well, that's a pointless argument because 99.99 percent of studioone users aren't people that just record. and certainly, i dont know what the percentage of studio one users who use plugins either. but im sure its a high number. and if you were to tell an electronic musician that, 'studio one free is an amazing gift, you know what? they couldn't careless. point is, it is useless to the plugin crowd. completely useless. and daws that record audio are very numerous. as are free ones, and ones that use fx plugins. vsti plugin daws are not. so, i speak the truth. its a useless gift to the plugin world. i think you know what i meant.

i agree great band.

Not that I personally care either way about a rather pointless debate about a free product that nobody debating it's value actually needs (everyone involved already owning a relatively full featured daw right?) ... but... how do you know that exactly?

You have a printout of the S1 demographic report?

I'd be surprised if PreSonus themselves can pinpoint personal usage percentages in any really reliable way... down to a hundredth of a percentage point.

exactly. i don't, nobody does. its was a number a previous posted posted. i didn't not post that number.

Where is that link?... there's going to be some interest in where that figure comes form.

Edit; found it semantics don't seem to be a solution to the argument just creates more confusion.
Last edited by CTStump on Wed Apr 18, 2012 9:27 am; edited 1 time in total

Fair enough. I just don't see the point of the whole thing, debating it's subjective value ... unless you're actually personally seeking a free DAW to use? If you are, there are a few good free ones out there to choose from...

Acid Express, S1 Free, Ardour, Podium Free, probably a few more I don't know about.

If you already have a DAW that you paid for that does much more for you than any free product could ever do for you, what's the point exactly?

Oh, you speak the truth. You know, people who speak the truth always scare me.

its more a rant then a complaint. im just sick of all these daw companies stepping up to the 'altruistic' plate. with there free version for the 'less fortunate' trying to look like the good guy when in reality they couldnt care less about helping the less fortunate. instead there offering a product that is so obnoxiously limited it edges on spam.

i feel, if you want to offer something to people who couldn't otherwise afford it then just do so. don't offer something that nobody can use. offer something that has a value instead of something that is made to appear valuable.

it like me donating my hand to somebody who needs a hand transplant with 4 missing fingers. of course it makes me look like i care to help somebody else and or its the thought that counts but the truth is i just donated something thats completely useless to the person im giving it too. that is what the free version really are damn near useless.

and i have no problem whatever in pointing this out. because like i said before theres no such thing as a company that cares about you. a company invests far more money in the advertising of a good deed then in doing a good deed. many people cant see this but if you close your eyes and look past the 'good' deed you realize how truly selfish and sneaky this is. its giving in a selfish manor.

is it really necessary that i point this out? its not but i point this out because i feel its my duty and at least it will open your eyes next time you think "oh, how nice of them"

No it isn't necessary at all, I think most people know it was a marketing ploy. Where do they say they are doing it for charity anyway? And even though I now own Studio One I am going to put the free version on my son's computer, the living room computer, every computer I don't want to use up an activation on because even as a limited freebie, I am finding it useful and actually having lots of fun trying to get my own sounds out of Presence. Anyhow most everyone is somewhere between selfishness and selflessness, when some companies. I would feel like a hypocrite myself nitpicking other's motivations when my own are certainly mixed.

@AstralExistence

1. Presonus Free is usable to some. Just because it is not usable to you does not change this.

2. Presonus never said giving this version was an altruistic deed. I don't know where you got that from.

3. Most of your post is fighting a strawman. Free or lite versions of bigger products are clearly to advertise for the big product and encourage people to upgrade. I'd be shocked if you could find one person who thinks otherwise.

So, your preaching to those people who think commericial companies code for the good of humanity is time wasted. These people don't exist...but for some reason that doesn't stop you from continuing to type pointless rants to "educate us."

Wow, comparing a free, no obligation, voluntary download product borders on spam? That's a new one to me.

I think criticism for the sake of improvement is great on a free product, but complaining because they didn't give you ENOUGH for free? Really?

Nobody at Presonus said they are doing this for those who are 'needy' or anything like that. They are giving you a free, feature-limited introduction to their commercial product. It's not new, it's not immoral, it's not unethical, and it's definitely not anywhere close to "spam". That's about the most ridiculous thing I've read in a while.

While you may somehow feel you are some kind of whistleblower for the rest of us, pointing out how Presonus really doesn't care, blah blah blah....you're not. Presonus is a business. They are in it to make money. No business survives without doing so. If you don't like what they give away for free, then why does it bother you so much? Can't you just move on without making up all the junk about screwing over the "less fortunate", when they have no obligation to give anything away in the first place?

It's really quite sad that somebody would take it that far, don't you think?

Brent

im freely entitled to my opinion. i said what i said, its how i feel, it is not directed to presonus but rather company altruism. which does not exist. lets not burn the witch. end of story. move on.

But your assuming it was altruism, I assumed it was marketing, and I think I'm more likely correct and it really wasn't a witch but your bitch that we were burning I have nothing against witches, nor female dogs either, but in my opinion your complaint has little merit. we are all entitled to our opinions.

And, may I add, 99.9% of all statistics quoted on forum threads are made up...