Amplitube 2 Jimi Hendrix RELEASED this month!!!

[Lunch Money]

Wow, I didn't even bother reading any counter-arguments... not out of disrespect to individuals, but simply because it is unbelievable that anyone would have to pay to demo something. Insane. I don't pay to try out a PRS at a guitar store, they just make sure my belt buckle is covered.

If they ONLY want to sell to people who already own the dongle for other products, fine. That's their bed and they can sleep in it. As far as I'm concerned, it's a total joke.

Greg

[flamin-gitaur]

"Amplitube suppsosed to be out this month" is that this month , six months ago, or this month, this month?

[Hink]

"Amplitube suppsosed to be out this month" is that this month , six months ago, or this month, this month?

just read the thread

[warren]

Go visit any file sharing site on the net. Dongle protection doesn't stop the hackers. If anything they probably see it as more of a priority because they like the added challenge.

I'm sure it's a huge bummer to the people who work hard on the software, and I feel for 'em... but uh, it just doesn't work, plain and simple. Plus it's pissing off a lot of potential customers.

I think it's time to go back to the ol' drawing board. There's gotta be a better way.

[Sickle]

Go visit any file sharing site on the net. Dongle protection doesn't stop the hackers. If anything they probably see it as more of a priority because they like the added challenge..

Indeed, that's exactly how it works, and I agree there should be a better solution, but the problem is a fundamental one and not likely to be rectified any time soon:

If it's software code, it can be busted open.

Simple as that.

And of course, you can take the 'high road' and get a TDM system, which has absolutely no defienciency in cracked instruments/fx. It's probably even worse at that, cause you have yo-yo's that validate using cracked TDM/RTAS plugs as they already made a huge investment in bulky Protools hardware..

I think things should be just a serial number, or specifically, assign a unique serial per license holder. If that number pops up online in the warez trade routes, ban that client, done deal..

That said, people griping here about buying a syncrosoft dongle *just* to try the Amplitube demo are pretty short-sighted..Not only are there half a dozen companies using it or about to switch to using it, but once you aquire one of these keys, any syncrosoft related software will work with the same key, so instead of looking at it as an inconveniance to demo a single product, look at it as an investment to make it easier to get other products demo'd/registered in the future.

I don't care for it much, but literally, since I installed the IK CSR suite, I haven't thought about that dongle once since. Really, the only time it intrudes in my conscious thought is when I read about people here bitching about it.

I won't stoop low enough to insert the logic that potentially half the whiners about these dongle-protected products can't afford them anyways, so this is the sour grape they blanch at using the dongle as a scapegoat.

People are funny.

[Squids]

Okay. I am going to request that there is no demo at all then. Is that better?

Look. It's not like someone had the idea "hey, let's CHARGE to demo the product!". Sure!!!!! If you look at it THAT way then it is lame. But, if you think about it for how it really is which is that products that are protected with the key have to sacrifice on the downloadable full working demo that we're used to. It is a trade-off for the developer. If they WERE to make a downloadable non-key full working demo then we all know how much easier it is for it to become "unleashed" so to speak (yes, we know that even dongled products can too... however, I have not seen that happen to Miroslav Philharmonik and it has been out for 8 months so... even if it was temporarily saved it is better than not).

Now, just because a dongle-protected product sacrifices on being able to have the typical full working time-out downloadable demo does that mean it shouldn't be offered as a demo for people who have (or optionally choose to get ala carte) a compatible USB key? What if THAT at least is possible for the developer to do without much trouble? Why NOT???? Why deprive the people who have the necessary element in the system - the KEY- to be able to try it out?

Even if one doesn't have a product that has this key already, in some ways perhaps you should WANT to see what it is like to demo the KEY itself too if it happens to be your first time using it. (also I think you can resell a generic key or perhaps even borrow one from someone). Plus, in reality have we not spent a little money to be able to try things out before? Maybe not directly but how about the price of gas to go to the store a bunch of times? How about the price of shipping things? The price of accessories for the studio? For media? For estimates on fixing our gear?

Look, it's just an OPTION. No one makes anyone do anything. I think it is a nice option. But, I am not sure it's worth doing if people don't understand or accept the circumstances and limitations of a USB key protected product. If they just look at it as a glass half empty then perhaps it is better not to have a glass then.

You just can't win I tell ya! The funny thing is, people who are against USB keys in my experience have NEVER mentioned a better system that actually protects the software. SURE, its easy for anyone to say "Oh, just use basic serial number protection". You think? Of COURSE users would like that. But, that's like saying "don't protect it". Not really a solution if companies are looking for ways to better protect products from the very real and damaging issues of piracy. And let me PLEASE break once and for all the ILLUSION that once a product is cracked the same day it is released that there is no point in having any copy protection... YES believe it or not there still is. You want to know why? Because not EVERYONE is so savy on getting their pirated products. There's at least 2 or 3 times the amount of users on average who copy just from their friends because the CAN. So, even if the CP worked to balance THAT out it STILL does at least some of its job. It is NEVER done to punish legit users and anyone who sees it that way is really looking for justifications... it is done to protect the product and to have it used by more legit licensed users than it would be without adequate protection. Period. Going by statistics of many companies I am under NDA with I can tell you that sales have increased with the use of CP for many companies (hence WHY they are moving in this direction). To be CLEAR I am not even saying that my company, Sonic Reality, is even moving in this direction (so don't blame ME for CP!!! I am just trying to explain it from my POV).

Lastly, the whole "tempted to use warez" thing has some major problems with it in perception. If you take it for what it is which is illegal copying and distribution then saying you could be "tempted" to use it is like saying you are tempted to STEAL! (it's just perhaps easier because it can be done so easily with a download). Also, people who say they would be honest and just use warez to "demo" a product they would buy if they ended up liking and used it TECHNICALLY are essentially saying they'd "borrow" something from a store (ie. steal it) but since they are honest they'd come back later and pay for it.

Don't fool yourself! That's what it is really.

I can see the temptation is still there for many, especially because a lot of people are lazy and are capable of taking advantage when there is at least that option sitting there tempting us. Lucky for products like ProTools HD or UAD where there isn't even the option to be tempted to use some other illegal "free" version.

[Sickle]

I thought you weren't gonna talk about this, Dave..

[Squids]

I thought you weren't gonna talk about this, Dave..

Right when I am out, they pull me back in. Right Sickle?

Actually, the whole warez talk is really the same old shit. It's tiring, let alone inappropriate on KVR (sorry for engaging in it myself). I try to dissuade it (as one can read in my previous posts). But, if people are going to insist on trying to justify it and say that it makes protecting software pointless then I might as well point out that this is a fallacy. The assumption that copy protection is only to prevent downloadable warez is an incomplete one.

Again, reality is that copy protection does what it is supposed to do which is help it sell more legit units. If sales increase when it is used then companies are going to use it more and more... why? Because it is a goal of software companies to sell more legit units to balance against the problems of piracy. Heck, even IF as some people like to think that it is not definitive enough in data to know whether it truly makes a difference I can tell you that JUST the fact that there's increased sales for WHATEVER reason makes companies want to continue with even the VOODOO of whatever might be a part of that trend! So, there's no arguing it from this standpoint. As long as companies see increased sales on theirs or other company's protected products many of them are going to move toward that direction if they desire similar results.

Hey, now that's MANY companies' philosophy on it and from a business standpoint it makes sense (maybe more in the actual numbers than say public opinion on a forum ). Want to know MY philosophy on it for MY company (SR)? Here it is in a nutshell: "Whatever". Like I said, 99.9% of Sonic Reality products don't even have serial copy protection. Refills? Waves? Rexes? That fluffy heart is ready for RAPE! All I can say is luckily enough people are willing to pay for them to sustain a growing business. We may never be as big as companies that use more copy protection in their product lines and have that advantage. SR at least has SOME co-products that are protected (like our virtual instruments). But, I run a smaller ship and I am okay with that (actually, who am I kidding? SR payroll is huge and we have mouths to feed so... we depend on the good ol honor system! But, we're suckers. ).

[Lunch Money]

Bwah. I don't even care about the HaXXorZ versus the world argument, because I know that BOTH sides have points. I don't even care about buying a product with a dongle if it's a product I know I want to buy-- to me, the dongle would just be a part of the product's asking price. I'd put it into the back of my computer and forget all about it... I'm not against the "wart" or "extra hardware" factor.

And, if you feel any better individually, Squids, I DO understand the logic that it's an "option." Nobody can ever FORCE anybody into any of these kinds of things, and if you read my post, I didn't say that it was anything other than an option. But the sheer idiocy of this one leaves me with the only OTHER option: to not bother at all. As an interested party, it is certainly within my rights to at least state publicly that the reason I have chosen the option to NOT pursue Amplitube 2 is directly because of the necessity to purchase a dongle in order to try the product out.

I can't even fathom having to pay to demo something. It literally defies my imagining. When I try (and I do) to put myself into others' shoes in terms of justifying it, I literally can't. My brain refuses.

"Wait... let me work this through again one more time... It's bound to make sense..." but no, I always stop short at the part where I have to pay $20 for the dongle. My brain won't get past it.

And I'm a pretty logical and fair guy.

Sorry, it just doesn't add up. There will always be arguments on both sides of ANY debate that make sense, and I agree that some of yours make sense. It's not the individual points that are wrong, it's the balance at the end of weighing them. And when all is tallied, buying a dongle to demo a product just doesn't compute.

The one side of the argument I accept is that if a store has their system set up with Amplitube 2 for their clients to try out "in-store" then I may indeed give it a whirl and eventually be a customer. IK Multimedia had better be pretty generous, though, and give discounted or NFR demo copies to retailers in order for this to be an option. It can't be the same deal that car dealers get, because the car dealer can re-sell the physical property at the retail level for 'floor model' pricing. I don't think that an iLok protected software has the same options. That being the case, I sure hope IK has thought out their retail-level marketing strategy.

Greg

[Squids]

To call it rediculous is cancelled out by it being rediculous not to! Why? Because, if the system only allows for a demo to work with a key, then why would a company NOT allow it to at LEAST be available to anyone who has a key? Especially since many, many thousands of people DO already have the key! It would be REDICULOUS not to, right? That's the irony. A sort of Catch 22.

But, I like you and respect you Lunch Money. If something like this is not able to compute with someone like you then as much as I think it is better to have a demo than not at all (even if it requires a key), maybe it is a better CHOICE that there isn't one (for other reasons). I will say it'd be a shame for the people who either have the key already or don't think it is a big deal to get one even just for demoing purposes. I know I wouldn't give a rat's if I had to have a relatively inexpensive key to try out something before I spent $300-400 on it (not to mention the ability to try out other products as well from the same key). I also know I would find SOME way to get that $20 back in the way of a discount or something to balance it from the person I bought it from... that's why if we sell it on esoundz we'd already be prepared to respond to that request.

[Lunch Money]

Ah, but here's the problem. Here's how it DOESN'T add up.

Scenerio #1: Guy already has Cubase, Philharmonik, CSR or any other product that already has the key! Downloads demo. Likes product, doesn't like it... No problem. All adds up nicely for him no matter what (because he/she already has the key... remember there are many THOUSANDS of people who fit in this scenerio).

That's not me, or many musicians who were interested in AT2.

Scenerio #2, #3, #4, #5...

... are ALL contingent on getting the person to buy the key in the first place! You can't have the end result as a premise in an argument, because the very argument is about the purchase of the key, not speculation about the outcome. Particularly the ones in which "liking" the product is a requirement, because that's the very issue at stake-- getting the key in order to find out if you like the product or not! You really can't use those arguments, which is why I say it doesn't add up.

[Er, one of the arguments was in borrowing a key... almost forgot about that one... I'm throwing this in as a pre-"submit" edit, so forgive the disjointed paragraph-- in any event, one can't presume that you know someone with the key. Out here in the mortal world, many of us are the ONLY person in our circle of friends who even know what the term DAW stands for. ]

Each of those scenarios (2-5) can be easily distilled into something that amounts to no more than making the customer pay up front, and take a complete gamble (or put in some work-- and my time is money) on the outcome. Which brings us to the next point you made:

Bottom line is, if one thinks they could be in scenerio #5 and being out $20 is not something they want to risk... then don't do the option!

Exactly, and I agree! Which is why I'm exercising my option not to. And I think a great many people will also exercise this option. It's "ridiculous", "ludicrous", "silly", "stupid", "insipid" (or any other number of derogatory adjectives) to make this aspect of the client-vendor relationship a necessary gamble.

I really think the only viable and non-RIDICULOUS counter-argument (assuming persistence of the dongle, of course... it can be safely assumed that there's no turning back about this kind of copy-protection) is the one I myself proposed: make it easy to demo the product in-store. That still fits the criteria of "try before you buy" that we all expect. I can't try out a new guitar on my computer, either, and have to go in-store for that, too. Fair enough. But this is contingent on IK Multimedia having an aggressive retail-level marketing strategy which supports retailers by making this a viable option for them. I sure hope they're smart enough to do so.

But, to call it rediculous is rediculous itself! Why? Because, if the system only allows for a demo to work with a key, then why would a company NOT allow it to at LEAST be available to anyone who has a key? Especially since many, many thousands of people DO already have the key! It would be REDICULOUS not to! That's the irony.

Well, there's not much irony there. It's simply fact: the demo will now only be available to people who have the key-- Either by previously owning one, or by someone being simpleton enough to buy one for the mere purpose of having the privilege to try a demonstration of a product.

Here's where we see eye-to-eye: Offer the demo. Make it available only to people who have a key. It's silly to not allow people who already have a key to do so, from the convenience of their own home, and that I agree with. Here's where we don't see eye-to-eye, though: that's not where my opinion of the ridiculous lies. It's in the fact that with this strategy, a lot of people will simply exercise their option to not bother, as I'm doing. It's strange to instantly cut off a large potential client base this way (a strange way to do business, indeed!), and what's even stranger is that IK are approaching this as though they imagine a LOT of people WILL in fact get the dongle! It would have been easy enough to find out. What do you think the result of a "would you pay $20 to demonstrate a product?" poll would have been?

You HAVE to assume that in addition to people who decide to buy, there will be people who won't. These people will be in possession of a key that they may then sell forward (can you? how easy is it?), an action that depends on resourcefulness and time. Any justification is simply a way of putting a spin on losses, or showing how you could diminish them. A loss is a loss, though, and that's what makes it not add up.

Here's hoping that Long and McQuade get a working demo in-store....

Greg

[Hink]

Yah know Squids, no offense but several times you have kind of put some of us down for speaking our opinions...and those of us who express our opinions in a mature and reasonable manner should get respect.

Right when I am out, they pull me back in.

Statements like that in all honesty make me say to myself "maybe I shouldn't offer my opinion"...of course I don't even listen to myself ...but I'm sorry my friend...I think our points are valid...getting defensive, or hinting that here at forum for such discussion we are being some kind of pain in the ass by voicing our valid opinions, I'm troubled by that.

I know it's not your fight, but I don't like comments that are dissmissive like that. It's better you say nothing at all then to fault us for our valid points that you do not agree with.

EDIT no one is forcing you to respond either, it is your option...

[chrisby]

Not to break up the philosophy debate but... is the ampeg svx plug already out? I just got a sweetwater catalog that lists it and doesn't make any "shipping soon" kind of disclaimer. It just looks like you can order it. Of course it also lists at2, which is sure to be shipping soon soon sooon (yeah, I know, it really is going to ship soon.... probably, maybe).

[A3ntar]

"Wait... let me work this through again one more time... It's bound to make sense..." but no, I always stop short at the part where I have to pay $20 for the dongle. My brain won't get past it.

LM, I respect and value very much your opinions, and as you said yourself you always looked to me as a very logical and reasonable guy.

But, it is really not hard to understand IKMM's decision, honestly. Let's establish some facts first.

1. These guys have put some serious work into this software, and they want to protect it using the best and most secure method.

2. Dongle protections are harder to "crack" then most software counterparts.

3. Right now, IKMM' iLok latest incarnation is still not pirated yet ( Miroslav, CSR, ...), and the previous generations have been really hard to hack.

OK, so if you were IKMM and your goal is to protect you application, you would use iLOK because of it's proven track record. Now how would that affect your sales or bother your customer is out of the scope of this discussion. We are only discussing the CP aspect of it.

So the go ahead to implement iLOK in AT2 is taken, and there is no turning back. Now comes the time where you think of letting your customers get a useable preview of your application. Here are the most obvious choices you have.

1. Have a 30 days trial full version with no dongle, that will most definitvly get cracked and distributed on P2P.

2. Have a demo with a severly handicaped and sized down version that will not give most people a good idea of your product, or worst, showcase an amp that most people would hate, but that won't require a dongle.

3. Have a 30 days full trial that requires a dongle, that a large numbers of users have anyways, and that will not compromise in anyways your application's security. You might loose a few customer that don't have the iLok and don't want to purchase it.

4. Have users be able to test and demo the software at the store, but that might not give you enough time to tinker with the full 20,000 combinations.

5. Have no demo at all.

Thus far, IKMM decided to go with 3 and 4, and to me they seem very logical and full of sens. In fact I would have a hard time immagining it otherwise. They would really have to be careless to go with #1 after all the efforts and $$$ that went into implementing iLOK in AT2 and paying for licensing ( very expensive ). And nobody really want #5.

I personnaly would have liked to see 2,3 and 4, so as people that don't want to demo at the store and to buy an iLOK still have a chance to have a "sneak preview" of the product itself.

[Lunch Money]

Sorry, but that still doesn't follow what I've said. You say that you're only talking about the CP side, well that's not what I'm discussing. I can't and don't disagree that iLok has a proven track record. If your point is that iLok works, then consider your point made even before I joined the discussion. But a copy protection can never be as important as attracting business. So, I AM only talking about the client/vendor relationship; and that scope includes not only potential sales but relationships. I've already agreed that they have the right to do whatever they want in terms of CP. But that doesn't change the simple, basic, indisputable fact: I have the choice between paying $20 for a DEMO, or not paying at all and therefore not demoing at all.

I choose the second option, and there's no justification in the world that can make #1 seem valid. For every argument you can come up with, I'll show you a counter-argument or expose the incorrect logic (and yes, logical arguments can be assessed as correct and incorrect, despite people's contention that it's opinion) of it.

Heck, I've even said that the more limited version (in-store demo) as acceptable. Even at home, nobody's going to try the 20,000 combinations (or the multi-million combinations of the TonePort...) possible, so that's not even the issue there. I've thrown a bone, don't disagree with it as an option simply for the sake of disagreement. The only thing that remains at this level is for IK to be smart about it. For all I know, maybe they already ARE! Maybe there's a mailing list in place and contact has been made with their retailers.

Greg