Waves central a complete bust!

[chk071]

You can argue all the way you want, won't change the fact that he's still a support employee of Waves, there to help you with your issues, not a voyeur interested in your uninteresting personal stuff. And it still won't change the fact that he can do jack shit on your computer anyway, even when remote controlling it. Get real.

[ghettosynth]

You can argue all the way you want

Yes, and I've argued correctly. If you want to understand, you should try to read what I've written. Your rejoinder is meaningless, it conveys that you don't understand the essence of my argument.

I'm not sure what you're trying to convince me of? You've failed to argue that trust is unnecessary, you've not even attempted to argue that knowledge exists to trust anyone else's network, what are you trying to accomplish?

You are simply not going to convince me that requiring remote control is good customer service.

[chk071]

You can argue all the way you want

Yes, and I've argued correctly.

No, not at all. But hey, i stopped trying to convince people online years ago, it's simply pointless, especially when they're clutching at straws to prove what they believe is true. I pointed out the important thing, and that's that the person from Waves you're talking to first of all does his job. And that's providing help for your problem. What you or others in this thread make of it, is your, and their decision. But it has nothing to do with the real world out there.

[ghettosynth]

You can argue all the way you want

Yes, and I've argued correctly.

No, not at all.

I have you simply don't understand. Your words convey this clearly

[pc2000]

Question: Why do the advocates of Waves remote tech service, refuse to give any perspective to valid points I've previously made? Let me regurgitate some of those points that are consistently ignored by Pro-waves technician- cheerleaders.

For a start, all software is subject to bugs and Waves is no exception. Are they somehow the first company to develop the worlds first generation of truly bug free software? If the answer is no... then why are folks acting as if central is somehow ironclad code? This also seems to be the mindset of waves tech people- since they give me the impression of no issues on their end. I've even provided them with my windows event viewer error log, which they ignored like many have in my threads about central.

The log is generated for a reason and gives the best clues as to what maybe causing the issue. I even did a systrace which revealed even more, but It would be an utter waste of time sharing it with waves tech people- because their new generation software is completely bug free and my inferior machine is the sole culprit. This was my point about tech people VS actual programmers. Waves tech people are middle men or women (cough) that make decisions on what they personally find relevant- based on their own agendas or following a company playbook by numbers. Are these people experts on computer code or merely following a standard tech manual on their computer screens?

Let's consider the freeware developers for an example. Many release a product that users report bugs about. These developers generally have no middle men that is a sole pipeline to user complaints. They deal with users directly and therefore get all bug reports upfront. Because they're the actual creator of the product-they can address issues immediately. They know their software isn't perfect, so they actually investigate and fix issues based solely on user feedback. No extraordinary measures are taken. The funny part is... it only takes a single complaint. This is even the case with a one man commercial company.

What is Waves filter? Does it take 500 complaints or many tech votes for an issue to be considered an issue for a product? At what point in the pipeline does the actual programmers receive bug reports and from whom? What exactly is the protocol? I'm not having issues with their plugins running. I'm not having trouble finding where they're located or scanning them. I'm having an issue with central generating an error when it comes to downloading products. The app is communicating to the internet, because It detects all my products. I can manage licenses and all of that. IMO, this simply isn't an tech solvable issue. Their main objective is to find issues with your machine, not bugs in Waves software!

This is the thing that's going over people's head. The tech can't fix bugs. Even if they manage to find a workaround that works for the current version, what happens when the next update is released which is mandatory! Updating central isn't an option. The remote connection argument for me is that small developers can seemingly fix issues without the measure. Again, reference points I made previously. If I were a noob to software and computers and had no troubleshooting abilities, or I had an elaborate system configuration that included sound-grid, etc... then remote connection would be an option. I just can't see the validity in this case. I can't overlook the fact there hasn't been any acknowledgement from Waves that central may have issues on some systems. Ive seen plenty of online complaints by users that have the same issue, yet they offer nothing on their website. They don't offer alternatives for downloading products if central fails in some way. Still get crickets when I present the argument. It's either central or bust! No way to defend it, yet a lot of you do.

Let's say I do a remote connection and the tech still doesn't fix the issue...what's next? I've read complaints from users that had fruitless sessions or a fix that only worked temporarily. Again, what has Waves done with the complaints they received thus far? I even pointed the tech to the first thread that was started about central on KVR and this was his response:

"What you see people post online isn't necessarily related to what you are experiencing.
Errors could happen for different sorts of reasons and not all systems are the same".

This is condescending and insulting. I'm not smart enough to surmise this on my own it seems. The point in my directing him to that thread was to show the numerous complaints about central, yet he found a way to dismiss it. To Dismiss- that something could be wrong with central and that it has to be purely a system related issue. This is exactly what you can expect from a tech VS a programmer! FIN...

[robotmonkey]

Now, let's consider Waves, or really, almost any other corporate entity. You know nothing about their network, nothing about their employees, and you have no way to gather this information. You know nothing about any potential man in the middle type of attack and it's not just one person. Yes, you're dealing with one person but you are allowing their network of workstations with many employees to connect to your network and you know nothing about that network or the people who work there.

The value, to me, is incredibly low compared to the risk. If I don't trust the bus driver, I might lose my job and have to figure out how to eat. If I don't let waves connect to my system, OMG, I'll have to use some different plugins.

You may place more value on losing your waves plugins, so you have to take the risk to trust Waves, that doesn't mean that you have any data, it just means that you've chosen to take the risk.

And this is exactly where your argument falls flat on its face. When talking security obviously no one is suggesting that something is completely secure. Everyone who knows something about computer security more than the average Joe knows that nothing is considered completely secure. The question is always about proper risk analysis and security for all practical purposes. And in that there's no question that when all things are considered letting Waves tech support remote into your computer with Team Viewer is perfectly secure. And Waves network security has very little to do with it because how Team Viewer works. Even if their network would be completely unsecured, which I highly doubt it is, the likelihood that someone would compromise your computer over a particular Team Viewer session is still zero in practice.

And this is again where your analysis fails. When risk and benefits are weighted then there's absolutely no question that letting Waves support remote into your computer and fix the problems would win out any possible security risks in practice. I don't know how many Waves plugins you have, but lets say they are worth 250$. Now even if something would happen, let's say Waves tech accidentally screws your Windows installation and you would have to spend the whole day reinstalling stuff or ask a computer tech come in and do it, you would still be in positive after paying him. And I'm sure Waves would also compensate the trouble caused. While throwing away your plugins would be a net loss of 250$.

And like I pointed out above those kind of risk analysis are done all the time in very security conscious places like banking, government and healthcare where TeamViewer is considered safe for all practical purposes. To claim that you have some kind of higher security requirements is veneering into tin foil hat wearing weirdo territory. If you are so worried about your computer security then you really should not be browsing KVR as the likelihood that your computer gets compromised, for example, by a drive by malware attack from a hijacked ad's in this place, is infinitely bigger than something happening by letting a Waves tech support connect remotely.

[ObsoleteAcc99]

[DELETED]

[robotmonkey]

Question: Why do the advocates of Waves remote tech service, refuse to give any perspective to valid points I've previously made? Let me regurgitate some of those points that are consistently ignored by Pro-waves technician- cheerleaders.

For a start, all software is subject to bugs and Waves is no exception. Are they somehow the first company to develop the worlds first generation of truly bug free software? If the answer is no... then why are folks acting as if central is somehow ironclad code? This also seems to be the mindset of waves tech people- since they give me the impression of no issues on their end. I've even provided them with my windows event viewer error log, which they ignored like many have in my threads about central.

I think all your points have been addressed already in this thread. But just to recap. First, that other devs are not doing it is a loss for their clients and probably for their tech support also. This is probably not a standard practice yet because it needs a bit of resources that might make it nonviable for one man developers.

Second, as bugs are concerned then Waves is definitely in a class of its own - their stuff is very high quality and thoroughly tested from the release day one. The bugs are rare, mostly non-significant and fixed very quickly. There's no doubt that they are pretty much above the rest when it comes to product quality.

Third, as I pointed out, I have two cases unsolved with some other developers for quite a long time now. And I just see no point in bothering anymore because it is not likely that this problem will be solved without troubleshooting on exactly the same configuration. And this is where remote support comes handy. There's absolutely no doubt whatsoever that remote support is 100x more effective and quicker when it comes to troubleshooting software problems and it leads to quicker resolution and higher customer satisfaction. I do use it myself for work and we have our partners remote in when we got unique and complex problems. And it results 99% of the time in quick and effective resolution. And even if the problems is not fixed immediately it leads to discovery what is the root cause of the problem in a particular unique environment so that this can be addressed in future patch. And again, that Waves is offering this shows that they are a notch above the rest when it comes to support.

Edit: And as far as the Windows Event Viewer logs are concerned there's really not much there that would be helpful for troubleshooting Waves Central and VST issues. It also greatly exemplifies why remote support is more effective than just relying on end users

[ghettosynth]

you are probably right it's likely perfectly safe and we are just being paranoid, i don't doubt you.. but i don't know what it is, i just can't allow myself to let them connect. thankfully in 20 years i have never needed waves support for anything other than a license transfer LOL, and i do believe this is the case for the majority of waves users - i.e they usually just work.

Right, I'm not even going to respond to all of those words, I'm tired of this thread. But there's little reason to let someone else connect. For me, the value of waves plugins is nowhere close to the price that I paid for them, which isn't very much. If I had to make the choice of giving up my waves plugins today forever, or, reformat my computer, I'd give up the waves plugins in a second.

The essence of this is that forcing customers to do something they're uncomfortable with is bad customer service, period.

Now that we all agree that no network system is completely secure, I think that this conversation is almost over.

[chk071]

The essence of this is that forcing customers to do something they're uncomfortable with is bad customer service, period.

And who has done that now? Even if it has been the case here, which i doubt, and i haven't read anything about it, you can just hang up the phone. Boom.

[ghettosynth]

The essence of this is that forcing customers to do something they're uncomfortable with is bad customer service, period.

And who has done that now? Even if it has been the case here, which i doubt, and i haven't read anything about it, you can just hang up the phone. Boom.

Bad choice of words, of course, you knew what I meant. Let me restate it clearly.

Requiring customers to do something they're uncomfortable with in order to receive service is bad customer service, period.

I love how at the end of the argument you're now parroting my position. Exactly, if you are going to require remote connection in order to get your plugins to work, then I don't need your plugins. I'll just hang up the phone.

Didn't I say that back in the first post or two?

If you guys want to let some low paid tech support try shit on your machine, knock yourselves out, my experience with tech support has generally been lackluster. If your stuff doesn't work without remote connection, then something about what you're doing is too complicated for your skill set.

[pc2000]

Question: Why do the advocates of Waves remote tech service, refuse to give any perspective to valid points I've previously made? Let me regurgitate some of those points that are consistently ignored by Pro-waves technician- cheerleaders.

For a start, all software is subject to bugs and Waves is no exception. Are they somehow the first company to develop the worlds first generation of truly bug free software? If the answer is no... then why are folks acting as if central is somehow ironclad code? This also seems to be the mindset of waves tech people- since they give me the impression of no issues on their end. I've even provided them with my windows event viewer error log, which they ignored like many have in my threads about central.

I think all your points have been addressed already in this thread. But just to recap. First, that other devs are not doing it is a loss for their clients and probably for their tech support also. This is probably not a standard practice yet because it needs a bit of resources that might make it nonviable for one man developers.

Second, as bugs are concerned then Waves is definitely in a class of its own - their stuff is very high quality and thoroughly tested from the release day one. The bugs are rare, mostly non-significant and fixed very quickly. There's no doubt that they are pretty much above the rest when it comes to product quality.

Third, as I pointed out, I have two cases unsolved with some other developers for quite a long time now. And I just see no point in bothering anymore because it is not likely that this problem will be solved without troubleshooting on exactly the same configuration. And this is where remote support comes handy. There's absolutely no doubt whatsoever that remote support is 100x more effective and quicker when it comes to troubleshooting software problems and it leads to quicker resolution and higher customer satisfaction. I do use it myself for work and we have our partners remote in when we got unique and complex problems. And it results 99% of the time in quick and effective resolution. And even if the problems is not fixed immediately it leads to discovery what is the root cause of the problem in a particular unique environment so that this can be addressed in future patch. And again, that Waves is offering this shows that they are a notch above the rest when it comes to support.

My points have been covered you say? Please direct me to where someone covered my point about Waves not offering an updated online installer download as an option. This means they have no fail safes in place in the event that central can't download products or something breaks in a update. What's your option in that event? Show me where Waves has acknowledged any complaints about central and have provided a reported issues section about central on their support page.

Where did anyone cover the system event log I posted many times over or the fact I actually did a sxstrace that gives some insight to what's creating the error. I'll wait....didn't think you could! I booted in safe-mode and central wouldn't run at all. The same side by side error pops up which is a consistent theme with central on my system. But you guys ignore that just like Waves.

Waves central is a standalone application not a plugin and it's new, so I don't understand your logic that it couldn't possibly have bugs in a given situation. Yes, their plugins seem reasonably solid in my experience, but maybe I've just been lucky. Doesn't mean I can make a declaration that they're bug free, as if I can use my personal experience as ground zero for everyone Else's!

As far as my points about small developers goes... that went over your head it seems and still hasn't been addressed since you ignored most of the points. They don't need to do remote connections because they know it's no such thing as bug-less software. When someone or multiple users reports an issue, they immediately look into it. They usually find the problems. People report issues with high CPU, crashes, random bugs,etc.. There is no pipeline or middle men that impedes these reports from reaching them. Your issues with a couple of developers doesn't null this fact. Waves basic customers don't have a direct pipeline to the actual people that bake the software, so who knows when they actually get wind of issues.

The techs job at Waves is foremost to find fault with your system, not Waves software, but I'll leave it at that. Ultimately- my points weren't covered when you consider I made this thread purely about waves central and it somehow became a debate about remote connections. This thread has become a complete bust!

[chk071]

The essence of this is that forcing customers to do something they're uncomfortable with is bad customer service, period.

And who has done that now? Even if it has been the case here, which i doubt, and i haven't read anything about it, you can just hang up the phone. Boom.

Bad choice of words, of course, you knew what I meant. Let me restate it clearly.

Requiring customers to do something they're uncomfortable with in order to receive service is bad customer service, period.

I love how at the end of the argument you're now parroting my position. Exactly, if you are going to require remote connection in order to get your plugins to work, then I don't need your plugins. I'll just hang up the phone.

Didn't I say that back in the first post or two?

If you guys want to let some low paid tech support try shit on your machine, knock yourselves out, my experience with tech support has generally been lackluster. If your stuff doesn't work without remote connection, then something about what you're doing is too complicated for your skill set.

What if you're already uncomfortable with updating drivers, or other suggestions they give to solve the problem? Is that bad customer support too, because YOU think it is something which is not necessary, or does make you feel uncomfortable? As has been pointed out, remote support is a common practice in giving customer support. Again, the customer sees everything the supporter does on his machine. It also has been pointed out that even if the supporter sees, or logs your admin password (again, how?), it won't matter, because after the session, you disallow remote control again. And you can change your password after, if you feel like, though, as mentioned, it's not necessary. So what exactly is it that you fear? Doesn't the support employee rather has to fear for his job, when you say he snuffed through anything? When i got remote support by a MS employee, i got asked to rate him after the support call. Now guess what would have happened if a handful of people rated him bad, or even claimed that he snuffed through their personal stuff.

[ghettosynth]

The essence of this is that forcing customers to do something they're uncomfortable with is bad customer service, period.

And who has done that now? Even if it has been the case here, which i doubt, and i haven't read anything about it, you can just hang up the phone. Boom.

Bad choice of words, of course, you knew what I meant. Let me restate it clearly.

Requiring customers to do something they're uncomfortable with in order to receive service is bad customer service, period.

I love how at the end of the argument you're now parroting my position. Exactly, if you are going to require remote connection in order to get your plugins to work, then I don't need your plugins. I'll just hang up the phone.

Didn't I say that back in the first post or two?

If you guys want to let some low paid tech support try shit on your machine, knock yourselves out, my experience with tech support has generally been lackluster. If your stuff doesn't work without remote connection, then something about what you're doing is too complicated for your skill set.

What if you're already uncomfortable with updating drivers, or other suggestions they give to solve the problem? Is that bad customer support too, because YOU think it is something which is not necessary, or does make you feel uncomfortable? As has been pointed out, remote support is a common practice in giving customer support. Again, the customer sees everything the supporter does on his machine. It also has been pointed out that even if the supporter sees, or logs your admin password (again, how?), it won't matter, because after the session, you disallow remote control again. And you can change your password after, if you feel like, though, as mentioned, it's not necessary. So what exactly is it that you fear? Doesn't the support employee rather has to fear for his job, when you say he snuffed through anything? When i got remote support by a MS employee, i got asked to rate him after the support call. Now guess what would have happened if a handful of people rated him bad, or even claimed that he snuffed through their personal stuff.

I'm sorry bro, I'm so bored with this. You keep repeating yourself with the same nonsense. I'm just not going to address you point by point.

As far as your absurd review scenario, let me spell it out for you. Most users are not more computer literate than tech support, so you wouldn't know if he was an idiot, and you wouldn't give him a bad review. However, it's immediately apparent to me that tech support is worth exactly what they're paid, or less. Since I'm in the minority of musician customers, statistically, bad reviews from the knowledgable will have no effect on their performance review.

Probably for you, it's better to let them connect to your system.

[chk071]

You totally disregard that the common computer user is a dummy. So, in most use cases, it would be the best to do remote support. I'm actually surprised it isn't more common. Best thing invented. Can't count the times i had to help someone on the phone, and he had no idea how to describe his problem, what he's seeing, or execute what i suggest to him. Everyone who knows how horrible it is to try to fix something you're not seeing, and having to rely on the other guy to describe his issue, and do what you tell him, will appreciate a method to do it yourself. The "privacy risk" mentioned here is a laugh, myself and others pointed that out already. If you still insist that it is a privacy issue, well, continue your monolog, if you're not open to reasonable arguments.