states that in the second link I posted below. Anyone in IT will tell you a weekend outage lasting into Monday morning is not a basis for front page news.

eOpen was closed on december 6th and replaced by VLSC (Volume Licensing Service Center) at the following link: https://www.microsoft.com/licensing/servicecenter/home.aspx [microsoft.com]

Morte info can be found at: http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/existing-customers/manage-my-agreements.aspx [microsoft.com]

The VLSC site also appears to be down now, but maybe the swap is taking longer then planned or they are working out a bug on the week old site.

Not saying Microsoft doesn't screw up, but lets get all the facts, eOpen is closed for good and has been replaced.

Re:eOpen was replaced on the 6th with VLSC (2, Informative)

Sxooter (29722) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432326)

I hate to comment on my own post, but I just found out that another service window for the VLSC site was planned on the 12th, it actually states that in the second link I posted below. Anyone in IT will tell you a weekend outage lasting into Monday morning is not a basis for front page news.

I don't know about you but I'd probably be out looking for a job if the sites I run were down on open of business monday morning.

Re:eOpen was replaced on the 6th with VLSC (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30430520)

Right, that's the problem, the eOpen site, which was always horrible but at least worked, has been redirecting to the new VLSC site for about a week now (since the 6th or so). Unfortunately the VLSC site has been down about 90% of the time (after many, many tries I was eventually able to activate a new Windows 7 license last week so it has worked at least some). The point is this is virtually the ONLY way to activate and manage licenses for Microsoft's volume license customers (at least for mid-size customers like me, might be more options for the biggest customers) yet it's been broken for a week. While it's true that the site should not be critical for actual existing, already activated systems, I know of no way to add new eOpen purchases except via this site.

Re:eOpen was replaced on the 6th with VLSC (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430530)

The VLSC site also appears to be down now, but maybe the swap is taking longer then planned or they are working out a bug on the week old site.

Not saying Microsoft doesn't screw up, but lets get all the facts, eOpen is closed for good and has been replaced.

Sounds to me more like eOpen is closed for good and hasn't been replaced. Maybe when this new site is up, it will have been. Right now, however, Microsoft is screwing the proverbial pooch, and no amount of apology will remove egg from face.

Re:eOpen was replaced on the 6th with VLSC (1)

Kaboom13 (235759) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430952)

I tried to process an eOpen license last week. When the VLSC site finally was up, I went to add the license to our account, only to be completely unable to find an option to do so. Finally I gave up in frustration, and called their tech support line. I was on hold for 2.5 hours, and when they finally answered, was told they "forgot" that functionality when they did the "upgrade" to the VLSC from the old eOpen site. Luckily I already have the media and such, and can go ahead and build the server and put the product key in later, but it is a pain in the ass.

The old eOpen site was pretty terrible, I have to give MS credit for making something worse.

Re:eOpen was replaced on the 6th with VLSC (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431440)

The old eOpen site was pretty terrible, I have to give MS credit for making something worse.

They're masters at it. DOS 4. Windows 95. Windows ME.

Re:eOpen was replaced on the 6th with VLSC (1)

sharkey (16670) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432394)

...maybe the swap is taking longer then planned...

Yeah, doing the swap before planning it could certainly result in delays and outages.

One thing which hasn't been mentioned yet (3, Interesting)

jimicus (737525) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430436)

Microsoft are trying to rationalise how their licensing works. Historically, they've had a myriad of different websites you had to use depending on if you have an Open Subscription License, an Open Value License, an MSDN license or a license that you made up yourself with a box of magic markers and a sheet of paper.

They're certainly trying to merge Subscription and Open Value right now - I recently purchased a few licenses on the OVS plan (the website for which is being shut down) and I'm having trouble accessing them on the "new" system.

This isn't another "gosh how fragile everything is" story. This is a bog standard "some f*ckwit decided to go live with the new system without testing it properly" story. The only eyebrow-raising part is that you would expect Microsoft to have a whole brace of plan Bs in place at the drop of a hat for just such an occurrence.

Why would you expect that (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430716)

The only eyebrow-raising part is that you would expect Microsoft to have a whole brace of plan Bs in place at the drop of a hat for just such an occurrence.

I thought we all learned from Danger that in fact Microsoft had no such plans.

So this current issue is just Microsoft planning as they have shown us they are wont to plan.

You would be wise to make future plans based on Microsoft accordingly.

Re:Why would you expect that (1)

jimicus (737525) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431104)

Maybe I should re-word that.

One would hope Microsoft would have a whole brace of Plan B's in place at the drop of a hat, particularly considering the recent Danger/Sidekick fiasco. However, anyone who has worked with Microsoft products for any length of time and continues to do so must be fairly used to the triumph of hope over experience by now.

Re:Why would you expect that (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432858)

Indeed, it's one of the chief reasons I'm going Open Source everywhere I can. Budget is part of it, but it's just as much the obscene horror story that their licensing is. Couple that with the fragility of their only real option for license management, and you get a picture of a company that's awfully good at cashing your check, but has little concern with any kind of meaningfully delivery of service. This is what a monopoly gets you, incompetence and arrogance.

Re:One thing which hasn't been mentioned yet (0)

Techman83 (949264) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430764)

The only eyebrow-raising part is that you would expect Microsoft to have a whole brace of plan Bs in place at the drop of a hat for just such an occurrence.

You must be new here...

Not News (1)

aster_ken (516808) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430500)

They've been planning to replace eOpen for months. If you had viewed the warning message in red text at the top of the eOpen page since November 1st, you would know this.

Also, the volume licensing site is usually down on weekends for "maintenance" even though it seems like it's to deter piracy in the form of IT licensing admins logging in from home and downloading software. I don't think I've ever been able to connect to it from a Time Warner home cable connection.

Re:Not News (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30432634)

It's now about midday Monday US East Coast time (according to my UK based calculations) and it's still down.
MS are obviously using data type 'long long weekend'.

It was useless anyway (4, Informative)

myxiplx (906307) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430678)

As one of their ideal customers, we used to make a lot of use of eOpen. We registered all our licences on there, and it was nice, a single portal to track all of our Microsoft licences and upgrade rights.

Then we left it without logging on for a while (after all, it was all working fine), and the next time we tried to use it we discovered Microsoft had wiped *ALL* of our licence information that we had painstakingly entered into their site.

Turns out that they linked the accounts to Live, and that your account expires if you don't use it for 90 days.

Handy that for corporate account licence management, and strangely enough we haven't used it since.

Re:It was useless anyway (2, Funny)

IgnoramusMaximus (692000) | more than 4 years ago | (#30433018)

Same shit happened to pretty much all of my clients. I've been insisting that people keep all of their licensing info registered so that they have an easy off-site access point in addition to their regular documentation backups, to keep it "safe" and quick to get at - and after all where better then the very vendor who insists on all that activation and serial number crap, surely they will appreciate their customer's efforts! Even if it is a truly vile de-facto monopolist vendor such as Microsoft ... but then again I guess not.

Naturally, half of them lost their own copies and so now any and all changes involving license codes are pretty much foobar until Microsoft finds its ass-hole again, utilizing the provided flood lights, both of its hands, the hands of 32-part-time contractors, a radar-ass-hole-finder, an ass-hole-finding map and an "Idiot's Guide To Telling Your Ass-hole Apart From a Hole In the Ground". Hopefully sometime before 2012 rolls around.

On the other hand it has served as perfect example to point to when demonstrating the dangers of "licensing" combined with single-vendor-dependency, irrespective of how "popular" and "gigantic" that vendor is, to pointy-haired management.

So it's been down for a week, (1)

pecosdave (536896) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431004)

and people just noticed today?

Wow Microsofts open source really is grabbing attention!

M$ Business as Usual (1, Insightful)

omb (759389) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431178)

Outages, mistakes, no Certificate, late bad code full of bugs, Bribing legislators and Standards Organizations, Continuing Anti-Trust violations are all in the days work for the crooks from Redmond.

VLSC was working on Friday. (1)

illogic (52099) | more than 4 years ago | (#30433270)

We have a few licenses that used to be managed through eOpen, I never received any notification about its disappearance, but happened to discover the switch to Volume License Service Center on Friday when trying to login to eOpen. VLSC was definitely up and running at that point, I could log in and manage the same licenses that I used to with eOpen.

That said, the initial terms of agreement screen that appeared after logging into to VLSC was terribly confusing. A blank window with no instructions, I was expected to figure out that I needed to manually select my region and language from a non-obvious drop-down menu, then click a button labeled "Go", causing the terms of agreement to appear in English on the screen. There is a box below in which you are meant to type your name and click "I agree", however this button was not clickable until figuring out how to make the agreement appear above, and there were no instructions to indicate this. I spent several minutes feeling very foolish as I typed in my name, couldn't click the button to proceed, clicked "Cancel" instead, got to the VLSC dashboard to find that all the functions were disabled because I hadn't accepted the agreement, logged out and back in to make the terms window appear again, repeat a few times. Grrr.

Recent Windows 7 eopen brain damage (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30433502)

Had a customer buy some Win 7 Pro licenses via eOpen. Finally got the paperwork, logged in to eOpen, and entered the agreement and license numbers. They let you download the software, but won't let you get the product key without calling. WTF?

So I call, and get some guy in India who barely speaks English. He asks for the agreement and license numbers... then the business name, my name, email, etc. Why doesn't he have access to that after entering the agreement and license numbers? Give him all the info, then wait 5-10 minutes for an email. The email never comes. Call back. Repeat... find out the guy got the email address wrong. Try again. YAY it works!

Now when I see the Windows 7 banner that says "Licensing simplified" I just wanna beat somebody.

SOLUTION (1)

StuartHankins (1020819) | more than 4 years ago | (#30433706)

I found the solution and it works for me!!!

The obvious solution is that you aren't reloading the page enough times. Try it, it works the 16th time!!
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...