iLok?

[ATS]

If there has to be copy protection, I prefer ilok, especially over C/R. But of course the best copy protection is none.

[MFXxx]

Im in the same camp, for the time it takes to re-authorise software, the CR process, serials etc, Ilok makes a fresh install so quick to set up. Recently reinstalled my system from fresh, having way too many plugins it was great to just to install the ilok driver, pop in the dongle and the 150+ licenses were ready to go. So much easier.
Korg Legacy for example takes about 6 CRs to authorise and has to be done on launch of each daw freshly installed or when the time zone updates, very archaic.
Most devs nowadays with ilok drop you two licenses so you can keep one in the cloud if any hiccups. For the time saved, ilok can be a real time saver so I see it as a useful acessoriy.

[robotmonkey]

I think there is a common misconception that products utilizing this system must use a physical key.
We have found its actually extremely flexible as it offers Anon authorisation C/R, account based soft unlock and optional key or multi-license server support few solutions offer all of these options.

And it's also completely cracked and probably quite expensive for developers.

Soft iLok is almost bearable as long as it works. But it is a single point of failure. It's still basically a C/R but it allows one to authorize software from multiple developers. I would never ever have all my plugins authorized through one system only. It also makes me dependent on a faceless third party with a record of constant f*ckups. This dependency makes me perceive iLok protected software as low value and thus I would never pay any serious money for iLok plugins. Serial, regcode or keyfile based software has no such dependency so I regard them more highly. Ironically now that iLok has been cracked I'm more inclined to buy iLok plugins because I know that I'm not dependent on Pace in any way.

iLok also has the biggest system overhead of any C/P mechanism out there. It needs system level drivers which is a liability in the world of agile development and constant tightening of security of Windows 10. iLok plugins are also super slow to load on first time and the Pace wrapper code has shown to be ~40-50% of the plugin which leads to general waste of system resources.

I would also agree that the best way is to vote with your wallet which I'm doing. I generally tend to avoid iLok software because it's very easy with so much competition out there. I completely ignore any software that needs me to buy a physical dongle but I'm not religious about avoiding soft iLok. I'm ok with using it with freebies. I also have couple of plugins I have gotten for dirt cheap in the 15$ range. Strangely enough they were Air plugins. The most I have spent was the recent purchase of Xils PolyKB which cost 39$ and even that seemed too expensive for an iLok plugin. Only other iLok using companies I would consider giving my money are probably Eventide and maybe SoundToys because they have been pretty generous with their freebies. But again, the prices need to be dirt cheap.

[robotmonkey]

Im in the same camp, for the time it takes to re-authorise software, the CR process, serials etc, Ilok makes a fresh install so quick to set up. Recently reinstalled my system from fresh, having way too many plugins it was great to just to install the ilok driver, pop in the dongle and the 150+ licenses were ready to go. So much easier.
Korg Legacy for example takes about 6 CRs to authorise and has to be done on launch of each daw freshly installed or when the time zone updates, very archaic.
Most devs nowadays with ilok drop you two licenses so you can keep one in the cloud if any hiccups. For the time saved, ilok can be a real time saver so I see it as a useful acessoriy.

Talk about putting all your eggs in one basket.

I do a reinstall about once in two years and it takes me one day. Entering serials is pretty non noticeable part of it. But with that software I have a certainty that I can back it up and always reinstall it whenever I want. No dependency on any third parties.

[robotmonkey]

If there has to be copy protection, I prefer ilok, especially over C/R. But of course the best copy protection is none.

Soft iLok is basically a C/R.

[ATS]

If there has to be copy protection, I prefer ilok, especially over C/R. But of course the best copy protection is none.

Soft iLok is basically a C/R.

That's why I use a dongle.

[Aloysius]

Im in the same camp, for the time it takes to re-authorise software, the CR process, serials etc, Ilok makes a fresh install so quick to set up. Recently reinstalled my system from fresh, having way too many plugins it was great to just to install the ilok driver, pop in the dongle and the 150+ licenses were ready to go. So much easier.
Korg Legacy for example takes about 6 CRs to authorise and has to be done on launch of each daw freshly installed or when the time zone updates, very archaic.
Most devs nowadays with ilok drop you two licenses so you can keep one in the cloud if any hiccups. For the time saved, ilok can be a real time saver so I see it as a useful acessoriy.

Talk about putting all your eggs in one basket.

I do a reinstall about once in two years and it takes me one day. Entering serials is pretty non noticeable part of it. But with that software I have a certainty that I can back it up and always reinstall it whenever I want. No dependency on any third parties.

For those of us who have more than two plugins, it can take weeks to deal with all the different copy protection out there. iLok is a real time saver in this scenario.

[kocio21]

On a slightly side note, it's amazing how ridiculous is software market (not only audio).

Ilok... well. Why should we even bother with this crap. Customers don't need any form of copy protection, it's dev's thing. So why customer should be bothered to buy some dongle, worry about licenses and such? If developer wants to keep it's product copy protected, do it without customer ever noticing it. Physical products are protected (idk, cars, phones etc) for customer's safety, not for manufacturer's safety. It's all upside down in software world.

On the other hand... we have subscription model wchich assumes that you don't own anything, you just rent the right to use the tool as long as you pay. But do you really OWN something you buy for full prize? Company tells you how many times you can install it, on how many computers, you obviously can't borrow it to a friend, a lot of time you can't sell it or you can after asking for special permission or even paying ridiculous fee (FXpansion 50$ fee to sell something you own). I don't consider this "owning" something if you are strictly told what you can and can't do with product.

And everyone seems to be happy with this kind of crap. People are fine with buying hilariously overpriced chunk of code with billion restrictions and are happy even to pay additional cash for dongle and suffer from different consequences just to make company's life easier.

[Megakazbek]

It's even more ridiculous considering that most iLok products are cracked. I can't believe that any reasonable developer would pay for this non-functional "copy protection", so my guess is that PACE's business model works like this: they actually pay certain developers to have iLok protection for their products, and profit from users buying iLoks and subscribing to trivial services that are expected to be included by default.

[kmonkey]

It's even more ridiculous considering that most iLok products are cracked. I can't believe that any reasonable developer would pay for this non-functional "copy protection", so my guess is that PACE's business model works like this: they actually pay certain developers to have iLok protection for their products, and profit from users buying iLoks and subscribing to trivial services that are expected to be included by default.

Your guess is completely wrong. But your logic is fine. I keep asking same thing.

Ask any iLok developer. They are actually paying fee to ilok just to be able to use it. Yes company is paying ilok not the other way. And it's strictly regulated in contract - in simplistic way - if ilok is cracked (and we all know it is eventually) company can not ask iLok to compensate damage caused by warez software.

I don't get it. I could understand it if ilok is uncrackable - sure i myself would have it as well if ilok is uncrackable and i am selling digital product. But ilok is cracked every so and then so i am not sure why developers even consider iLok protection anymore? Let alone usb key??

In conversation with one developer he said to me that he is counting on that period of when ilok is not cracked and that's all to it. Seems dumb to me. You are forcing customer to buy a key, you are paying ilok fee to use their SDK, copy protection and online mechanism and then when ilok is cracked all this is obsolete to some extent.

WTF?

[Hink]

I'm moving this thread to Everything Else as it is just another thread debating ilok and not specific to instruments.