Steinberg Discontinuing VST2 Support in its products

[S0lo]

There is an OSC 2? (never used OSC, just heard it mention a million times on different forums )
rsp

I mean OSC is supposed to be a better alternative for MIDI. But then it was never widely adopted. At least relative to MIDI

Too much stuff was already using MIDI. So any new thing had to offer some compatibility with the old hardware/software to see large success. Well, thats at least IMHO.

[zvenx]

oh got ya.. didn't know it was suppose to do midi notes etc.. I thought it was just a way of controlling parameters 'remotely'.

rsp

[vurt]

Why are you like this?

he was raised by wolves, on reddit.

[zvenx]

I know for sure not v12...
and steinberg has said as such...
so I can comment here on the v12 with 100% certainty.

rsp

[chk071]

Why are you like this?

Yeah, stop insulting my TikTok homies.

[Hink]

so we're just gonna encourage him are we?

[sqigls]

thin ice

[surreal]

What rhymes with Hink?

Super Hero, Awesome Mod, I think!

(Are we writing a new song by Pink?)

[stargate]

By that same logic. MIDI shouldn't be used at all today because it has been for 35 years now. Yet, new hardware comes out every year supporting MIDI. Why does Roland, Korg, sequential, Novation, Arturia, Moog, etc still support MIDI. Comon folks. move on.

C++ STL library has been there for 22+ years now. We shouldn't use cout, cin, iostream, vectors, etc. they're too old. Let alone C functions like printf() and scanf()

Windows API still has functions and structures that are 25+ years old. BitBlt(), CreateThread(), OpenClipboard(), GlobalAlloc(). etc.. Why doesn't Microsoft remove those old horses ?

I don't know about Apple. But I'm sure others do.

Time doesn't make something obsolete. Some thing is obsolete only if people don't have a use for it any more.

Post of the year. Users often want "the new thing" because they assume it will be better than the old thing. Who wants to be anti-progress? Bring on the future!

The problem is, "2nd system syndrome" is real, and developers often screw things up, or worse, deliberately turn a new technology into a legal trap to further their own market dominance. There are plenty of "old" technologies like C89, MIDI and VST2 that still are the best tool for some jobs, despite the fact that people from the future tried (and failed) to design a better mousetrap.

[Urs]

Unless a really solid Vst 2 to 3 adapter comes about.

Unfortunately latter adapter won’t be possible.

VST2 can’t be wrapped with anything that requires it to be open sourced. Such as the GPLv3 version of the VST3 license. But the commercial (aka proprietary) VST3 license might eventually exclude the right to publish derivatives of VST2…

[syntonica]

I don't know about Apple. But I'm sure others do.

With the move to Apple Silicon, they finally managed to put a stake in the heart of Carbon, which was the old OS9 and older Pascal-based GUI and graphics framework. It was only ported to OS X as a temporary stopgap until devs could move over to Cocoa. Apple should've taken it out behind the barn with OS 10.4!

It's hard to replace old technology with newer. The older is tried, tested and familiar. It just works, as opposed to the new hotness. As Steinberg has discovered...

[sQeetz]

Just chiming in to say I don't have any opinion on anything said here.
VST2 - Reason needs it so I install it.
VST3 - why not? Propellerhead will support it eventually according to their roadmap. Can delete VST2 folder after that
As a non-dev I would prefer them to support AUs in order to get rid of all VST stuff, but I can't tell how difficult that would be. As far as I've gathered from this thread developing for AU doesn't require any licensing at all.

[LeVzi]

Unless a really solid Vst 2 to 3 adapter comes about.

Unfortunately latter adapter won’t be possible.

VST2 can’t be wrapped with anything that requires it to be open sourced. Such as the GPLv3 version of the VST3 license. But the commercial (aka proprietary) VST3 license might eventually exclude the right to publish derivatives of VST2…

So basically there defintely won't be away to get any plugins that aren't VST3 into Cubase at all?

Steinberg going to be dropping the ball there in a big way

[Cochrane]

Unless a really solid Vst 2 to 3 adapter comes about.

Unfortunately latter adapter won’t be possible.

VST2 can’t be wrapped with anything that requires it to be open sourced. Such as the GPLv3 version of the VST3 license. But the commercial (aka proprietary) VST3 license might eventually exclude the right to publish derivatives of VST2…

Sorry, but I don't get the point: would be possible two years from now making (and selling!) a strictly closed-source VST2-to-[VST3/other_format] adapter, providing a valid acquired VST2 commercial developer license? I hope so...

[DarkStar]

If they (third-party developers) don't want to give up VST2, Steinberg can punish them in other ways, like permanently banning them from using the VST3 SDK.

That's a win, win, isn't it?