Revit Trial Activation Error

[uluber]

Hi all,

I've been playing around with Revit 6.1 for a couple of weeks using the 60 day trial. This weekend, I installed Windows XP over Windows 2000, wiping out my trial version. I downloaded Revit again and installed it, but when I went to "register" the 60 day trial, I get an error message [9.1.4040] indicating that I need to re-activate the product. So, I get aggressive and reformat the partition and install Windows XP again... but the same problem! I don't see any way Revit could know I'd previously installed the product on the computer unless it's messing with the hardware or storing information on other partitions... and besides, I still had over a month left on my trial! Anybody else have a similar problem or have an idea of what's going on?

Thanks,
uluber

[mlgatzke]

The only thing I can think of is that the Revit License Server sees your IP address and MAC address and thinks you're already running a license on that machine and won't let you license another seat on the same computer. You should call (or email) Autodesk about this (revitsupport@autodesk.com).

[rhys]

Hi all,

don't see any way Revit could know I'd previously installed the product on the computer unless it's messing with the hardware or storing information on other partitions... and besides, I still had over a month left on my trial! Anybody else have a similar problem or have an idea of what's going on?

Thanks,
uluber
Thats exactly what it does - splatters information over the whole of your hard disk at a level unaffected by partitioning. Check out "Cdilla" in a web search.

[uluber]

I emailed revit support about the problem.

Here's their lame response:

We do not support or run diagnostics on trial versions. You'll have to
run in demo mode or install revit as a trial version on another
system.

Autodesk Revit Support


Since I have very standard hardware and re-installed Revit as the only application after re-installing XP for a third time (to avoid any possible software conflicts), the problem is obviously related to their licensing scheme which they obviously have no desire to fix.

Thanks again for the responses.