Integration was relatively straight forward and on the whole definitely less effort than rolling your own solution. Costs overall put it slightly in favour on the build vs buy decision. It is not inexpensive but in most cases will cost less than your own solution unless you need something extremely basic.

Hosted activation option is great for avoiding the pain of setting up your own activation service and managing uptime and other issues. Lots of available options for local licensing, license servers, activation and other configurations. Documentation is extensive, though so extensive that it can be a little tricky to find your way around it, usually the information is there though. Top notch support team, extremely responsive to questions and issues.

No true usage based licensing system (e.g., for billing users by the hour). Possible in a way with various work around techniques but complex. Interface in web tools is somewhat "old world" at this stage, however perfectly functional. There have been some recent updates improving this however.

RLM is an important tool for our licensing and revenue protection from unauthorized use

The software works well with no noticeable glitches. If we need any fixes or changes, we find Reprise to be a good company to deal with. They have been responsive to our needs and we are planning to continue using them over the long term

There are no issues that Reprise hasn't dealt with in a timely manner. No complaints here

Once we got everything setup, implemented and tested within our software solutions, the licensing manager is now very easy to use, manage and maintain. Setup was the hard part. Better documentation might make it easier for new clients. Now that we are there, Reprise License Manager pretty much runs effortlessly in the background. Our next steps are to implement our own hosted activation site so that we can unplug from the hosted activation server, when time comes available.

Allowed us to quickly implement a licensing and activation solution by leveraging activation pro for the interim until our team could invest in implementing our own activation server to host locally.

My role was to write the license activation, revoke, validation code in order to integrate RLM into our multiple software solutions. Additionally, I designed the product and licensing models for the client support team (who would then generate and deliver activation keys to clients). Though documentation and sample code does exist, I found that I had to constantly switch between different documentation sets in order to find valid answers. Even in doing that, I still found it difficult to get the answers I needed, in order to determine what configuration settings we really needed to override for our company specific rlm server. Additionally, we struggled with understanding how to deal with proxy servers and what types of licensing models we really needed. I will say that that the support team has been wonderful with answering all of our questions and helping us to get up and running quickly.

Wide range of features, with reasonably-priced a-la-carte offerings. Lots of licensing options, and we ended up using a bunch of different configurations: * Node-locked short-term demo licenses enabled anyone to try our software * Cloud-based floating license servers was a big hit for customers with distributed offices * Onsite licensing servers with proxy settings and failover was used by our larger and more restrictive automotive customers * Hardware license dongles were used by our most restrictive customers, who wouldn't permit any authentication traffic

Node-locked protection on Linux was weaker than Windows (didn't support less easily-spoofed options like disk serial number)

I got up and running on Reprise very quickly. Once it has been implemented in my software, I rarely need to do any coding with Reprise. It just works.

Reprise is easy to configure and deploy. It is widely used in the industry. All of my customers have existing installations of Reprise on their license servers, so using Reprise is easy for them.

My code is a python code. I have to write my own C++ / DLL extensions to access Reprise. It's not hard to do. I would just like this functionality out of the box. I would like Reprise to provide workshops on how to use the basic and advanced features. Ideally these would be free, but I would be willing to pay a moderate price for this.

RLM was fairly easy to setup and deploy in a relatively short time-frame.

It possessed limited reporting capabilities when we first deployed it, but they have enhanced them over time.

We have been selling connectivity software since 1989, and were using our own license enforcement until late 2010, when a customer recommended RLM as an improvement over our clumsy ad-hoc system. We sell to all size companies, from 1 user to 1000's of users, and RLM works well for all sizes. Pros: RLM is fairly easy to install: Simply download the package, follow the instructions, and link the resulting library into your application. The license files are text and rather compact, and one format supports both node-locked and license server models. The API has simple calls, but also more advanced ones. Using the simple calls, you pass the name of your application and its version number, and it returns a yes or no. If no, you can go into a demo or evaluation mode. Reprise is very good at customer service. They usually answer tech questions the same day. Cons: When we first signed up (in 2010), the RLM activation server was primitive and not usable, so we wrote our own. (An activation server distributes an license file with the customers hostid from a sales database when given an activation key.) Since then, they have released "Activation Pro", but we had already written our own, so I can't review that. We don't use their free product, but their paid product requires an additional annual fee for each architecture, and "Windows 32-bit" is a different architecture from "Windows 64-bit". If your customer runs your application on one architecture and wishes to run their license server on a different architecture, you have to purchase both. There is not a good API for querying license use, but there is a good web interface to the RLM license server. The Linux startup script for the license server (/etc/init.d/rlm) did not work well. It can easily shut down the wrong server if it's not configured correctly. We ended up making major changes to the Linux startup script. However, the Windows RLM license server starts up very well.

Simple C API that is easy to integrate in any software product on any (RLM supported) platform. Things just work on our clients side. Well documented. Great support.

Cannot think of anything negative to say about RLM and the people we interfaced with in their support team.

Very good experience throughout.

Easy integration, all the features we want.

There was nothing in particular that we didn't like.

Very flexible licensing model. Easy to use API. Very responsive technical support.

. .

Great

RLM has really a great support team. The product is good too and very easy to use.

Two separate databases for Activation Pro and RLM Cloud. If a customer wants node locked and RLM cloud, you need to enter customer details in two places.

We've been using Reprise for our products' licensing for more than 6 years now. Their solution client-side is in the form of a library, and it is very transparent what it does and how it works. It is in a form that is highly flexible, so that when we have requirements or processes that are unique for us, it is possible to adapt. The transparency has also allowed us to develop much of our own back-office processes and automation, from license generation to activation, to salesforce integration, around the Reprise toolset. They have a diverse set of licensing options, only a subset of which we make use of, but we are able to offer our customers floating (site) licenses as well as individual licenses. I've interacted with Bob many times, from advice on how to approach issues or client-specific problems, to addressing bugs, to implementation problems on my end. He's the expert, and I like being able to get right to the deep technical details immediately. Because the client-side is essentially a library, much of the onus for the customer experience falls on us -- how our product's UI presents licensing interactions to the user. This is less turn-key than some other options, but as I said, it gives us total flexibility. I often feel that we could do a better job on our end. Where there are areas where ERs on their end can help, I know I have a receptive ear, and have seen several of my requests implemented over the years.

Flexible company - good technical support

It is difficult to read and understand the documentation

RLM is an effective tool which programmers and sales groups can use to eliminate proprietary product licensing and license management. Building a product is challenging enough without having to factor in the cost of sustaining custom licensing code and license generation software. RLM does all that and more. Need support for network licensing? RML does it. Need support for licensing renewal and expiration? Look to RLM. Cons? You have to spend a bit of time understanding licensing to realize the complexity of the task required to turn you own licensing solution. The same is true when you want to integrate RLM. You have to decide what features you need and then later branch out to use many of their more advanced offerings. The learning curve on concepts like license sharing, or detached licenses can be high at first. Once the concepts are understood the value is readily apparent. Great product, solid well thought offering, responsive support group.

We use RLM in our desktop products and have been very happy with it. It didn't take us long to get it up and running (though we went a step or two further and built a nice C++ wrapper on it -- you certainly don't need to do that if you don't want to) and whenever we need support, Reprise is quick & prompt with the help (usually situations involving odd customer networking setups when they're trying to use a floating license server). Perhaps most important, we've found RLM to be of the category of 'fire and forget'. We implemented it in our software, verified it, and have had to do almost nothing since to keep it up & running. Every so often we'll upgrade to a newer version, which means compiling some binaries and putting them in the proper place so our in-house licensing system (which sits on top of RLM) can do its thing, but that's basically a couple of hours of work We upgrade to the latest version every couple of years, so this is pretty minimal.

We have been a customer of Reprise's for many years and have found their solution to be technically excellent. As a new company, they delivered a robust product from the onset and have incrementally continued to improve. Some of the pros are: - supports many licensing models--trials, stand alone, network and mixtures. - flexible binding to various host/system ids - a fare pricing model to fit smaller businesses - very quick to respond to technical support and provide solutions - easy to use management and troubleshooting tools Cons are minimal: - not as plug-and-play as some solutions (e.g., requires compilation and more coding to integrate) - .NET wrappers are fairly basic and non-object oriented I would recommend RLM without hesitation.

Easy to setup, administer and integrate within our software suites.

For the use we have, we don't see any Cons.

We researched several license management products before selecting Reprise as the licensing server for our commercial enterprise software product. Reprise was the clear winner in terms of features and cost. Our developers had no complaints against Reprise while integrating it into our complex code base. We have not run into any limitations with the Reprise software, despite having complex and varied software licensing control requirements . The product is very stable and works well in enterprise multi-data center deployments with high availability or DR requirements.

Having reviewed several alternatives about four years back, we can now look back and say we are very glad that we chose RLM. We short-listed Reprise and Flex, as our customers and developers were familiar with Flex, and both had the features we were looking for. During the evaluation period, the Reprise people were soooo much easier to work with, and have been great ever since. Our experience was with Flexera in Australia, and Reprise in USA. Our customers are all over the world, and their feedback in implementing RLM in their IT environments has been good.

We use RLM in licensing various software products. RLM allows us to provide professional and flexible licensing scenarios for our needs. Pros: License activation can be done using activation, file-based licensing or network licensing using license server. Activation server can be hosted on own server, which allows tight integration with internal systems, such as CRM. Cons: When implementing RLM it takes some time and patience to read and understand all documentation. However, once all details are configured correctly, RLM works perfectly.

Pros- The software is very powerful. Has a lot of features, which covers most licensing cases. Their support is very good. They respond really fast. Included sample programs cover a lot of ground and can be used as a template. Cons- The documentation is vast. Their quick start guide could be made a lot simpler, especially with regards to the license servers. Some screen shots and diagrams would help. It is also a little outdated. A good help website would go a long way as compared to having to sort through the large PDF manuals.

We've been using RLM since version 1. Version 12 at the time of this review, Reprise continues to add interesting and useful features, many of which are based directly on customer feedback. It has a simple and straightforward API, but you can add advanced features as you need them with a bit more effort. They also have an Internet activation add-on called Activation Pro that we don't use because we built our own Internet activation on top of RLM. The pricing is is very reasonable and the customer support is stellar.

The RLM software can handle numerous licensing needs, including locking a product to a specific machine, limiting the amount of time a product can be used, and if desired setting up a license server. Keep in mind that this is software intended to be used by other software engineers. So it's not a product like Microsoft Word or Quicken where you just install it and it's ready to be used. It takes a little work, including changing your own code to use it, but once all of that's done, it's pretty robust.

At Fintronic USA, Inc. we are using RLM for software protection since October 2014, and we are very happy with it. RLM is product with numerous advanced capabilities and yet easy to use. Customer support is knowledgeable and helpful. A negative aspect could be that Reprise Software is a small company and if it disappears overnight we will have some problems. However, a big positive is that it is a small company and we get knowledgeable customer support and personal interaction at all levels.

We've switched our license product from FlexNet and are extremely happy with the customer support. While the initial cost is a little painful, it's more manageable over time, and the improvement in support, operation and feature set will be worth the expense. We're also implementing Activation Pro to improve our own customers' experience. It takes a little extra effort to integrate with customer sales and support pipeline, but we believe it will eliminate some headaches for both customer and vendor.