I am currently facing challenges while trying to run a Machine Edition Runtime (.mer) on a server. Despite activating Factorytalk View SE, which my distributor insisted was the correct version, Rockwell has pointed out that the issues may be due to my serial number being registered to the distributor. Strangely, my Studio license has been functioning smoothly without any issues. I suspect that the distributor may have provided the wrong version, as indicated by the error message I have encountered. I have explored various options within the Studio software to resolve the issue, but to no avail. The pressure is on as I have a deadline to meet and key stakeholders, including the CEO and contractor, are expecting results. Could it be a case of the distributor delaying in order to make a second sale or am I missing something obvious? Additionally, I have included a direct link to the image to provide more context: https://www.dropbox.com/s/q415mn9zj8hqwj1/liscence.png
The MER file is specifically designed for FT View ME, rather than FT View SE. To operate this file on a PC, a valid FT View ME Station license is required. The license is based on the number of displays within the project, with the minimum starting at 15 displays. The size of the license needed will be determined by the total number of displays in use.
Your image reveals everything. You possess a license for FT View SE Station, not ME, so that option is not viable. ME is typically utilized on a PC rather than a server. Compatibility hinges on the ME version, server OS version, and whether it is 32 or 64 bit. If I were in your shoes and had an existing ME project, I would recommend converting it to SE and utilizing the SE station license at your disposal. Why are you interested in running ME on a server? It appears to be excessive.
The customer requires the ability to oversee his system, and admittedly, I only have around two weeks of familiarity with this particular software and system. You mentioned converting my project to SE - what option have I overlooked? Upon further research, I have come across discussions about manually editing files with Notepad (although this method is not ideal, especially for extensive code editing).
The 3 packages each offer a variety of distinctive features and customization options. Share your specific needs with us, and we can provide tailored guidance to meet your exact requirements more effectively.
He desires the ability to access information remotely, store it on a centralized system, view real-time updates on a monitor in the office, and control calibration and level values. After reading your suggestion to convert his project, he realized he may have the wrong edition of the studio software. It seems that the site edition is the ideal solution for his needs.
I understand your frustration and the pressure you're under. Looking at your image and from your description, it sounds more like a licensing issue rather than the distributor trying to make a second sale. Have you tried contacting Rockwell's support directly to discuss this? They might be able to clarify if the serial number is indeed registered to the distributor or if there might be an issue with the activation of your Factorytalk View SE. Additionally, have you cross-checked the version you have against the requirements of the .mer file? Sometimes, even a minor mismatch can cause problems. While your Studio license is working perfectly, that doesn't necessarily mean your Factorytalk will behave the same, as different products have different licenses and serial numbers. Lastly, remember to keep your stakeholders updated about the issue and how you're actively seeking to solve it. Transparency can buy you a bit more time and understanding from their side.
Hey there! It sounds like you're in quite a pickle. With respect to .mer files, take note that they're created with ME (Machine Edition) and typically run on PanelView Plus terminals, not on a SE server. FactoryTalk View SE is more for.network distributed applications on a server. Thinking back to Rockwell's response, it might be that your current FactoryTalk View version doesn't match the version with which the .mer file was created. This can sometimes create hiccups. So, don't stress out on a possible second sale from the distributor just yet. Instead, try confirming the version compatibility first. If the issue persists, it might be helpful to have Rockwell run a license validation, especially given the serial number situation you mentioned. Hang in there and best of luck!
✅ Work Order Management
✅ Asset Tracking
✅ Preventive Maintenance
✅ Inspection Report
We have received your information. We will share Schedule Demo details on your Mail Id.
Answer: Factorytalk View SE and Machine Edition Runtime are different software versions with distinct licensing requirements. The issues you are experiencing may be related to incorrect version compatibility or licensing registration.
Answer: To resolve licensing issues, ensure that your serial number is correctly registered and linked to the appropriate software version. Contact Rockwell support for assistance in verifying your licensing information and resolving any registration discrepancies.
Answer: While uncommon, it is possible for distributors to provide incorrect software versions, which can result in licensing issues. It is important to double-check with the distributor and Rockwell to ensure that you have the correct software version and associated licenses.
Answer: When facing time-sensitive licensing errors, prioritize direct communication with Rockwell support to expedite the resolution process. Provide detailed information about the error message, software versions, and licensing registration to facilitate a quicker resolution.
Join hundreds of satisfied customers who have transformed their maintenance processes.
Sign up today and start optimizing your workflow.