Why the iLok hate?

[JunSev]

And in the 13 years I have been on kvr and the complaints have been constant, let's see.
Waves stopped. PsP started.

Which other developers have you guys change the minds of?

And in those 13 years quite a few new developers have emerged...who do use ilok.. That is I am sure they are more developers now who use ilok's than 13 years ago.
rsp

And that at the end doesn't mean that a very clear problem isn't there and continues there for so many years.

Is an example everyone has seen in the trendings, politics, history, social problems and more; never something widely spread means that is a right thing, never. You know by yourself there is a problem but you are just trying to justify what can't be justified.

For real, every time someone support something like this copy protection scheme the first things that comes to mind is what sort of education, what their beliefs are? how can someone support something that takes ownership of the license over them, a really bad copy-protection that most likely is interested in make money, trying to make the users to pay additional fee for further "protection", even knowing that an accident can happen and the license can be lost, it really makes me wonder if they are friend, there is some links with some developer that supports that or they are part of that disgusting company.

Like come on, really?... if your system crash, is stolen or some update might be needed, you my friend, can lost what is supposed to be your license, your keys; you're dependent of the will of Ilok or the company and the most disgusting thing about all of this, is that a global company like Pace knows perfectly something like that can and will happen.

[chk071]

Like come on, really?... if your system crash, is stolen or some update might be needed, you my friend, can lost what is supposed to be your license, your keys;

But you don't. Why do we keep hearing the always same wrong allegations?

[Teksonik]

Let me get this straight....you want me to pay extra for a hardware dongle to protect your intellectual property when the intellectual property I create using your software can't be protected in the same way ? You want me to pay extra to use an intrusive copy protection method because you are either too incompetent or too lazy to out code the crackers ?

Seems fair to me where do I sign up ?

The first iLok Love/Hate thread started the day their first dongle was released and they won't stop until the last dongle is tossed in a land fill.

I used to have a hardware dongle....on my Atari ST back in the 80's. It's good to see copy protection has advanced so far in that time.........

I'm out of here....there are few thread topics as pointless as this one. There will never be a resolution..........

[zvenx]

You are assuming I think like you.

I don't think there is a problem with ilok.
It is one of my favourite forms of copy protection once it comes with two activations or more..... new computer I am up and running in seconds.
I like that.
I really like that.
No reinstall serial number. No phone home for c/r.
New OS update, or change of internal Hard drive.... no problem.

Insert ilok and I am off and running.

I am on record saying it is ilok computer authorisation is the disaster waiting to happen, and I would never use that.
But dongles?
I am perfectly fine with it.

rsp

And in the 13 years I have been on kvr and the complaints have been constant, let's see.
Waves stopped. PsP started.

Which other developers have you guys change the minds of?

And in those 13 years quite a few new developers have emerged...who do use ilok.. That is I am sure they are more developers now who use ilok's than 13 years ago.
rsp

And that at the end doesn't mean that a very clear problem is there and continues there for so many years.

Is an example everyone has seen in the trendings, politics, history, social problems and more; never something widely spread means that is a right thing, never. You know by yourself there is a problem but you are just trying to justify what can't be justified.

For real, every time someone support something like this copy protection scheme the first things that comes to mind is what sort of education, what their beliefs are? how can someone support something that takes ownership of the license over them, a really bad copy-protection that most likely is interested in make money, trying to make the users to pay additional fee for further "protection", even knowing that an accident can happen and the license can be lost, it really makes me wonder if they are friend, there is some links with some developer that supports that or they are part of that disgusting company.

Like come on, really?... if your system crash, is stolen or some update might be needed, you my friend, can lost what is supposed to be your license, your keys; you're dependent of the will of Ilok or the company and the most disgusting thing about all of this, is that a global company like Pace knows perfectly something like that can and will happen.

[chk071]

See i'd be the first one to be glad if the dongle stuff gets dropped tomorrow. I just think it's ridiculous how a industry, which consists mostly of really, really small businesses, who try hard to make a living are treated as if they were some evil multinational corprorations with billions of cash flow. And, especially, that the consumer only always sees his own position. While he should really mind the position of the people he buys from as well, because, if they do well, prices will be low, and companies will be healthy enough to still provide nice tools to make music tomorrow. I think it's really a consumer attitude issue. And an issue of very short sight.

Anyway, it's always the same, never ending discussion. So, it's over and out for me. Doubt that there's a point to repeat the obvious over and over again.

[Teksonik]

I will drop this before I go. We could put a huge dent in the debate if Pace would simply put some plugins on their empty Dongles. Make people think they are getting something for their $40-$50 besides a fancy USB stick and the privilege of supporting lazy and incompetent developers.....

[chk071]

Actually a good point (about the cost of the hardware dongle). Why not put one or two plugins on it, the AIR plugins, which are literally sold for nothing, come to mind.

Anyway, i really don't know how future proof the system is, in general. I rather see a future for cloud protection, than for hardware dongles.

Regarding the "lazy and incompetent developers", i'd say it's pretty much a cost/benefit calculation. Besides, i doubt that many devs who are into DSP would want to fuss with security/protection as well.

[mgw38]

Anyway, i really don't know how future proof the system is, in general. I rather see a future for cloud protection, than for hardware dongles.

I would think that eventually somebody will build something based on a decentralized ledger technology (blockchain, hashgraph, or whatever).

But to be honest, so far I have not yet seen anything more convenient than iLok. Especially iLok Cloud looks very promising.

And the idea that an industry can live without any digital asset protection whatsoever is nothing more than techno-social romanticism. It is just not going to happen.

[JunSev]

And the idea that an industry can live without any digital asset protection whatsoever is nothing more than techno-social romanticism. It is just not going to happen.

It will not happen, but always is better implement better alternatives.

The real problem never is addressed and is getting worse, I will ask a single question, who is to blame? who has the fault? who is disrespecting the developers?... is the normal user? no is not, then instead to use a horrendous copy protection scheme why the developers can't go and attack the real problems? why better they don't go and united close those places where theirs software could be shared illegally? instead of that what the future is holding for us will not be good, seriously, will not be nothing good.

And just to add, no all copy protection are bad, not all copy protection takes complete ownership over the user, no all ask fee for more "protection", no all copy protection makes the user completely dependent of the company (if the company dissappear or something happens in a future, then you will not have the software neither). There are better alternatives and better solutions to all of those problems.

[robotmonkey]

Anyway, i really don't know how future proof the system is, in general. I rather see a future for cloud protection, than for hardware dongles.

But to be honest, so far I have not yet seen anything more convenient than iLok. Especially iLok Cloud looks very promising.

And the idea that an industry can live without any digital asset protection whatsoever is nothing more than techno-social romanticism. It is just not going to happen.

U-He has a 100 times more convenient protection that iLok. More effective and customer friendlier too. So did Camel Audio whose plugins remained uncracked longer than any iLok protected plugin.

There's plenty of companies who thrive despite having minimal protection. Image-Line is prime example. Fruityloops is probably the most pirated piece of music software and yet they have been in business for decades.

[simmo75]

Seems like working studio engineers and producers love the convenience of being able to use there usual plugins wherever they go. Hobbiests don’t like it, which is a shame because they’re missing out on some Top notch plugins.
It works for me, never had any issues.

[chk071]

There's plenty of companies who thrive despite having minimal protection. Image-Line is prime example. Fruityloops is probably the most pirated piece of music software and yet they have been in business for decades.

Which doesn't prove that it would work for everyone. There are enough examples of companies which headed to more restrictive copy protections, Adobe for example.

I also wonder how many legit users Image-Line/FL Studio really has. And how much the company grew over the years. Doesn't look like much, TBH.

[himalaya]

Seems like working studio engineers and producers love the convenience of being able to use there usual plugins wherever they go. Hobbiests don’t like it, which is a shame because they’re missing out on some Top notch plugins.
It works for me, never had any issues.

I actually work with two world class producers who travel the world, and have done a lot of sessions for some of the biggest names ( I don't want to drop names here) and none of them use any iLok'ed software. I myself, make my living from sound design and music production, so I am not a hobbyist, and I stay away from any hardware dongles too.

What you will find lately, is that world class producers have their own laptops, and that is what they carry around with them, and not a single dongle that they then need to use on somebody else's computer. People like this choose the path of least resistance, so no dongles, as they have all the pitfalls which I have outlined in my first post in this thread.

Of course, there will be those who prefer to use dongles and that is fine. But to suggest that it's only hobbyists who stay away from dongles, does not tally up with my experience.

[chk071]

Well.. at the same time you suggest that noone professional uses dongles, because you know 2 or 3 professionals who don't. Eventide or Exponential Audio are very popular brands, and both use iLok. There'll be loads of professionals using iLok protected stuff.

[mgw38]

U-He has a 100 times more convenient protection that iLok. More effective and customer friendlier too. So did Camel Audio whose plugins remained uncracked longer than any iLok protected plugin.

U-He uses per-plugin serials which is extremely inconvenient if you move licenses around a lot, regularly change your studio computer or need to use computers you do not have admin right for on a temporary basis (such as in an educational setting, for example). With iLok, I do not rely on the IT department to uninstall the plugin, I just unplug the dongle after I'm done.