Starting to hate iLOK

[el-bo (formerly ebow)]

Please, take a gander at the currently active Cakewalk forums to get a better sense of how C/R causes problems.

Why should I bother. I already said that if a company knows it's to cease trading, the right thing to do is to bring down the walls.

Again, I'm not arguing which is better. I'm just placing my bets on hardware failure being more likely than company death. My laptop is 5 years old, and while I imagine there's still some years left in it, you never know.

Either way, the death of a company causing issues to my software, for me, is easier to deal with than a company just folding their arms and telling me "Tough shit! You should've bought a dongle". In reality, a company ceasing to exist means no compatibility updates, And while I'm not on the bleeding edge of OS updating, I don't expect to hold onto software forever.

I'm not sure what you're point is here. So you own one piece of decent iLok software, so what? If you had some of the better software that exists, then you'd realize what I'm talking about.

I get that there are huge amounts of benefits to owning iLok, I just don't want to own one. I never have. That's why, despite first trying Echoboy about 10 years ago, I never considered buying till it went 'soft'. Clearly, I didn't do my due diligence with regard to the possible ramifications of computer death. Now I know, I want confirmation about the vendor's personal policy. If I don't like it, I'm out. Nothing more, nothing less. Having only one piece of worthwhile software on iLok makes the whole thing easy, both in terms of process, and in me being able to get over it.

As for some random internet character wanking on about me not having "some of the better software that exists":

Yep, get over it.

Get over what? You trying to one-up me on who has the better toys? I'm 45 years old, so, yeah...I'm over that

[yellowmix]

Now I know, I want confirmation about the vendor's personal policy. If I don't like it, I'm out. Nothing more, nothing less.

You could, you know, send them an support request as a customer, instead of gossiping about it.

[ghettosynth]

Yep, get over it.

Get over what? You trying to one-up me on who has the better toys? I'm 45 years old, so, yeah...I'm over that

Nope, you are perceiving it that way. I'm simply telling you that my experience tells me that there is more value in embracing iLok (and related methods) than rejecting it based on a perception of quality and utility provided by firms that use iLok. That you seem to think that this has anything to do with the quality of music produced with such tools or "one-upmanship" is all in your head.

As I said, get over it. Where "it" is being offended that someone is judging the quality of your tools based on your stated acknowledgement of rejecting an entire class of tools. So clearly, since you ranted about it some more, at 45 you are not yet quite over it.

[el-bo (formerly ebow)]

Now I know, I want confirmation about the vendor's personal policy. If I don't like it, I'm out. Nothing more, nothing less.

You could, you know, send them an support request as a customer, instead of gossiping about it.

I've already said I intend to email them

[el-bo (formerly ebow)]

Yep, get over it.

Get over what? You trying to one-up me on who has the better toys? I'm 45 years old, so, yeah...I'm over that

Nope, you are perceiving it that way. I'm simply telling you that my experience tells me that there is more value in embracing iLok (and related methods) than rejecting it based on a perception of quality and utility provided by firms that use iLok. That you seem to think that this has anything to do with the quality of music produced with such tools or "one-upmanship" is all in your head.

As I said, get over it. Where "it" is being offended that someone is judging the quality of your tools based on your stated acknowledgement of rejecting an entire class of tools. So clearly, since you ranted about it some more, at 45 you are not yet quite over it.

Well, maybe I misunderstood. But I wasn't talking of quality of music either.

In all my years of doing this I've only wanted one plugin that uses iLok. Something else might come along, but there always seem to be alternatives. It hasn't happened yet, and I am just pretty much over all g.a.s. Either way, I'm not about to pony up for a usb stick for one plugin, especially considering my 2-usb slots are fully occupied (Yes, I have hubs).

I've already acknowledged there are clear benefits to iLok's, despite their disadvantages, but I, as in me (I'm not speaking for you, or anyone else), am not interested.

I enquired (as did Himalaya) after another member's experience, for the sake of clarity, after which I made it clear that if I wasn't able to get some assurances that Soundtoys were a bit more lenient with their license renewals, I would just jump ship. No hate, no diatribe, and no crying and whining with others. So, why you had to stick your nose in with such accusations is beyond me.

And how did you get that I was offended at the thought that you were judging the quality of my plugins? I might have mistaken your intent, but maybe take my comment as it was intended i.e derision

So, no! I don't hate iLok. I don't particularly think C/R is better. And I won't harbour any bad will towards Soundtoys if they can't make any assurance.

[himalaya]

So now you are conveying that you don't understand the technical details.

Not "now". I said from the beginning that I don't know much about how iLok works beyond the many user reports of various iLok issues.
I'm kind of annoyed with myself for allowing myself to be sucked into long tedious topics about copy-protection, all out of fear of loosing access to products I have legitimately bought! I should not need to know the intricacies of how a copy-protection works, but I sure will voice my concerns.

There is no way to "deactivate" a license that is either on a dead hard drive or a hard drive that is just playing dead.

Not on the dead hard drive. The licence would be deactivated from the iLok soft account. I have a licence manager software from one company, which periodically scans for the vendor's own plugins, I'm fine with that. I would have thought that this is also how iLok works, which would make de-activating of a license possible. I don't know if this is technically possible, and so I'm mostly reflecting at this point...

IMO, that should not be possible by law without obtaining your consent every time. There are valid reasons to do this, e.g., upgrades, but beyond that the license should be treated as if it were any other asset that you own.

And here lies the issue: licenses on the soft-iLok account are assests which I do not own.
What I mean is, and we all know this, with any other software (non-dongle based) I can back up the installer and any serial numbers to an external drive for safe keeping. If my computer dies, I have a simple way of re-installing all such software without having to worry and/or hassle the software vendors. Or, I can simply log-in to my user account at the software vendor's website and retrieve all my installers and licenses. Here, with soft-iLok, it seems like people are at the mercy of other companies and have to count on good will and understanding. I think this is far from acceptable.

This whole thing about "emergencies" and "fault" is laughably naive. What does that have to do with anything? Something happened to YOUR machine, the vendor has no blame in that. That's like asking your bank for a new $100 bill because you lost the one that they gave you at the bar last night.

Legitimate emergencies have everything to do with it. We all know that computers fail, and so a system like 'soft-iLok' which is designed to make the customers life difficult when it comes to retrieving a license is stupid. It's backwards. It penalises a legitimate customer for no fault of their own. I think this should be evident to any sane person.

Further, in case of emergencies I have everything that *can* be backed up, backed up to an external HD. I'm good to go in case my computer dies, and can restore from my back ups, or like mentioned above, from user website accounts.
Of course you are right that the vendor can not be blamed for my computer issues, but I think this is boiling the issue down to a very simplistic level. Nobody is expecting the vendor to foot the bill for my computer repairs or pay for a new one. What the vendor can do however, is help in restoring a licence which is bought, which is legitimate, which belongs to one of their customers! It seems that PACE and some iLok using vendors are not up to speed with these ideas, in that why should a user plead to have their legitimate licence reactivated in case of a dead computer which had the soft-iLok app installed?

Your illustration with the bank note misses the point entirely, for the very basic reason: the bank note is a physical object, whereas a licence is not. Asking the bank to give me a replacement $100 bill is totally unlike asking for a new licence number. When the bank gives me another bank note, to replace the one I lost, they loose money, when a software vendor gives me a new licence, to replace the one gone to the cosmic dustbin with my dead computer, they do not loose anything at all. Pretty much every illustration that uses physical stuff does not make sense when using it in context of software licenses, which are not manufactured in a factory, which do not need to be distributed through physical means, etc, etc. I would have hoped that it's very easy to understand this difference.

[ghettosynth]

Yep, get over it.

Get over what? You trying to one-up me on who has the better toys? I'm 45 years old, so, yeah...I'm over that

Nope, you are perceiving it that way. I'm simply telling you that my experience tells me that there is more value in embracing iLok (and related methods) than rejecting it based on a perception of quality and utility provided by firms that use iLok. That you seem to think that this has anything to do with the quality of music produced with such tools or "one-upmanship" is all in your head.

As I said, get over it. Where "it" is being offended that someone is judging the quality of your tools based on your stated acknowledgement of rejecting an entire class of tools. So clearly, since you ranted about it some more, at 45 you are not yet quite over it.

Well, maybe I misunderstood. But I wasn't talking of quality of music either.

In all my years of doing this I've only wanted one plugin that uses iLok. Something else might come along, but there always seem to be alternatives. It hasn't happened yet, and I am just pretty much over all g.a.s. Either way, I'm not about to pony up for a usb stick for one plugin, especially considering my 2-usb slots are fully occupied (Yes, I have hubs).

I feel you on the GAS thing, but, if you only have one iLok plugin then you most likely lack the subjective experience to judge. You would have had to demo plugins to get around this and often the better quality plugins can't be used or demo'd on soft iLok.

Case in point Exponential Audio's reverbs.

Of course there are always alternatives, but alternatives aren't always quite as good. If you can find an alternative to IRCAM Verb3, EA's R2, or Flux Solera, I'm all ears. Sure, you can find things that work similarly, or achieve similar effect, or even, could achieve similar or better quality results with my own music. That doesn't mean that there are alternatives that I want to use. Some tools, such as Vienna Ensemble Pro (eLicenser, but same idea), have no alternatives that actually work and solve the same problem in the same way where that way is an important part of the solution.

But complaining about me addressing your posts is nonsense. This is a conversation, people are going to chat and when you post something, you have no say in who responds and how. I find these threads to be particularly "ignorance heavy." That you don't like that is just something else for you to get over.

[ghettosynth]

So now you are conveying that you don't understand the technical details.

Not "now". I said from the beginning that I don't know much about how iLok works beyond the many user reports of various iLok issues.
I'm kind of annoyed with myself for allowing myself to be sucked into long tedious topics about copy-protection, all out of fear of loosing access to products I have legitimately bought! I should not need to know the intricacies of how a copy-protection works, but I sure will voice my concerns.

Your concerns are born of ignorance.

There is no way to "deactivate" a license that is either on a dead hard drive or a hard drive that is just playing dead.

Not on the dead hard drive. The licence would be deactivated from the iLok soft account.

You don't understand how iLok works. Please go read the thread and learn something and stop talking to everyone else like they're the ones that don't understand. The entire point of iLok is that you have possession of the license and the control of that asset is not dependent on any online process.

[chk071]

The more i got into plugins, the more i realized how many gems out there use iLok protection. I don't really like it either, but, frankly, since i have a USB hub, and it doesn't use up any more ports on my computer, i stopped caring too much. As soon as companies using iLok allow cloud protection though, i will switch to that. I hope that many will do, i find it much more convenient than having a dongle sticking out.

And, again, people, don't worry. Cloud protection will be optional. Those who want to go on using dongles, or software iLok will surely be able to do that.

[himalaya]

In the end customers seem to forget that they are responsible. Like they are when losing they car keys or when deleting files, when buying a house or ranting in a public forum.

Responsible for what? For a software license which can not be backed up and used in case of emergencies when a computer dies? Or software vendors who can refuse a replacement licence in said situation?

Car keys? Really? It's a physical object. A license is not. I hope you can understand that one can be replaced with no manufacturing costs involved, the other can not. Can you guess which one?

"Deleting files, buying a house, forums"....what are you on about?

This is all about legitimate customers having access to their soft-iLok'ed products when a computer dies.

[murnau]

Don't bother himalaya.. ..some here simply don't get the valid point. Of course a license which get lost simply because a computer dies (one day every computer dies and most of the time without warning) is a no go. To say this is in the responsibility of the customer is laughable.

[ghettosynth]

In the end customers seem to forget that they are responsible. Like they are when losing they car keys or when deleting files, when buying a house or ranting in a public forum.

Responsible for what? For a software license which can not be backed up and used in case of emergencies when a computer dies? Or software vendors who can refuse a replacement licence in said situation?

Car keys? Really? It's a physical object. A license is not. I hope you can understand that one can be replaced with no manufacturing costs involved, the other can not. Can you guess which one?

It is, in essence, a physical object when you store it on a dongle. When you store it on your computer YOU are making a choice to store something that can't be recovered in a volatile container that Pace cannot help you with. It's like blaming the bank when you decide to store your cash on the dash of your car. Pace gives you an asset, the license, you get to choose where you keep that license just as in the old days you would get to choose where you stored your original CD/Floppy Disks. When you choose to store it on a dongle, that dongle as a unique ID and so there is no need to derive one from your computer. When you derive an ID from a computer, you have a vested interest in making sure that the ID can't be easily cloned.

You're kind of talking to a wall really. There's no solution for Pace that is going to make all users happy given the constraints of Pace's system. Those constraints are, in part, what are responsible for the value to the user base. The last thing that I want it yet another online process for managing the ongoing validity of my licenses. BTW: for those that do, your solution is coming in the form of cloud authorization, however, that will require you to be online when you use your machine and then we're going to see endless bitching about that.

[el-bo (formerly ebow)]

Yep, get over it.

Get over what? You trying to one-up me on who has the better toys? I'm 45 years old, so, yeah...I'm over that

Nope, you are perceiving it that way. I'm simply telling you that my experience tells me that there is more value in embracing iLok (and related methods) than rejecting it based on a perception of quality and utility provided by firms that use iLok. That you seem to think that this has anything to do with the quality of music produced with such tools or "one-upmanship" is all in your head.

As I said, get over it. Where "it" is being offended that someone is judging the quality of your tools based on your stated acknowledgement of rejecting an entire class of tools. So clearly, since you ranted about it some more, at 45 you are not yet quite over it.

Well, maybe I misunderstood. But I wasn't talking of quality of music either.

In all my years of doing this I've only wanted one plugin that uses iLok. Something else might come along, but there always seem to be alternatives. It hasn't happened yet, and I am just pretty much over all g.a.s. Either way, I'm not about to pony up for a usb stick for one plugin, especially considering my 2-usb slots are fully occupied (Yes, I have hubs).

I feel you on the GAS thing, but, if you only have one iLok plugin then you most likely lack the subjective experience to judge. You would have had to demo plugins to get around this and often the better quality plugins can't be used or demo'd on soft iLok.

Case in point Exponential Audio's reverbs.

Of course there are always alternatives, but alternatives aren't always quite as good. If you can find an alternative to IRCAM Verb3, EA's R2, or Flux Solera, I'm all ears. Sure, you can find things that work similarly, or achieve similar effect, or even, could achieve similar or better quality results with my own music. That doesn't mean that there are alternatives that I want to use. Some tools, such as Vienna Ensemble Pro (eLicenser, but same idea), have no alternatives that actually work and solve the same problem in the same way where that way is an important part of the solution.

But complaining about me addressing your posts is nonsense. This is a conversation, people are going to chat and when you post something, you have no say in who responds and how. I find these threads to be particularly "ignorance heavy." That you don't like that is just something else for you to get over.

You say you feel me on the g.a.s thing, but I'm not sure you do. I don't need to find alternatives to Exponential audio's reverbs, nor Ircam's or Flux's, nor Waves' or any others. Why? Because I have three Valhalla reverbs, Spacemaster2, and Space Designer (Logic). I likely don't need all of those, but this is what I have. I even own an EA reverb (The freebie), but since it needs physical iLok I've not even tried it

It's not because I think the 'verbs I have are the best, that I don't even need to look to your list. It's because I'm happy with what I have. And I've yet to come up against a scenario where I couldn't find what i was after within what I already had. Maybe one day I will, at which point I might go looking. Until then, I'm just happy with what I have.

There was an interesting thread started here the other day in which the op started by saying that he was happy using xxx plugin for xxx purpose, but he still had plugin fomo, and needed others' opinions on whether yyy would be better. It struck me as odd, and also struck me as odd that it struck me as odd. That's because I recognise that kind of 'grass is greener' feeling in myself, and was quite surprised that i no longer have it. (Swearing off buying plugs for the year seems to have had quite an impact).

So, if I lack subjective experience to judge, so be it. But I'm not judging the plugins. It was you who introduced the idea that I was missing out on superior plugins because I was avoiding the iLok. I am perfectly happy to accept that the plugins for which I have no subjective experience to judge are either subjectively, or even objectively better. It just doesn't matter to me...Yet!

I'm perfectly happy to accept that one day I might be lucky enough to find myself recording solo artists, quartets etc, and may find that I want something that can't be provided by what I currently have. Or maybe I end up with the kind of gig that means getting hold of VEP, in which case I'll assess options, then.

I'm not really complaining about you addressing my points, or joining in the conversation. It was the manner in which you did so. You've yet to address your misplaced accusations of iLok hate where there was none, or your suggestion that all us iLok-haters need to get a room, convention, or whatever to have a big cry about it all. But you get all sensitive when someone would rather you just eff off

[himalaya]

So now you are conveying that you don't understand the technical details.

Not "now". I said from the beginning that I don't know much about how iLok works beyond the many user reports of various iLok issues.
I'm kind of annoyed with myself for allowing myself to be sucked into long tedious topics about copy-protection, all out of fear of loosing access to products I have legitimately bought! I should not need to know the intricacies of how a copy-protection works, but I sure will voice my concerns.

Your concerns are born of ignorance.

Laughable!
My concerns are born of the fact that there appear to be software vendors who may not be willing to provide a replacement software licence when a computer dies, when said licence could not have been de-activated prior to the computer crashing!

You don't understand how iLok works. Please go read the thread and learn something and stop talking to everyone else like they're the ones that don't understand. The entire point of iLok is that you have possession of the license and the control of that asset is not dependent on any online process.

I'm not telling anyone how iLok works. When it comes to its inner workings, I can only muse, which is what I have stated from the beginning, so instead of this fact, which we all know, focus rather on the fact that I am trying to make, and it is, soft-iLok appears to be designed to make people's life difficult in case of emergencies. It's a system that could do with a revamp. A simple message, really.

[ghettosynth]

You say you feel me on the g.a.s thing, but I'm not sure you do. I don't need to find alternatives to Exponential audio's reverbs, nor Ircam's or Flux's, nor Waves' or any others. Why? Because I have three Valhalla reverbs, Spacemaster2, and Space Designer (Logic). I likely don't need all of those, but this is what I have. I even own an EA reverb (The freebie), but since it needs physical iLok I've not even tried it

I'm just referring to the perception of GAS as a phenomenon, not all acquisition of tools is GAS.

It's not because I think these are the best, that I don't even need to look to your list, it's because I'm happy with what I have.

Ok, here comes a cluebat, other people would NOT be happy with your inferior choices. So when I say "show me alternatives", it's not about you. It's about that you took offense to my claim of my experience as if it was about your music. You can either accept that it's true, or you can prove it wrong and that will require to you to show alternatives.

In my experience, as I said, and what drew your ire, is that, on average, the better developers employ hardware protection. They are typically going after a more professional audience that is going to see the value in that type of protection and that aren't going to whine about $40 and a USB port.

The entire point was trying to help some of you understand the value proposition of iLok. If that has no value to you, then you aren't the target market. As I see it the soft iLok is a compromise and we've seen several vendors reject that option because it's been easier to crack. I really don't see that changing. It comes with the territory.