BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

In order to ensure automatic updates for commercial software

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 10
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 10:27 pm

In order to ensure automatic updates for commercial software

by itzmyzone911 » Fri Oct 03, 2014 8:23 pm
In order to ensure automatic updates for commercial softwares, firms using them are required to procure an original license for each copy of the software. Firms typically purchase multiple such 'shared' licenses such that the software is supported on a WAN (Wide Area Network) network and is available to any random user on a one-license-per-computer basis. Hence, when the total number of computers accessing the software at any point equals the number of licenses procured, then any further waiting user would not be able to access the software, unless existing active users log off their licenses, making them available on the network. However, despite the 'sharing' feature of these licenses, occasionally, waiting users using a single computer have been unable to access Pro-CAD, a commercial software, even after some active Pro-CAD users had logged off.

1.Which of the following, if true, would MOST help to resolve the apparent paradox presented in the argument?
2.Which of the following, if true, would LEAST help to resolve the apparent paradox presented in the argument?

A. Occasional instances of network breakdown are always known to give rise to software inaccessibility issues for waiting users even after some active users have logged off the network.

B. Most commercial softwares, such as Pro-CAD, are set to restore accessibility to waiting users only after a certain number of active users working on the software have logged off the network.

C. Some commercial softwares, such as Pro-CAD, are set to restore accessibility to waiting users in order of their waiting times only, one just logged in as a waiting user given the least priority to access the software once some active users have logged off.

D. Most high-end commercial softwares, including Pro-CAD, are set to restore accessibility to waiting users only after users have logged off a certain number of computers using active licenses.

E. Service teams later reported that many Pro-CAD licenses had actually become corrupt, thus reducing the total number of valid licenses available on the network

[spoiler]OA:1.D;2.E[/spoiler]
Last edited by itzmyzone911 on Wed Oct 08, 2014 11:34 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
User avatar
Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2014 10:01 am
Thanked: 2 times

by yangsho » Fri Oct 03, 2014 11:26 pm
For answer A, I was initially confused between option C and Option D. I chose option D because it talks about the missing link between 'lack of access by users on waiting list and logging off by active users' without indirectly attacking the network.

Can someone please explain if there is a better explanation?
Top
Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 10
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 10:27 pm

by itzmyzone911 » Sat Oct 04, 2014 2:55 am
Hey yangsho,

D is the only option that resolves the paradox completely. D essentially says that accessibility to waiting users is restorable subject to a condition that the number of active licenses that have been logged off reach a certain pre-defined minimum, a figure that has been 'set' by the software administrator team. For example, let this pre-defined number be 'set' to 10. Now, if only 5 active licenses have been logged off, then NONE of the waiting users will be able to access Pro-CAD. However, if 10 or more licenses have been logged off, then atleast one user (SOME) will definitely be able to access Pro-CAD.

C could help to resolve the paradox partially, but is not as all-encompassing as D is. Note that the stimulus casually says that 'waiting users are unable to access Pro-CAD'. This could be construed to mean that either ALL or SOME waiting users are unable to access Pro-CAD. We need an option that takes care of the generality presented by the stimulus by considering both these scenarios. Option C just arrives at a definite conclusion by stating that at most only SOME (NOT ALL, in a scenario when no. of waiting users is greater than that of licenses set free) waiting users would be left waiting, whereas option D, a much broader option accounts for the generality by saying that if a certain pre-defined threshold of 'free' licenses is reached then only at most SOME (in a similar scenario as highlighted previously) will be left waiting, other wise definitely ALL will be left waiting.
Also, note here, that option C actually states something, the logical outcome of which accords with common sense. Saying simply, C just implies that 'If the no. of waiting users occasionally has been greater than that of the licenses that were logged off, then SOME will logically anyways be left waiting.'..Quite simple, isn't it?. Indeed if so simple were the case, the author would actually never spend time in complaining about the inconvenience to those SOME waiting users by highlighting it as a paradox. More so, we are not really bothered about the waiting times actually to determine who got the license but whether none of them got even one. Since C does not go beyond to give any justification for a situation where ALL waiting users are kept waiting in spite of even one license set free, it does not hold much water to stand among the best contenders.

Did you have a look at option B? This is another trap..I would personally call this the second best option for the 1st question. If you look at the intricacy B presents, you would realise that B actually considers the paradox presented by the BOTH the scenarios as explained in the previous paragraph. What it doesn't do, however, is that it does not provide a unique solution to explain why ALL waiting users may be unable to access Pro-CAD in the given situation, enforcing another dilemma. On one hand, it can be conspicuously seen that until the pre-defined 'set' minimum of active users logged off hasn't reached, ALL waiting users will be kept waiting. On the other hand, however, it would require a slightly astute mind to observe that since a user can access as many computers with Pro-CAD (bear in mind the one-license-per-computer restriction specified in the stimulus)and if the number of active users using all the licenses itself is less than the pre-defined 'set' number of active users (a situation indeed possible), then even when all licenses are set free, ALL waiting users would be at bay...Analyse the highlighted situations and you will realise that we have an either/or scenario when ALL are made to wait.

A is another trap. It MAY help resolve the paradox sometimes but not always. Just because network breakdowns always result in software inccessibility, the latter need not always be a result of the former. ELIMINATE.

E does not serve our purpose even a bit. This is the correct answer for the 2nd question and is too digressing to resolve the paradox. First, this option nowhere states that the findings of the service teams are a cause for license unavailability in the situation under consideration. It may actually just be a separate correlative fact that has come to light while the service teams were working to solve the apparent discrepany raised under question (by the head of department). Second, the fact that the total number of licenses have reduced does not even remotely pertain to our argument. Even if the company had originally purchased 100 licenses, out of which 10 have conked, leaving the users to work with 90, then the entire workforce might as well work with 90 only. The paradox actually arises only when an active user logs off one license at least and even one waiting user is still not able to access. An astute manager (who desires to resolve the license fault) would definitely have the audacity to dismiss these facts presented by the service teams as outright irrelevant.

I hope this helps :)
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1