KVR Audio

fanfarecircuit · Post by **fanfarecircuit** » Sat Nov 22, 2008 6:49 pm

pace c/r protection for max/msp is bull. it is based on an install id and not possible to back up without imaging your entire drive. one time i was refused an authorization because the dumby at c74 thought i'd requested 6 auths in 2 months, when it had actually been 2 years and 2 months. 4 days went by before i got it straightened out and i blame it on the copy protection system because to this day i can't understand why a company would use a system that can't tell anything about the hardware the software is being installed on. i only ever authorized max/msp on one computer with no hardware changes and they could not tell that on their end. even without the error by the rep, it's ridiculous they don't take the hardware used into account. there are allot of other challenge/response systems that allow you to at least back up a code or key file for the same hardware and that's pretty much where i draw the line.

zvenx · Post by **zvenx** » Sat Nov 22, 2008 7:04 pm

just so you know I changed a hard drive on my computer and had to re-authorise ALL my IKMultimedia stuff and lose an authorisation (and yes as a result I may never buy another IK software), none of my syncrosoft or ilok gave me problems after changing the hard drive.....I guess people have different experiences..
rsp

fanfarecircuit · Post by **fanfarecircuit** » Sat Nov 22, 2008 7:10 pm

yeah, but there is nothing wrong with "losing" an authorization from ik. they'll give you more if you contact them. at least you know where you stand and you can contact them in advance. with the c74 pace system, i never knew it was even an issue until it was too late and then... there goes a whole weekend.

the one positive thing i can say about ik is that their authorization situation is not an issue.

koolkeys · Post by **koolkeys** » Sat Nov 22, 2008 7:13 pm

fanfarecircuit wrote:yeah, but there is nothing wrong with "losing" an authorization from ik. they'll give you more if you contact them. at least you know where you stand and you can contact them in advance. with the c74 pace system, i never knew it was even an issue until it was too late and then... there goes a whole weekend.

the one positive thing i can say about ik is that their authorization situation is not an issue.

It would really come down to the developer and whether they are willing to give more authorizations. It's not up to PACE.

Personally, I would take a dongle over C/R any day. But that's just my preference.

Brent

zvenx · Post by **zvenx** » Sat Nov 22, 2008 7:15 pm

fanfarecircuit wrote:yeah, but there is nothing wrong with "losing" an authorization from ik. they'll give you more if you contact them. at least you know where you stand and you can contact them in advance. with the c74 pace system, i never knew it was even an issue until it was too late and then... there goes a whole weekend.

the one positive thing i can say about ik is that their authorization situation is not an issue.

ah that's my point, for me it is. I had to reauthorise six different software because I changed a hard drive? whereas all my ilok stuff gave me no problems.
rsp

fanfarecircuit · Post by **fanfarecircuit** » Sat Nov 22, 2008 7:18 pm

i understand that, brent. you must have missed my point though. pace challenge/response does not even account for someone's hardware. i had the same computer and had an issue receiving timely authorization. at least the other poster changed his hard drive when he was requested to get a new authorization.

and we've had this conversation before. it is not up to the developer. it would be up to the courts. especially if the developer has no record of the actual hardware being used, as is the case with c74. but i'm not arguing with you. it is not my priviledge to be able to use the software i buy. it is my right. period.

zvenx · Post by **zvenx** » Sat Nov 22, 2008 7:19 pm

and for me personally Overloud is giving me the best of both worlds.
A Dongle on my main music computer that doesnt' go anywhere, and I can use one of the license key on my macbookpro which does go places with me... so I get for me the set and forget dongle, and the additional license for my macbook.
Of course my favourite is serial numbers, but we all know how easy that is to 'crack'....and my second favourite is reasonable unlimited authorisations 24/7 like spectrasonics...
rsp

fanfarecircuit · Post by **fanfarecircuit** » Sat Nov 22, 2008 7:23 pm

dongles are out of the question for me because i use laptops. my only requirement for c/r is that i can back up my authorization in a file or code for my computer as long as i don't change components. if overloud can confirm this possibility, then they have a sale. i don't think i'm being too rigid at all.

zvenx · Post by **zvenx** » Sat Nov 22, 2008 7:26 pm

To be clear, I wasn't suggesting you were being to rigid. I was just suggesting different people have different needs. I dont' find your request unreasonable....
rsp

susiwong · Post by **susiwong** » Sat Nov 22, 2008 7:28 pm

Brent,
there's no doubt it works in many cases.
I'm not afraid of a working PACE installation, I'm afraid of a non-functional one.
I've had to deal with DAWs of colleagues in the past however which wouldn't boot into Windows no more, bluescreened with mention of tpkd.sys and other shady issues, immediately following a Waves installation for example.
Those were not hobbyist's gaming-office-w*rez-internet machines but well installed, reliable DAWs.
In all 3 cases I remember we had to give up and do a "format C" since there was no way of successful exorcism, not by our own research nor by manufacturer support.
Are you aware of a safe method to completely uninstall this junk ?
Syncrosoft drivers can be removed with ease, of course the software will stop working then.
To me there is not much difference between PACE and a rootkit / polymorph trojan in behaviour.
And the killing joke is, what do you see all over hobby- and commercial studios ? Non-legit versions of Waves, URS, Princeton, you name it - all PACE "protected".
I'm not a cheapskate and I'm 100% legit here (hell, I've even got 4 Win licenses for 2 PCs, 2x XP Pro, XP64, V64 Business), instead of accepting the risks of PACE I went the Syncrosoft nd DSP route (UAD, SSL, ex PoCo) and can live quite well that way.
Sometimes however I regret that a company makes it impossible for me to even check out their great work let alone give them my money.
Peace,
susiwong

koolkeys · Post by **koolkeys** » Sat Nov 22, 2008 7:29 pm

No, it is up to the developer. If you use all your authorizations, and you contact the dev, most of the time you can get more. I don't know where the courts came into this. The limited authorizations are to prevent you from just installing on everyone you know's computer at once. But if you run out and contact them, it's rare that a dev won't give you more installs.

Are we talking about the same thing? It IS up to the developer. I'm not sure why it wouldn't be.

Brent

fanfarecircuit · Post by **fanfarecircuit** » Sat Nov 22, 2008 7:33 pm

zvenx wrote:To be clear, I wasn't suggesting you were being to rigid. I was just suggesting different people have different needs. I dont' find your request unreasonable....
rsp

thanks. i guess in your case, i understand the time involved in re-authorizing software, but i'm always worried about being locked out of my software more. i guess c74 made me paranoid and ableton didn't help either early on with their berlin office hours and my inability to figure out how to back up their authorization (which ultimately i did figure out and the system became quite convenient).

fanfarecircuit · Post by **fanfarecircuit** » Sat Nov 22, 2008 7:37 pm

koolkeys wrote:No, it is up to the developer. If you use all your authorizations, and you contact the dev, most of the time you can get more. I don't know where the courts came into this. The limited authorizations are to prevent you from just installing on everyone you know's computer at once. But if you run out and contact them, it's rare that a dev won't give you more installs.

Are we talking about the same thing? It IS up to the developer. I'm not sure why it wouldn't be.

Brent

because, in my opinion, only abuse can be used to deny someone access to a license they have purchased. unless number of absolute authorizations is specified in the eula, which i don't think it is. for instance, if i say i have only one computer and c74 says i've installed 6 times. who is compelled to prove whether i installed on 6 computers or 1 computer 6 times? c74 simply does not have that info through their pace system. that's what scares me about pace c/r. i think that's the topic we are talking about.

fanfarecircuit · Post by **fanfarecircuit** » Sat Nov 22, 2008 7:41 pm

and the courts come into play because i would definitely take any developer to court who denied me authorization when i know i didn't abuse the license. it would be them who would have to prove i did abuse it. c74 would have to prove i installed on multiple computers to the point of abuse, which they obviously can't do, unless they knew i had installed max/msp on the same hardware 6 time and were just giving me a hard time for the fun of it.

i doubt that.

zvenx · Post by **zvenx** » Sat Nov 22, 2008 7:42 pm

but for those who are anti-pace it is a pity that this one software choose the copy protection you would not use, because it really is a great sounding piece of software....some nags, some things I would want different, more stuff etc... but it is the first guitar amp simulator that I am using because I want to use rather than I have to use.....

rsp

Overloud TH1 Guitar System released!