Plugins "calling home": what do you think about it?

[docdued]

Lately I've been thinking about changing DDMF's updating system such that each effect would automatically check for updates at the DDMF server at startup. This would prevent me from having to send out emails every time, half of which never arrive due to various reasons (mailboxes full, spam filters etc). Then, after a while I thought that maybe it would also be good to set up some simple anti-cracking scheme via plugin-server-interaction. Now naturally some problems could arise in this context: not everybody's workstation is online all the time, and users also might not like the idea that data like MAC-addresses are automatically sent to my server. So this poll is to find out the general opinion about these things... just to get some feedback before pursuing something that in the end nobody likes. Thanks!

[MountainKing]

Usually offline!

[Zombie Queen]

My workstation is "usually online". But there are Internet breakdowns here, so I would definitely avoid anything that requires connection to run. As for calling home for updates, I don't mind, but I'd rather prefer an e-mail.

[ouroboros]

DO NOT WANT!
(The dialers always create firewall problems/glitches for me.)

[mauseoleum]

[Nokenoku]

I voted for "offline" which means, that my firewall blocks every app, which does not have to go to the internet.

I find it highly alarming, that today a lot of software goes online (without any actual need to do so), while you just don't know, what exactly it's doing there.

I've once read an article on how some games send some HUNDRETS of MB to some servers (in just a few hours), whithout you actually playing online.



So a clear "NO" to telephoning home software.
I guess some developers do that for fighting piracy ...
Well .. you can't fight piracy.

[thecontrolcentre]

Always offline ... and don't want plugins (or anything else) trying to get online automatically.

[chokehold]

Unfortunately, I throw all my money out the window for legal licenses which insanely increases the speed and terminal point of my money fluctuation... so I don't have the extra buck or two for a dedicated offline DAW, my "normal" PC will have to suffice.
But as I really buy all my licenses and don't mind owning an iLok, I couldn't care less about anything "calling home" because I have nothing to hide.
I'd be one stupid ass (=donkey, of course!) to have personal files lying around unencrypted, just like emptying the contents of your purse outside on your doorstep every night, and noone could possibly profit from my encripted personal photos or really bad songs... so wtf.
And if someone wants to know if I'm on Intel/AMD or Win/MacOS... f*ck it, tell him. I don't care.

Once again, I tend to believe that 90% of the people who are afraid of "calling home", just like with iLoks, are the ones that have something to hide.

[Mattiiiii]

I think plugins are for music making - they shouldn't require internet connectivity (what seems like a waste of computer resources for music makers).

I also think it is a bad idea to implement some online anti-cracking procedure. Some people just wouldn't buy the product anymore, with good reason (what happens if your server goes online, the company disappears, etc.). Problems are likely to occur with such a system that make customers angry. Most important, such a system punishes only your customers; people who steal software will know where to get the product without protection. In sum, I see more to lose than to win for a company that enforces online anti-crack procedures.

[anzoid]

No thanks, I don't really mind stuff calling home but I don't really see the point in plug-ins doing so. At least I've not yet seen a convincing argument in favour... I tend to keep up to date on plug-ins that interest me - obsessively checking KVR throughout the day

Having said that, I may well not be in your target demographic - I pretty much only use freeware synths plus some payware VSTs that don't ever call home - the developer is on KVR so I can find out about new stuff easily enough (not that I expect new stuff every day, though that would be nice).

[Mattiiiii]

Once again, I tend to believe that 90% of the people who are afraid of "calling home", just like with iLoks, are the ones that have something to hide.

Sure, my computer is full of personal memories and corporate documentes that I am either forbidden to distribute or that I don't want to make public. Especially not to some corporations. Am I a bad person?

[thecontrolcentre]

I tend to believe that 90% of the people who are afraid of "calling home", just like with iLoks, are the ones that have something to hide.

So everyone else in this thread has "something to hide"?

[anzoid]

I tend to believe that 90% of the people who are afraid of "calling home", just like with iLoks, are the ones that have something to hide.

So everyone else in this thread has "something to hide"?

I'm hiding my music... it's for the best.

[shamann]

I prefer to upgrade at my own pace. I might get an IIEQ update in email and not actually install it for several weeks until I'm in between projects, just in case a new version introduces a new bug/problem.

So a phoning-home system of updates would be bad in my book, unless it was an optional "check for new version" system, which would be fine.

[zvenx]

I dont' mind it doing so, IF and only IF I instruct it to do so explicitly at a specific time. That is I go to a menu item and say check for updates.
rsp