Loadrunner 11.0

[Rajesh Ananthaiah]

What's New

Protocols

• Ajax TruClient- An advanced protocol for modern JavaScript. based applications (including Ajax) emulating user activity within a web browser. Scripts are developed interactively in Mozilla Firefox.
• Silverlight- A new protocol for Silverlight based applications emulating user activity at the transport level. Allows generating high level scripts by automatically importing and configuring WSDL files used by the application.
• Java over HTTP- A new protocol designed to record java-based applications and applets. It produces a Java language script. using web functions. This protocol is distinguished from other Java protocols in that it can record and replay Java remote calls over HTTP.
• Citrix
• The Citrix Protocol now supportsCitrix Online Pluginversions 11.2 and 12.0.
• Added support for Citrix XenApp Server 5.0
• Oracle NCA -NCA Java object property support now provides automated creation and registration within a script. of a query-answer table of communication between client-side Java objects and the Oracle NCA server.
• SAPGUI- Added support for SAPGUI for Windows Client version 7.20.
• Service Test- The LoadRunner Controller can run scripts created in HP Service Test 11.00, HP's solution for creating and running automated tests for SOA and headless technologies. Refer to the Service Test documentation for details of creating Service Test scripts for a load testing scenario.

Features

• Data Format Extension (DFE)- Enhanced data format capabilities for the Web (HTTP/HTML) protocol family. Allows converting raw HTTP traffic into a maintainable and structured XML format and enables correlations by XPATH.
• Correlation Studio- Web (HTTP/HTML) automatic correlation mechanism has been enhanced to search for possible correlations in the larger scope of snapshot data created during code generation including data formatted by DFE.
• Snapshot View- New snapshot view for Web (HTTP/HTML) protocol steps allows viewing complete HTTP traffic in both raw and DFE generated formats.
• VuGen - HP ALM Integration- Enhanced integration with HP Application Lifecycle Management platform. that serves also Quality Center and Performance Center editions.
• Windows Support- Added support for Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008. See below for limitations.
• Analysis Reports- Enhanced Analysis reports are more customizable. Analysis data can be exported to a variety of formats, including Word, Excel, PDF, and HTML. New report templates allow saving report definitions and generating reports based on a template.

Installation and Configuration Information

Prerequisite Software

Specific software needs to be installed before you can install LoadRunner. When you run the LoadRunner installation wizard, if the prerequisite software is not already installed on your computer, the wizard detects which software is missing and provides the option to install it.51Testing软件测试网%J b6a5u#C(g!Ou

The following prerequisite software needs to be installed:

4oQ t([ } T-V‑f1mG0

• .NET Framework 3.5 SP1
• Microsoft Data Access Components (MDAC) 2.8 SP1 (or later)
• Microsoft Windows Installer 3.1
• Microsoft Core XML Services (MSXML) 6.0
• Microsoft Visual C++ 2005 SP1 Redistributable Package (x86)
• Microsoft Visual C++ 2008 Redistributable Package (x86)
• Web Services Enhancements (WSE) 2.0 SP3 for Microsoft .NET Redistributable Runtime MSI
• Web Services Enhancements (WSE) 3.0 for Microsoft .NET Redistributable Runtime MSI
• Strawberry Perl 5.10.1

 

"X3J+}8f­}0

System Requirements for VuGen, Controller, and Analysis

The following table describes the system requirements for installing VuGen, the Controller, or Analysis:

M j"r!aw4y9w0

51Testing软件测试网 P\8z"y%l"I C d h&l'R
z#C T

Processor	CPU Type:Intel Core, Pentium, Xeon, AMD or compatible Speed:1 GHz minimum. 2 GHz or higher recommended
Operating System	Windows Vista SP2 32-bit Windows XP Professional SP3 32-bit Windows Server 2003 Standard Edition/Enterprise Edition SP2 32-bit Windows Server 2008 Standard Edition/Enterprise Edition SP2 32-bit and 64-bit Windows 7 Note:VuGen recording is not supported on 64-bit operating systems.
Memory (RAM)	Minimum:2 GB ;p[1]y!m_&\,s A0Recommended:4 GB or higher
Screen Resolution	Minimum:1024 x 768
Browser	Microsoft Internet Explorer 6.0 SP1 or SP2 Microsoft Internet Explorer 7.0 Microsoft Internet Explorer 8.0
Available Hard Disk Space	Minimum:2 GB

+G9| wQ6i)s
g3[0
f'X!c |w3e[1]x0

(S e
wt

---

KQt0

/o

---

a P2d Z0

 

f N7X(`4C3{
\]0

Load Generator for Windows System Requirements

The following table describes the system requirements for installing the Load Generator on a Windows machine.51Testing软件测试网#u

---

H9K2B pA T
U6F

51Testing软件测试网|5Wu5PCy#|)fU

Processor	CPU Type:Intel Core, Pentium, Xeon, AMD or compatible Speed:1 GHz minimum. 2 GHz or higher recommended Note for Pentium Processors:Intel Hyper-Threading technology is not supported. Hyper-Threading can be disabled in the BIOS. For more information, see: http://www.intel.com/support/processors/pentium4/sb/CS-017371.htm
Operating System	The following Windows operating systems are supported: Windows Vista SP2 32-Bit Windows XP Professional SP3 32-Bit Windows Server 2003 Standard Edition/Enterprise Edition SP2 32-Bit Windows Server 2008 Standard Edition/Enterprise Edition SP2 32-Bit and 64-bit Windows 7
Memory (RAM)	Minimum:1 GB Note:Memory depends on protocol type and system under test and can vary greatly.
Browser	Microsoft Internet Explorer 6.0 SP1 or SP2 Microsoft Internet Explorer 7.0 Microsoft Internet Explorer 8.0
Available Hard Disk Space	Minimum:2 GB

2L!i5L
h Ap$C051Testing软件测试网 b J(Z;{,b mb

&Fw-{.{ cj051Testing软件测试网"W1[�`%U#?+c d u

---

M+D

 51Testing软件测试网3j

---

{j9}*U$N[1]u9v#C!l

Load Generator for UNIX System Requirements

This section describes the system requirements necessary for installing the HP Load Generator on a UNIX machine.

$K
sj)|
O%rn `Dh0

"S
p _;\ v#|O�c D

---

H0

Memory (RAM)	256 MB minimum Note:Memory depends on protocol type and system under test and can vary greatly.
Available Hard Disk Space	150 MB minimum

51Testing软件测试网:A[1]L O/K:c!U I

:x rU8L T9\ ]9L
F7|0

(e

---

E Pe7? `&N | j9x051Testing软件测试网)^(g P­ea)|I

The following table describes the supported operating systems on which you can install a UNIX HP Load Generator.51Testing软件测试网:Dn3N0F!l P5@ L

OS Type	OS Version	Platform.
Sun Solaris	Solaris 9 (2.9) Solaris 10 (2.10)	Sun UltraSPARC-based systems
HP-UX	HP-UX 11iv2 (11.23)	HP PA-RISC
Red Hat Linux	Enterprise Linux 4.0 Enterprise Linux 5.0	CPU Type:Intel Core, Pentium, AMD or compatible Speed:1 GHz minimum. 2 GHz or higher recommended

3` [ d&s1a.`$U(P0
/C fud8X#z0

k1M m E#J0

!ROR3gn
P0

Product Compatibility

LoadRunner 11.00 is compatible with the following HP product versions:

)]6l#} OTv9M0

• HP Quality Center version 10.00
• HP Application Lifecycle Management version 11.00
• HP QuickTest Professional versions 10.00 and 11.00
• HP Diagnostics versions 8.04 and 9.00 (Note: To use Diagnostics 8.x with LoadRunner 11.00, the Diagnostics 9.00 LoadRunner Add-in must be installed. For more details, see the HP Diagnostics documentation)
• HP SiteScope versions 10.12 and 11.00

Pre-Installation Notes and Limitations

This section includes:

---

y6~ e1Wh

---

W‑EQ
W0

• Windows
• UNIX
• Virtual Environment Installation
• Diagnostics for J2EE/.NET Requirements
• ContentCheck in Multilingual Environments
• Windows Firewall Considerations
• WAN Emulation
• HP Performance Validation SDK

Windows

• On Vista machines, if you want to add a new license from the LoadRunner Launcher (Configuration > LoadRunner License > New License), you need to have Administrator privileges on the Vista machine.
• If you are running McAfee or Aladdin's eSafe anti-virus applications, close them before installing LoadRunner.
• To use Windows 2003 with a HASP plug, download Aladdin's latest HASP driver.

UNIX

• The LoadRunner UNIX installation is based on native packages per operating system. This requires you to be logged in as root user to run the installation.
• If you are installing a UNIX load generator on an HP-UX operating system, you cannot install it from a network location. You can install it directly from the installation disk or you can copy the installer onto the local directory of the target machine.

Virtual Environment Installation

• LoadRunner supports Vmware version ESX 3.0, ESX 3.5, and VM Workstation 5.5 and is certified for the following Windows platforms: Windows XP SP2/SP3, Windows Server 2003 SP2, and Windows Vista SP1.
• Running Vusers on virtual machines may adversely affect performance due to the sharing of physical resources.

Diagnostics for J2EE/.NET Requirements

A unique transaction name must be used for each scenario.

-@|$T*h!p‑W:\
j0

ContentCheck in Multilingual Environments

This version supports ContentCheck rules in French, German, Spanish, and Italian. The correct language file should be installed according to the system locale.51Testing软件测试网L"W#Y)d v8X

The suitable language file can also be copied from the installation disk:51Testing软件测试网\9@%e

---

t ^?TF:?

..\lrunner\MSI\setup\international\<lang>\dat\LrwiAedInstallation.xml51Testing软件测试网"b |:?v8w

to the<LoadRunner>\datdirectory.

c L6d+`�V4[)^'w0

Windows Firewall Considerations

In most Windows environments, Windows Firewall is turned on by default. The firewall does not allow certain LoadRunner components to communicate with each other. The Windows firewall therefore needs to be turned off.51Testing软件测试网

---

o g th B

Note: Turning off Windows Firewall increases the risk to your computer's security.

| P1yP)V O0

For each process that needs the firewall you can unblock the process by clicking the unblock button in the popup window that indicates that the program needs it, or by manually tuning the Windows firewall from the Exceptions tab.51Testing软件测试网W` Z#V/|(Y&a&~

WAN Emulation

• Make sure that the relevant 3rd party components are installed on the load generator machines. Note that in addition to the load generators, you may be required to install the relevant 3rd party component on additional LoadRunner components. For more information, see the relevant 3rd party software installation documentation.
• The relevant 3rd party component licenses must be purchased from the 3rd party vendor and not from HP.

HP Performance Validation SDK

HP Performance Validation SDK version 11.00 can be used only with LoadRunner version 11.00 and above.51Testing软件测试网 e:|

---

p al(o x f‑|

Notes and Limitations

This section includes:51Testing软件测试网+{$LE+B;DW
v

• General
• VuGen
• VuGen Protocols
• Controller
• Analysis
• LoadRunner Integration with HP Service Test
• WAN Emulation
• Windows Vista
• Multilingual Support

General

• To run LoadRunner on Windows 7 or Window Server 2008, you must have Administrator privileges and User Account Control (UAC) must be disabled.
• Internet Explorer 8
• For Click and Script. based protocols, address bar operations and pop-up windows are not supported.
• The Internet Explorer SmartScreen Filter must be disabled when recording with Citrix Web Access (formerly known as Citrix NFuse).
• Internet Explorer Enhanced Security Configuration should be disabled when recording with Citrix Web Access (formerly known as Citrix NFuse) recording on Windows 2003/2008 Server.
• WinInet recording is not supported.
• Recording on 64 bit machines is not supported, however replaying scripts on 64 bit machines is supported.
• FTP active mode with SSL is not supported in both explicit and implicit flavors.
• The network speed simulation settings in theNetwork: Speed Simulationnode in the Run Time Settings do not work with Windows 7. Virtual users will use the maximum bandwidth regardless of which option was selected.
• It is not recommended to install and uninstall a Load Generator standalone installation on the same machine with a VuGen standalone installation.
• The Load Generator cannot run Citrix scripts in service mode when the script. was recording using Citrix Client version is 11.2 or higher.
• The Agent icon does not appear in Windows 2008 and Vista when the LoadRunner Agent service is launched.
• When LoadRunner Agent runs as service (magentservice.exe), files that are stored on remote network drives or referred to by UNC path cannot be accessed (script, parameter file, etc.). If you want to access files this way, run the LoadRunner Agent as process (magentproc.exe). If this is not possible, please contact Customer Support.

VuGen

• SAP (Click and Script) recording.During recording, if you use a keyboard option instead of a UI element (for example, pressingEnterinstead of clicking thelog onbutton), the step may not be recorded. In general, when recording your script, it is recommended to use UI elements rather than keyboard options.
• Citrix snapshots.Black snapshots may appear during record or replay when using Citrix Presentation Server 4.0 and 4.5 (before Rollup Pack 3).

Possible workaround:On the Citrix server selectStart Menu > Settings > Control Panel > Administrative Tools > Terminal Services Configuration > Server Settings > Licensingand change the settingPer UserorPer Deviceto the alternative setting (i.e. If it is set toPer User, change it toPer Deviceand vice versa.)

(f)s-W+AY0

• Recording Window Size and XenApp Plugin for Hosted Applications 11.The recording window size options does not work properly with the XenApp Plugin for Hosted Applications 11. The size of the client window is installed, but the server screen resolution is not. This is a Citrix Client bug and will be fixed in future Citrix Client versions.

Workaround:When recording, set the window size equal to the local screen resolution. When replaying/load testing, set the VuGen or Load Generator's screen resolution to equal the resolution used when the script. was recorded. To verify the recorded resolution, view the Window property in the<Script. Folder>\default.cfgfile.

l C u*k�q
N

---

xL\0

• For the following protocols, replay is supported but recording is no longer supported: Siebel DB2, Siebel MSSQL, Siebel Oracle, and Voice XML.
• InTest Result reports, you can only use theExport to HTML fileutility for scripts replayed in version 9.50 and later. To generate an HTML report for scripts created with earlier versions, run the script. again in the 9.50 version (or later) of the product.
• If you terminated theProtocol Advisorimmediately after the detection process started, the Protocol Advisor may leave a zombie process of the detected application, causing all recordings and detection sessions that follow to fail.Workaround:Manually terminate the zombie process.
• The new Web snapshot model is backward compatible with previous versions of LoadRunner, however some snapshot data may be missing. If this occurs, regenerate the script.
• The JSON Data Format Extension does not work in UNIX environments.
• Recording a network based application on Windows 7.To record a network-based application (including Web), IPv6 communication must be disabled. Follow the instructions inhttp://www.addictivetips.com/windows-tips/how-to-disable-ipv6-in-windows-7/to disable IPv6 in Windows 7.
• For protocols using XML, replay fails to create a request when a parameterized input argument contains the ampersand (&) character.

Correlation Studio

• In VuGen, when correlating large amount of snapshot data, in some cases the parameter is not created and data is not correlated.
• Scan for correlation will work on a script. that was regenerated and replayed with the early access version.

VuGen Protocols

AJAX (Click and Script)

• ActiveX objects and Java applets are only supported on Windows platforms.

Ajax TruClient

• The Ajax TruClient protocol can only be used with applications that support the Mozilla Firefox browser.
• Documentation and further limitations about this protocol will be provided separately.

Citrix

• Installation of the registry patch is required for the support of all version of Citrix clients over 10.x. Additionally, you need to installEnable_Citrix_API.regfrom theLoadRunner\datfolder on Vugen or LG machines if a Citrix Client will be installed after installing LoadRunner.
• Running Citrix Vusers on virtual machines may adversely affect performance due to the sharing of physical resources.
• Citrix XenApp Desktop cannot be recorded with Citrix Web Access (formerly known as Citrix NFuse) if Desktop View (Desktop Toolbar) is enabled.
• Citrix Agent text trapping does not work on Citrix servers installed on Windows Server 2008.

Click and Script. (All)

• Does not support VBScript
• Does not support user actions on ActiveX objects and Macromedia Flash
• Scalability is lower than the Web HTML protocol, depending on the size and functionality of the business process
• Replay snapshots may differ from the actual Web page
• Support of right-to-left languages is limited (e.g., bi-directional or reversed text may not be processed as expected). This is defined by the default operating system translation table.
• Recording of an application in a specific language (e.g., French, Japanese) must be performed in a machine whose default locale (inSettings > Control Panel > Regional Options) is the same language
• The locale of the load-generator machine, including the default non-Unicode character set, must be configured to be the same as that of the recording machine. It cannot be assumed that the UNIX default character set is the same as in Windows, even for US-English machines, and this has to be explicitly verified. For example, the default character set in some UNIX machines, such as Linux, is UTF-8.
• The Recording Options dialog box may take a long time to open.
• Citrix Clients 11.2 and higher do not support the TCP/IP mode in the Citrix > Login node of the Recording Options dialog box.
• When recording Citrix Web Access (formerly known as Citrix NFuse) applications, set the window size to "No preference" in the Citrix XenApp web portal preferences page.
• Web (Click and Script) no longer supports replay of Applets and ActiveX objects. This functionality is now part of the AJAX (Click and Script) protocol.

Java (All)

• Java Record Replay Protocol: Recording of JMS applications requires JDK version 1.6u17 or lower.
• Java over HTTP Protocol: Requires the JDK version 1.5 or higher.

Listing Directory Service (LDAP)

• If an LDAP version 3 script. fails during replay, modify themldpa_logon_exstatement to specify the version number by adding"Version=3"after"URL=.."
• When recording LDAP scripts, the binary parameter values for certain LDAP functions (such asmldap_addormldap_modify) are not recorded. Recording of binary parameters is part of the protocol's extended functionality and is not supported by VuGen.

Media Player (MMS)

Media Player scripts fail with the error:Error -86801:Host access denied, <hostname> not available or missing.51Testing软件测试网 ^:c Z S*F w!A&I G*s&@

Workaround:Call themms_disable_host_checkfunction in all Media Player scripts.

E n!E t&l d/r0

Microsoft .NET

• When the application under test retrieves a server-activated object by callingnew RemoteObject(), VuGen generates aRemotingServices.Connectfunction.
• Applications using multiple processes or multiple application domains are only partially supported.

Microsoft Remote Desktop Protocol (RDP)

• Clipboard sharing supports only short simple textual content.
• When recording with RDP Agent, applications which were developed using CBuilder may not record properly.
• RDP 6.1 is not supported in Windows 7, Windows Server 2008, Windows Vista SP1 and Windows XP SP3.

SAP (Click and Script)

• Cannot define transactions to measure time of a subset of steps done in a modal dialog.
• During recording, if a user double-clicks on a tree-view tree cell outside of its text, VuGen records "Select" instead of "Activate." This results in a missing POST in replay.
• If the list of retrieved values contains a scroll bar, cannot select an item that requires scrolling in order to get it from the server.
• Scalability is lower than the SAP Web protocol, depending on the size and functionality of the business process.
• Does not support theReplace with Alternate Navigationrun-time setting.
• In certain SAP environments (such as 6.20 and 6.40), the replay fails for tests that call theweb_elementfunction and select an element whose tag name is "TD".

SAPGUI

• Due to a SAP-related bug, do not use thesapgui_tree_set_column_orderAPI function in LoadRunner version 9.5.

Silverlight

• REST services do not generate Silverlight service calls however they can be recorded and replayed.
• You cannot edit the WSDL location in the Protocol and Security Scenario dialog box.
• The Update button in Silverlight Service node of the Recording Options dialog box is not working (always reporting success).
• Duplex (Polling) Binding for WCF Web Services is not supported.
• Silverlight 4 Client is supported, however applications developed using the new communication features such asnet.tcpbinding are not supported.
• VuGen snapshot viewer does not support Silverlight controls.
• The Silverlight Protocol does not support applications which use Japanese, Korean, Simplified Chinese, and Traditional Chinese.

WAP

• Cannot record in secure mode.Workaround:Record script. in non-secure mode and then replay it in secured mode.
• Cannot replay a script. in connection-less mode.

Web Services

• In VuGen Tree view, you may experience problems viewing/editing the following types of elements: any_object, CDATA, derived and recursive.
• For large SOAP envelopes, Record and Replay snapshots are disabled.
• TheImport SOAPfeature is not supported for envelopes containing a single element larger than 500KB.
• The recording of requests with attachments or security is not supported.
• For Axis toolkit, Web service calls that include both attachments and security are not supported.
• For .NET toolkit, SOAP version 1.2 is not supported for asynchronous calls.
• You can enter text strings up to 10 KB to encode to base 64. If your string is larger, use theGet from fileoption.
• For Axis toolkit, to use base64Binary encoding in scripts created before version 9.10, you must update your WSDL.
• VuGen supports Web Service messages over JMS message Queue, but does not support JMS Topics.
• JMS Bindings Extensions are not supported.
• All services in your script. should have the same security scenario. This can be configured via the Protocols and Security tab.
• Asynchronous Web Service calls and custom user handlers are not supported for WCF.
• The IsNonceIncluded and TimestampFormat properties ofweb_service_set_securityare only supported in Script. view-not in Tree view. LoadRunner cannot replay scripts containing thesoa_xml_validatefunction.

Note: For more detailed Web Services limitations, refer to the HP Service Test readme.51Testing软件测试网"B H4tO�O

Controller

Secure Channels

• You cannot use the Host Security Manager utility to update security settings on UNIX load generators that use rsh (remote shell) to connect to the Controller.
• You cannot use the Host Security Manager utility to change the security mode of the load generator located over a firewall from off to on.
• When the load generator is located over a firewall, if the load generator and Controller have different security modes, communication cannot be established.
• If the Controller machine is using secure channel communication, the MI Listener should not be installed on the same machine as the Controller.
• If the Controller machine is using secure channel communication, it will not be able to connect to an HP-UX load generator.

GUI Vusers

• LoadRunner supports GUI Vuser scripts created using HP QuickTest. GUI Vuser scripts created in WinRunner are no longer supported.
• Windows Load Generator machines can only run one GUI Vuser at a time. To run multiple GUI Vusers in a load test, you need to open a terminal server session for each GUI Vuser. For more information, see theHP LoadRunner Controller User Guide.

SiteScope

• If you are configuring the SiteScope System Resources Graph (System Resources Graphs > SiteScope), you cannot specify a specific SiteScope user account. LoadRunner uses the default SiteScope Administrator user.
• For Sitescope 9.51 Users:If you want to configure SiteScope monitoring with a SiteScope account other than the default SiteScope Administrator account, you need to explicitly assign a group with monitors to that account in SiteScope.

Analysis

• Analysis currently supports Microsoft SQL Server versions 2005 and up.
• If you are using Microsoft SQL Server 2000, you need to either migrate Analysis data or upgrade the server to 2005. The following two tasks describe how to perform. the migrating and upgrading procedures:

To migrate old Analysis data to a SQL 2005 server:

fj P7p3A

---

e)H
a0

1. From the SQL Server Management Studio, using Object Explorer, connect to an instance of SQL Server Database Engine.
2. Expand Databases, right-click Analysis database, selectTasks\Copy Database.
3. Follow the instructions in the wizard.

To upgrade SQL 2000 to SQL 2005:51Testing软件测试网8KS5b)y-v(s

1. Backup Analysis database on the SQL 2000 (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc966495.aspx)
2. Uninstall SQL 2000.
3. Install SQL 2005.
4. Restore Analysis data from backup. (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms177429(SQL.90).aspx)

• If you are using Microsoft SQL Server 2005 to store Analysis data and you apply a global filter on the Analysis graphs, you may receive errors due to a Microsoft limitation. If you receive an error, try and apply the global filter again.
• If you are using your own policy in an MS SQL server, you may need to add your own account to the Analysis database template (in the<LR Installation>\bin\datfolder).
• When exporting Analysis reports to MS Word, take into account that the content load may affect the table format within the document.
• The following Analysis default settings have been modified:Include Think Timeis disabled andGenerate complete data onlyis enabled.
• There is a limitation with MS Access and SQL queries when filtering a large number of transactions (greater than 100).
• Even after running the <Language> User Interface Pack, the Analysis UI data generated from the sample session (in the<LR Installation>\tutorialfolder) will display in English. Filtering on the graphs will fail.Workaround:Re-generate the graphs and then the corresponding language from the <Language> User Interface Pack will display and filtering will work.

LoadRunner Integration with HP Service Test

• To use a Demo or Commuter type license in LoadRunner with Service Test, runsntinit.exefrom the product installation'sbinfolder after the installation.
• To use a Commuter type license in LoadRunner with Service Test, in the WCommute utility, you must choose the entryFeature "Service Test", version 9.0—not a later version.

For more information about Service Test licenses, refer to theHP Service Test Installation Guide.51Testing软件测试网*f&i G T6xVjX

WAN Emulation

• There is no backward compatibility between the current LoadRunner/WAN Emulation integration and any previous integrations.
• The integrated 3rd party software may not comply with accepted Internationalization (I18N) conventions.
• Selecting either Use bandwidth, or Use custom bandwidth in the Network: Speed Simulation node in the Run Time Settings, may interfere with the WAN Emulation settings and could lead to unexpected behavior.
• WAN Emulation is disabled if the host used as the Load Generator is also used as the Controller.
• WAN Emulation is not supported if the load generator is running on a UNIX platform.

Windows Vista

• To run LoadRunner on Windows Vista,User Account Control (UAC)must be enabled for users withUserprivileges. For users withAdministratorprivileges, UAC can be enabled or disabled.
• Running the Windows Aero user interface on Vista machines, may slow down VuGen UI performance.
• On Vista machines, icons may not appear correctly in some dialog boxes.
• If LoadRunner is installed on a machine running Vista, LoadRunner cannot be integrated with WinRunner.
• On Vista machines, replay for LDAP scripts recorded over SSL is not supported.
• If you want to connect to HP Quality Center from a LoadRunner machine running Vista and the Quality Center client is not installed on your machine, you need to have Administrator privileges on the Vista machine.
• Replaying a VB Vuser on a load generator machine with Windows Vista requires administrator privileges.
• When running a LoadRunner Agent on a Load Generator machine running Vista, it is recommended that you restart your machine after installing LoadRunner, before running Vusers.
• When running the LoadRunner Agent service on a Vista machine, the Agent Configuration will not restart the agent service if it is already running. To manually restart the Agent service, ChooseStart > Administrative Tools > Services. Select the LoadRunner Agent service and chooseStopfrom the right-click menu. Restart it by selecting the LoadRunner Agent service and choosingStartfrom the right-click menu.
• On Vista machines, when recording with MS Exchange (MAPI) protocol, theread_next_mailandmapi_read_next_mail_exfunctions work only once per script, resulting in reading only the first message in the mail box.
• On Vista machines with UAC enabled, FTP sessions cannot be recorded on Internet Explorer.

Workaround:Change the following Internet Explorer options:

k‑\%Kr _j

---

\0

• Disable Protected Mode by clearing theEnable Protected Modecheck box underTools > Internet Options > Security.
• Check theEvery time I visit the webpageoption underTools > Internet Options > General > Browse history > Settings.

Multilingual Support

• Language support.LoadRunner only supports English and the native language of the machine's operating system. For example, if you are using Japanese Windows XP, you can work with LoadRunner in Japanese and in English.
• Installation path.The path in which installation files for LoadRunner are located, and the path in which LoadRunner is installed, can contain only English characters.
• .NET Framework 3.5 failure.Installing LoadRunner on a localized machine may result in a failure in the .NET Framework 3.5 installation process, and you will be asked to terminate the installation. This happens because the .NET 3.5 Framework installation attempts to download the Framework Language Pack but fails.

Workaround:Terminate the LoadRunner installation according to the Installation wizard's instructions and invoke the LoadRunner installation again.

@%c
E
P­B\,U7N y0

• Japanese characters in Web (HTTP/HTML) scripts.If you set the advanced recording option to specify the encoding of an application, and the application uses different character encoding for different pages, then the recording log or script. may display invalid Japanese characters. This does not cause any errors in the script. replay.
• Non-breaking spaces in Web protocols for Far Eastern languages.A non-breaking space (&nbsp; &#160; &#xA0; `\xA0', etc.) cannot be represented in some Far Eastern locale character sets (in which it is considered a lead byte). Instead, non-breaking spaces are converted to regular spaces (` `, `\x20', etc.), both during script. code generation and replay. This may cause replay problems, such as mismatches in length due to eliminating multiple regular spaces. To work around this issue, either:
• Remove/add space(s) from/to the script. so the comparison succeeds.
• Specify regular expressions to avoid the issue.
• Tutorial scripts.After the Language Pack installation, all sessions and scripts in\HP\LoadRunner\tutorialare still in English.
• Standalone installations.The installation interface of the VuGen and Analysis standalone are in English and not localized.
• Flex AMF call properties.Multibyte symbols in Flex AMF call properties will be corrupted in the script. text view.

[chaitanya bhatt]

I too kinda managed to get a sneak peak of LR 11. I must say, the most promising among all the new features is Ajax TruClient protocol. HP claims to have gotten 6 patents for this technology.  The concept of embedding a part of vugen on a browser and using the browser's engine to record a script is amazing. HP also claims that the foot print of this new protocol is much, much smaller than C&S protocols.
Of all the recent releases of LR, I think LR 11 would stand out for being innovation at its best.
Can't wait till December to get my hands on it :P

-Chaitanya M Bhatt
http://www.performancecompetence.com

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google "LoadRunner" group.
To post to this group, send email to LR-Loa...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
LR-LoadRunne...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/LR-LoadRunner?hl=en

[vjp...@gmail.com]

Why december?

Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

---

From: chaitanya bhatt <bhatt.c...@gmail.com>

Sender: lr-loa...@googlegroups.com

Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 22:21:28 +0530

To: <lr-loa...@googlegroups.com>

ReplyTo: lr-loa...@googlegroups.com

Subject: Re: Loadrunner 11.0

"S
p_;\ v#|O�c D

[chaitanya bhatt]

@VJP: That's when my client will be ready for it :)

-Chaitanya

[James Pulley]

Big highlights on my book:

·         64 Bit load generation.   Uncap that 4Gb limit!    New load generator bottlenecks to find in the disk, cpu and network subsystems.

·         Silverlight

·         Ajax TruClient

·         Java over HTTP

·         New templating model for Anlaysis, more output options but alas still no LaTeX support

·         A statement whose weight knows no measure,  “Running Vusers on virtual machines may adversely affect performance due to the sharing of physical resources.”

 

Items covered in this note which cause lots of questions on this and other forums

·         No Notes protocol ;)

·         No VUGEN recording on 64 bit platforms

·         The priceless statement on virtualization above

 

Curiosities

·         No mention of Itanium on HPUX, only PA-RISC

·         RHEL only on the LINUX front.  No Debian derivatives

·         Only MSACCESS/SQL Server on the backend for Analysis.   No GNU or other commercial options (ORACLE, DB2, MYSQL,…)

·         Quite the ‘interesting’ mix of pre-requisite software.   A list which deserves closer examination.

 

Sad Items

·         WinRunner no longer supported as a GUI Virtual User:  QTP only.  (so long old friend….)

 

James Pulley, http://www.loadrunnerbythehour.com/PricingMatrix

 

From: lr-loa...@googlegroups.com [mailto:lr-loa...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Rajesh Ananthaiah
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 11:58 AM
To: lr-loadrunner
Subject: Loadrunner 11.0

 

What's New

….

[Floris Kraak]

On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 6:51 PM, chaitanya bhatt <bhatt.c...@gmail.com> wrote:

HP claims to have gotten 6 patents for this technology. 

Sorry for going off-topic - but seriously: Boo for patents. The entire concept is antiquated nonsense that only feeds lawyers, instead of fostering innovation.

I am very serious. Patents are a remnant of the time that Kings handed out monopolies nilly willy. It has no place in our modern time. It failed to work for the steam engine, it didn't work for electricity, it didn't work for the telephone, and it certainly without a doubt fails to achieve its stated objective for innovation when it comes to software.

HP getting 6 patents on this appeals me about as much as HP acquiring 6 nuclear warheads. It makes absolutely no sense for a non-military organisation to have devices like that. And I am supposed to cheer?

The concept of embedding a part of vugen on a browser and using the browser's engine to record a script is amazing. HP also claims that the foot print of this new protocol is much, much smaller than C&S protocols.
Of all the recent releases of LR, I think LR 11 would stand out for being innovation at its best.
Can't wait till December to get my hands on it :P

Well, speaking just for myself: I'd be very happy if LR 11 contained no new features, but only a pile of bugfixes (and a bit of usability work here and there) instead. It certainly needs it.


Regards,
Floris
---

'Apple says "you can't distribute this iPhone app in any form or through any means unless we explicitly allow you to do so, and you can't allow others to disobey this rule".
GPL says: "you can distribute this iPhone app in any forms and through any means you want, and you can't prevent others to do so".
Do I sense a subtle opposition?'
   --- Gabriel Morin

[Rupesh Garg]

Hello All:

Can you tell me if the Silverlight protocol will be able to capture the client side rendering data?

I know that we had recorded some time back, but it was used to record only web services.

 

Rupesh Garg, PMP | Associate Technical Services Manager | AppLabs
Plot # 83 & 84, Road # 2, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad - 500 034
Office:  +91 40 23558000  | Mobile:  +91 9160002744  | Fax: +91 40 23116660
rupes...@applabs.com | AppLabs.com

[chaitanya bhatt]

>Floris Kraak <rand...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Sorry for going off-topic - but seriously: Boo for patents. The entire concept is antiquated >nonsense that only feeds lawyers, instead of fostering innovation.

 

@Floris:  I think the concept of Patent -- fosters innovation more than it may actually hinder. But I admit that, the rationale behind patenting an intellectual property is paradoxical in many ways.

 

By and large most innovations comes out of research which is fueled by corporate money.  Typically, more money goes into developing a concept than in implementing a method to commercialize it. A company which is into both R & D and manufacturing may have to price their products much, much higher than products of another competing company which just mooches on someone elses idea to manufacture products. In such a juncture the only way the inventor can get his ROI is by becoming a license holder of his idea, and accumulate capital by leasing or selling licenses to people/company who want to implement it. Facts show that even Graham Bell had couple of patents under his belt and even James Watt was a staunch believer of intellectual property rights.

 

We have all seen giants like Sun Microsystem, MySQL AB, Symbian Ltd, NetScape etc. biting the dust in spite of experiencing massive success, and it ain't hard to figure out the reason as to what could have caused the problem.

 

I think, the right way to use a patent is by withholding a patent rights until the target ROI is met and then relinquish it to all partisans to enable further research, than to retain the patent rights till the expiry date(which I think is about 20 years!).

 

 Anyway, coming back to LoadRunner 11 and its high points, I concur that the customer community would be definitely more glad to see a defect free LoadRunner version than to see a version with fancy new features, but still harbouring those good old notorious bugs. 

 

-Chaitanya M Bhatt

http://www.performancecompetence.com

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Venkat P]

Am I the only one who cant seem to locate where exactly the Ajax TruClient Feature/Protocol is?  (Apart from that movie trailer upfront on VuGen)

Checking up on documentation shows "Documentation will be available on Tru Client Update"...  

So at present TruClient seems to be only on paper, unless I forgot to install some other component (I did go with the default installation settings)

Ditto with the DFE, while I can see the various options to enable it etc etc, I havent come across on where one can see this XML.

I did like the new http snapshot previews in the VuGen Tree view. more intuitive than the previous version.

-Venkat

--

[Madan]

TruClient is available with LR11 just like any other protocol. All the
customers who wants to use TruClient must install a Critical patch on
top of LR11.

What is your question about DFE? It is available with LR11.

-Madan

On Oct 2, 6:03 pm, Venkat P <vjpj...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Am I the only one who cant seem to locate where exactly the Ajax TruClient
> Feature/Protocol is?  (Apart from that movie trailer upfront on VuGen)
>
> Checking up on documentation shows "Documentation will be available on Tru
> Client Update"...
>
> So at present TruClient seems to be only on paper, unless I forgot to
> install some other component (I did go with the default installation
> settings)
>
> Ditto with the DFE, while I can see the various options to enable it etc
> etc, I havent come across on where one can see this XML.
>
> I did like the new http snapshot previews in the VuGen Tree view. more
> intuitive than the previous version.
>
> -Venkat
>
> On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 1:37 PM, James Pulley <
>

> > *From:* lr-loa...@googlegroups.com [mailto:
> > lr-loa...@googlegroups.com] *On Behalf Of *Rajesh Ananthaiah
> > *Sent:* Thursday, September 30, 2010 11:58 AM
> > *To:* lr-loadrunner
> > *Subject:* Loadrunner 11.0

>
> > What's New ….
>
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> > "LoadRunner" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to LR-Loa...@googlegroups.com
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

> > LR-LoadRunne...@googlegroups.com<LR-LoadRunner%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>

[Venkat P]

Figures, I didnt know about this extra patch.  will check the hp site.

-Venkat

[Floris Kraak]

On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 11:53 AM, chaitanya bhatt <bhatt.c...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Floris Kraak <rand...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Sorry for going off-topic - but seriously: Boo for patents. The entire concept is antiquated >nonsense that only feeds lawyers, instead of fostering innovation.

 

@Floris:  I think the concept of Patent -- fosters innovation more than it may actually hinder. But I admit that, the rationale behind patenting an intellectual property is paradoxical in many ways.

The concept on paper might work. In practice, it does not. This is not a theoretical argument - I've read academic papers researching the effectiveness of this thing over the last 150 years using historical data. It has not achieved it's stated objective - and it never will.
 
 

By and large most innovations comes out of research which is fueled by corporate money.  

Most innovation seems to happen in small corporations. At most 3-4 people with an idea, sometimes based on academic research - which is typically funded using governmental funds.

Typically, more money goes into developing a concept than in implementing a method to commercialize it. A company which is into both R & D and manufacturing may have to price their products much, much higher than products of another competing company which just mooches on someone elses idea to manufacture products.

Ironically, HP is one of best example of why that doesn't float. HP axed their R&D for short term gains - and got exactly what they paid for: A research deficit. They are being outcompeted by other companies that continued investing in R&D while they did not.

Note that patents have nothing to do with this. The size of a companies patent portfolio tells us nothing about their innovation level because patents are the product of lawyers, not engineers.

 

In such a juncture the only way the inventor can get his ROI is by becoming a license holder of his idea, and accumulate capital by leasing or selling licenses to people/company who want to implement it. Facts show that even Graham Bell had couple of patents under his belt and even James Watt was a staunch believer of intellectual property rights.

Funny that you bring that up. That Graham Bell had patents does not mean that those patents helped society. There was considerable dispute over his patents - and there is a real question to me whether his patents helped society at all.

However, I am by far the best person to go into historical detail here.

Let me direct you to this paper instead:
http://levine.sscnet.ucla.edu/papers/anew.all.pdf

Which states on page 27:

"In a nutshell, the telegraph, the telephone and the television are clear cases of simultaneous invention and cumulative discovery
by a number of more or less disconnected inventors. In all three cases one of the inventors participating in the cumulative effort – generally the one with the smallest contribution but the best connections and the most cunning instinct for the monopoly game – got the patent, the glory, and the monopoly profits. Thanks to the patent system, the other innovators were left out in the cold, without economic reward, without the right to make copies of their own invention, without the right to compete in the market, and without any fame."

As for the other name you mention - that paper opens with the story of James Watt and the steam engine - and lays out exactly why patents failed in their purpose in that particular case.
It isn't pretty.

 

 

We have all seen giants like Sun Microsystem, MySQL AB, Symbian Ltd, NetScape etc. biting the dust in spite of experiencing massive success, and it ain't hard to figure out the reason as to what could have caused the problem.

 

I do not see what patents have to do with any of these cases.

MySQL was bought. Oracle seems pretty happy with having them. That's hardly "biting the dust".

Sun did not die because of patents, they died because their product failed in the market.
Symbian deserves to die a painful death because that OS fails heavily on a technical level, on top of the failure of not being either a  fully FOSS system or a defacto monopoly.

Netscape died because Microsoft axe murdered them using their monopoly power. (Convicted, so don't say this isn't true.)
Patents couldn't have saved them. Microsoft didn't have any either, and killed them anyway.

 

I think, the right way to use a patent is by withholding a patent rights until the target ROI is met and then relinquish it to all partisans to enable further research, than to retain the patent rights till the expiry date(which I think is about 20 years!).

Which is stupid from a business perspective. From a business perpective you want to milk your patent, and focus on that.
The real effect of which is that companies start hanging back and doing exactly that - instead of innovating.
 

 

 Anyway, coming back to LoadRunner 11 and its high points, I concur that the customer community would be definitely more glad to see a defect free LoadRunner version than to see a version with fancy new features, but still harbouring those good old notorious bugs. 

 

Defect free is impossible. "Without bugs that turn easy things that should take 5 minutes into multiple-hour tests of patience" would be good enough for me ;-)

 

Regards,
Floris
---

[James Pulley]

As they say, it is a free market. If you don't like patents, then
don't purchase or use any products so encumbered. You are free to
choose.

As someone who has a patent in process (wholly developed and financed by
myself, not government money or some large R&D budget for a company) , I
take the opposite view. I look at this as a franchise for providing
something unique and beneficial for a limited period of time. This term
is not forever. You also have a critical incentive to continue the
innovation to protect your initial investment and value recognized by
the patent. It's one of the few market incentives left where you have
many severe market barriers.

[Floris Kraak]

On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 4:00 AM, James Pulley <loadrunn...@jamespulley.com> wrote:

As they say, it is a free market.   If you don't like patents, then
don't purchase or use any products so encumbered.  You are free to
choose.

That's another fallacy. Patents read on everything. Especially in the software world. There is no escaping it, because patents exist patenting the most ridiculous things. One-click shopping. Fire. The wheel. Every part of every webpage has somebody claiming patents on them.
(Example: http://webshop.ffii.org/)

There is no choice. Especially in software.

 

As someone who has a patent in process (wholly developed and financed by
myself, not government money or some large R&D budget for a company) , I
take the opposite view.   I look at this as a franchise for providing
something unique and beneficial for a limited period of time.  This term
is not forever.

Hard question time, then:

Are you practicing this patent?
Does the patent fully disclose something truly new and innovative?
Can other people (Testers, engineers - I don't care about lawyers) read this patent and learn how to do this new and innovative thing?
- Or are there better places to read up on this?
- Will people attempting to read this not risk treble damages if they try?
Now that you have developed this patent, do you feel incentivised to go on and do more new and innovative things? Or would you have done that *anyway*, regardless of the patent?
How much time and money are you spending developing, licensing, and enforcing this patent that you might otherwise have spended on innovation?

 You also have a critical incentive to continue the
innovation to protect your initial investment and value recognized by
the patent.   It's one of the few market incentives left where you have
many severe market barriers.

The paper disagrees.

And even if you are right and your patent does actually stimulate innovation in your particular case, consider this:

The vast majority of patents are either held by
- Big corporations
- Non-Practicing Entities (aka Patent Trolls)

The big corporations basically use them to surpress competition. If you're not capable of resisting the arms race against them (and let's face it, your one patent won't be enough when a big corporation like HP or IBM holds hundreds, if not thousands) they can just wield them like a club and patent you out of the market. Regardless of your innovation level.
(Granted though - they tend to be more likely to just buy you up..)

And the non-practicing entities .. well, they're just using patents as a weapon of extortion. They do not innovate, by definition.

Regards,
Floris
---

[James Pulley]

Is it something new and innovative? Yes. If not I would not be able to
obtain a patent on it.

Would others be able to read the patent and figure out how to implement
the solution? By definition patents in the USA have to be very clear
and precise on both the construction and use. The answer is yes. My
patent does involve a novel set of algorithms. The patent is in
process and will be enforceable in the USA but software patents are
unenforceable elsewhere in many areas of the world.

Once the patent is in place I do expect to market the algorithms to
appropriate hardware manufacturers for licensing in the USA. And yes,
I do expect to spend some amount of time going after overseas
corporations that may decide to co-opt my work where such corporations
have a USA market presence. If I choose not to enforce my rights then
over time I will lose the ability to enforce my patent.

As to your question on market incentives. At least in my case the
patent did provide a broad market incentive to carry forward with the
patent process. Having an exclusive franchise for a period of time is
a potentially lucrative item for my family. Ideally this should allow
me to travel less, spend more time with my family, with that income
offsetting what would have been made in other areas.

> --

[Floris Kraak]

On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 1:29 PM, James Pulley <loadrunn...@jamespulley.com> wrote:

Is it something new and innovative?  Yes.  If not I would not be able to
obtain a patent on it.

That is demonstrably false. There are plenty of patents on things that are neither. Many of them get invalidated later, in lawsuits costing the defense a few million dollars. On average.

See also: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20101001012258574

From a google filing less than a week old:
"Abusive patent suits based on invalid patents have powerful coercive effects and are a scourge of modern business."

 

Would others be able to read the patent and figure out how to implement
the solution?  By definition patents in the USA have to be very clear
and precise on both the construction and use.   The answer is yes.  

Sorry but I have to laugh here. The answer is NO. I've tried to read one or two. They are made by lawyers, for lawyers. They are often not intended to describe an invention - they are intended to cover as many possible uses of whatever it is they claim as possible in as broad (and therefore vague!) terms as possible.

Maybe your patent is an exception to this, but in the patents I've seen this is clearly not the case.

Besides, reading a patent opens you up to claims of willful infringement and therefore treble damages..

 

My patent does involve a novel set of algorithms.  

Algorithms are math. Math, by law, is not patentable. Nor should it.
That the patent office passes them and that the courts have trouble understanding that software = algorithms = math is a different subject altogether ;-)
(Something that is slowly changing, it seems. The Supreme Court came a hair's breath (1 vote) from invalidating broad classes of patents a few weeks ago in the Bilkski decision.. they left substantial questions undecided, though)

 

The patent is in process and will be enforceable in the USA but software patents are
unenforceable elsewhere in many areas of the world.

Once the patent is in place I do expect to market the algorithms to
appropriate hardware manufacturers for licensing in the USA.  

So it's a hardware patent then?


 

And yes,
I do expect to spend some amount of time going after overseas
corporations that may decide to co-opt my work where such corporations
have a USA market presence.   If I choose not to enforce my rights then
over time I will lose the ability to enforce my patent.
 

That's false, I believe. Trademarks have this "defend it or lose it" property. Patents do not. There have been cases of submarine patents where a company intentionally did not enforce a patent in order to get a substantial userbase - a userbase they then sued later ..

 

As to your question on market incentives.  At least in my case the
patent did provide a broad market incentive to carry forward with the
patent process.   Having an exclusive franchise for a period of time is
a potentially lucrative item for my family.  Ideally this should allow
me to travel less, spend more time with my family, with that income
offsetting what would have been made in other areas.

Let me break that down:

- Incentive to carry on with the patent process.
- Lucrative for your family.
- Offsetting what would have been made in other areas.

So: Your patent gives you financial reward for spending time on the patent process. The reward offsets income you could have made otherwise.
Nice, but note the: "otherwise." You're spending time and money on something that is not innovating itself, but rather attempting to capitalize on your government granted monopoly. You intend to use the resulting resources to "spend time with the family". Put crudely, it enables you to work less. Work you would have to apply "in other ares" then - innovation, for instance?

This is what happened to the steam engine. Invent, patent, hang back and reap the rewards. Forget about further innovation, and your competition can't innovate either because the basic idea they need to continue their innovation is precluded from use by a government monopoly.

I don't begrudge you for this, don't get me wrong. At least you are a small company that by all appearances at least means well and innovates itself. But it does not show that your patent is incentivising you to innovate - it shows that it incentivises you to STOP innovation.


Regards,
Floris
---

[James Pulley]

“There are plenty of patents on things that are neither.”

 

Yep, and that in the end is why these patents get invalidated in the end.   They go against the word and the spirit of the law.  

 

"Abusive patent suits based on invalid patents have powerful coercive effects and are a scourge of modern business."   A consider this a great case for tort reform and inclusion of ‘Loser Pays.”   Why spend millions to defend a knowingly weak patent when it may backfire on you by having to pay the losers legal bills?

 

As to the clear and concise.  I filed my patent myself.  No patent attorney to do the patent searches for me.   I did all the legwork at a local patent repository and used examples from the software industry on the construction of patents.  And yes, I did note broad areas of usefulness, because there were broad areas in which it would be genuinely useful.

 

More time with family does not necessarily mean that innovation will cease.   In my case the inspiration for my patent came while at a family gathering, off work hours.    Sometimes the mind needs a break from constant stress to allow larger patterns of behavior to be distilled which results in an innovative solution:   At least in my case my most innovative leaps come during such times.

 

My ideas don’t preclude implementation as a software only solution, but their most effective deployment would be in network hardware. 

 

Granted, as an individual going through the patent process I am likely the exception in your model rather than the norm of corporate patent processes.

--

[Floris Kraak]

On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 3:30 PM, James Pulley <loadrunn...@jamespulley.com> wrote:

“There are plenty of patents on things that are neither.”

 

Yep, and that in the end is why these patents get invalidated in the end.   They go against the word and the spirit of the law.  

Not enough of them end up that way, sadly. The standard for invalidation apparently is "clear and convincing evidence". A standard which is a very high bar to cross and more often than not means that invalidation does not happen even though it is clear from the evidence that invalidation *should* happen.


The groklaw article I linked to earlier goes into that very topic. The best way to put it is to quote an amicus brief submitted by a group of law professors in that very same case ( http://www.groklaw.net/pdf2/i4iProfsAmicus.pdf )

"But the initial process of patent review today is, unavoidably, often an inaccurate signal. Put bluntly, PTO review is not always reliable and is unlikely to become so.

Before the creation of the Federal Circuit in 1982, all regional circuits recognized the limitations of evaluation by the PTO in one important situation: where the PTO had not had an opportunity to review the evidence in question at all. But for nearly thirty years, the Federal Circuit has required proof of invalidity by clear and convincing evidence even when, as in this case, the evidence in question was never before the PTO."

That does not really get into the full depth of the problem, though. Invalidation is too hard, not just because it fails to work in many cases where it should: It also fails to happen because the mere threat of a lawsuit is often enough to make parties settle, even when the patent(s) in question are clearly bogus.

The reason why is simple: Lawsuits cost too much. Would you be willing to spend upwards of a million dollars to defend against a patent lawsuit? With a high risk of failing to boot? Or would you settle? How about having to spend 10 times that for 10 patents?

 

 

"Abusive patent suits based on invalid patents have powerful coercive effects and are a scourge of modern business."   A consider this a great case for tort reform and inclusion of ‘Loser Pays.”   Why spend millions to defend a knowingly weak patent when it may backfire on you by having to pay the losers legal bills?

 

Because more often than not, your opponent will not take the risk and just settle for a neat sum.
It's a very good shakedown scheme, really.

 

As to the clear and concise.  I filed my patent myself.  No patent attorney to do the patent searches for me.   I did all the legwork at a local patent repository and used examples from the software industry on the construction of patents.  And yes, I did note broad areas of usefulness, because there were broad areas in which it would be genuinely useful.

Well. Good for you.
I'm still not inclined to go find it and read it. Just in case it's something I came up with myself independently. (Doubt it, though.)

 

 

More time with family does not necessarily mean that innovation will cease.   In my case the inspiration for my patent came while at a family gathering, off work hours.    Sometimes the mind needs a break from constant stress to allow larger patterns of behavior to be distilled which results in an innovative solution:   At least in my case my most innovative leaps come during such times.

 

My ideas don’t preclude implementation as a software only solution, but their most effective deployment would be in network hardware. 

 

Granted, as an individual going through the patent process I am likely the exception in your model rather than the norm of corporate patent processes.

That's one thing.

The other is that in my view you getting the patent and you innovating are two things. The correlation is not a straight line. Your idea came on it's own. That you could get a patent on it is not what caused the idea to come to the fore, was it? And now that you have this patent, I doubt that it incentivises you to innovate further. I'm not saying that you won't innovate anymore, mind - I'm just saying that the patent is not what is driving you to do that in the first place.
It's nice that you have some bonus income, undoubtedly: But the stated purpose of patents is fostering innovation - and that just is not what it is doing.


Anyway, I've drifted off-topic for long enough. Back to some actual loadrunner discussion ;-)


Regards,
Floris
---

[Floris Kraak]

On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 4:31 PM, Floris Kraak <rand...@gmail.com> wrote:

Anyway, I've drifted off-topic for long enough. Back to some actual loadrunner discussion ;-)

As an aside, the Wall Street Journal has a pretty good article up covering a related subject: The Origins of Good Ideas.

The most relevant bit, discussing various forms of IP:

"The premise that innovation prospers when ideas can serendipitously connect and recombine with other ideas may seem logical enough, but the strange fact is that a great deal of the past two centuries of legal and folk wisdom about innovation has pursued the exact opposite argument, building walls between ideas. Ironically, those walls have been erected with the explicit aim of encouraging innovation."

And:

"The problem with these closed environments is that they make it more difficult to explore the adjacent possible, because they reduce the overall network of minds that can potentially engage with a problem, and they reduce the unplanned collisions between ideas originating in different fields."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703989304575503730101860838.html

[chaitanya bhatt]

@Floris: So, what is the solution that you want to propose? If there is no central authority to control the rights belonging to an individuals innovation, then in your model is there a way we can avoid/stop plagiarism of intellectual properties?

-Chaitanya M Bhatt

http://www.performancecompetence.com

 

[Floris Kraak]

On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 11:40 AM, chaitanya bhatt <bhatt.c...@gmail.com> wrote:

@Floris: So, what is the solution that you want to propose? If there is no central authority to control the rights belonging to an individuals innovation, then in your model is there a way we can avoid/stop plagiarism of intellectual properties?

Why on earth do we need one?

Intellectual properties? What is that, exactly? There is no such thing. Thoughts are not property. Ideas are not property. Speech is not property.

"If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of everyone, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it. Its peculiar character, too, is that no one possesses the less, because every other possesses the whole of it. He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. That ideas should freely spread from one to another over the globe, for the moral and mutual instruction of man, and improvement of his condition, seems to have been peculiarly and benevolently designed by nature, when she made them, like fire, expansible over all space, without lessening their density in any point, and like the air in which we breathe, move, and have our physical being, incapable of confinement or exclusive appropriation. Inventions then cannot, in nature, be a subject of property."

— Thomas Jefferson

"Plagiarism" - copying and modification of ideas, stories, and such - is a thing of all times. Walt Disney Studios "plagiarized" the Grimm Brothers. Was that a bad thing? Shakespeare's works are largely based on other works, often made by other playwrights of his time. If todays copyright and "IP" regime had been around he would likely not have been able to produce the fantastics things that he wrote.

The flowering Open Source movement is another example that shows why these artificial restrictions - both patents and copyright - are impediments to progress, not catalysts. We do not need "centralized authority",  "controlled rights", or anything of the sort: What we need, in fact, is more "plagiarism".


Regards,
Floris
---