The argument is that anyone still using TeamViewer deserves this, and anyone who isn’t isn’t actually impacted bym this change so it’s irrelevant.
That’s your argument, and I disagree with it. I’ve already shared why.
and anyone who isn’t isn’t actually impacted by this change so it’s irrelevant.
This is also wrong. Having the license revoked means the people who had one can’t use it at all whether they were using it or not. Let’s set aside that you shouldn’t advocate or endorse a company selling a product, shitting the bed, then revoking the product from those that already paid for it.
You’d be surprised, but there’s tons of small companies and organizations that rely solely on viewing software, some ancient version of Windows Server, and a remote toaster for administration still to this day. Those people are directly impacted by this.
I don’t think they deserve a license revocation because I don’t think any company should be able to take back a product that a user has purchased for no cited reason. Which is the case here.
Yes exactly and I may haved leaned on that a bit to make my point here. I worked at an MSP where 90% of their clients had the exact setup I mentioned, so workers had no choice but to run TeamViewer. The company would refuse any other recommendations specifically because it had already paid for a number of perpetual licenses and (at least at the time) free alternatives were limited. It was really awful even back then (~2015ish).
And for what it’s worth, I also agree that TeamViewer is an awful company and the software itself is awful, and of course if you can help it don’t fucking use it today lol.