Steinberg Discontinuing VST2 Support in its products

[Super Piano Hater 64]

Oh, they are trying. Here is part of an email I was sent.

First of all, that's crazy. The most charitable way I can read this is "we have inside knowledge that Apple will tighten security rules (again) and make it architecturally impossible to use VST2 on future versions of macOS" but that's a ridiculous stretch and they're most likely just posturing to scare people.

Speaking of inside knowledge, though, is it legally okay for you to post that? I hope it's not regarded as confidential communication.

[MirkoVanHauten]

Jeeez, reading the VST3 license agreement I know why CLAP was a good idea. They really can cancel the use of VST3 anytime they want. Would be interesting to see if this could be used to exclude certain free-thinkers from Steinberg hosts

[zvenx]

I know for a fact some plugin EULA's also have a similar clause .. that is terminate whenever they want , at least SB's require written notice.
rsp

[Super Piano Hater 64]

They literally already tried this.

Did they? What happened? I must have missed that. I don't have a VST2 license, I missed the memo to get grandfathered in, so I haven't really been keeping track...

I've talked about it like 20 times in this thread alone.

viewtopic.php?p=8345249#p8345249

Quick summary: In March 2021, they modified the VST3 license so it cancels VST2 licenses. Then they said they'd offer a "grace period" to plugin developers and took out the cancellation clause.

[Dewdman42]

Oh, they are trying. Here is part of an email I was sent.

First of all, that's crazy. The most charitable way I can read this is "we have inside knowledge that Apple will tighten security rules (again) and make it architecturally impossible to use VST2 on future versions of macOS" but that's a ridiculous stretch and they're most likely just posturing to scare people.

I really don't think Apple would limit VST2 use through security measures, unless there is actually some kind of security vulnerability in a more general sense, which Apple was planning to tighten up on already and it happens to affect VST2 plugins in some way. I could see Steinberg having problems with future MacOS security for anything related to KEXT...such as ASIO maybe...but I really doubt it on VST. But hey...who knows...maybe Apple is doing something to plug up some exploitable security hole...which VST2 has been using this whole time..we don't know. If so...that would be an easy way too Steinberg to just say "sorry Charlie", if you wanna make music use VST3.

And also if that is true I hope the CLAP team is listening...because something like that may affect what they are doing too. But there will almost certainly be a solution.....a solution which Steinberg would utterly ignore of course, in order to justify VST3, but that is what would happen.

[Dewdman42]

They literally already tried this.

Did they? What happened? I must have missed that. I don't have a VST2 license, I missed the memo to get grandfathered in, so I haven't really been keeping track...

I've talked about it like 20 times in this thread alone.

Fair enough, I have not read every single post....

Quick summary: In March 2021, they modified the VST3 license so it cancels VST2 licenses. Then they said they'd offer a "grace period" to plugin developers and took out the cancellation clause.

Right, thanks for remembering that...I do recall that now...

But I think its basically what they will do again later once they decide the grace period is over...so it will be RIP for VST2 distribution after that, unless you avoid ever signing any new VST3 license (which means not shipping VST3 plugins)

[zvenx]

Screen Shot 2022-02-05 at 4.11.20 PM.jpg

https://forums.steinberg.net/t/vst-3-sd ... /201638/13


The most recent Agreement which I linked a few posts before doesn't mention a transition period either, they took it out.

Screen Shot 2022-02-05 at 4.16.13 PM.jpg

rsp

[Super Piano Hater 64]

I really don't think Apple would limit VST2 use through security measures, unless there is actually some kind of security vulnerability in a more general sense, which Apple was planning to tighten up on already and it happens to affect VST2 plugins in some way. I could see Steinberg having problems with future MacOS security for anything related to KEXT...such as ASIO maybe...but I really doubt it on VST. But hey...who knows...maybe Apple is doing something to plug up some exploitable security hole...which VST2 has been using this whole time..we don't know. If so...that would be an easy way too Steinberg to just say "sorry Charlie", if you wanna make music use VST3.

And also if that is true I hope the CLAP team is listening...because something like that may affect what they are doing too. But there will almost certainly be a solution.....a solution which Steinberg would utterly ignore of course, in order to justify VST3, but that is what would happen.

I could absolutely see Apple doing something like this. They already introduced out-of-process AUv3 plugins. They could drop AUv2 support on very short notice and make changes to notarization rules (among other things) that effectively remove the option of using in-process plugins of any kind in any (notarized) software. Of course, VST2 would not be the target of such a move. It would just be one of the casualties caught in the blast radius.

[Super Piano Hater 64]

The most recent Agreement which I linked a few posts before doesn't mention a transition period either, they probably took it out.

They did take it out.

I say that every time I bring this up.

Please read my analysis (and Urs's) above.

[zvenx]

You did.. I wasn't suggesting you didn't, not everyone does though.
rsp

[Dewdman42]

I could absolutely see Apple doing something like this. They already introduced out-of-process AUv3 plugins. They could drop AUv2 support on very short notice and make changes to notarization rules (among other things) that effectively remove the option of using in-process plugins of any kind in any (notarized) software. Of course, VST2 would not be the target of such a move. It would just be one of the casualties caught in the blast radius.

yea its a good point. Though I do have to say that LogicPro currently works very poorly with AUv3. It is very prevalent on the iOS platform, but I personally only know of one AUv3 plugin on MacOS...and it is considered Beta because some stuff doesn't work properly yet and a lot of stuff about LogicPro's general architecture seems to get in the way of it.

Apple is a LONG ways away from pulling the plug on AU2's working anymore, if they did it would be a catastrophe for LogicPro users everywhere.

[kritikon]

yea its a good point. Though I do have to say that LogicPro currently works very poorly with AUv3. It is very prevalent on the iOS platform, but I personally only know of one AUv3 plugin on MacOS...and it is considered Beta because some stuff doesn't work properly yet and a lot of stuff about LogicPro's general architecture seems to get in the way of it.

Apple is a LONG ways away from pulling the plug on AU2's working anymore, if they did it would be a catastrophe for LogicPro users everywhere.

I thought Apple's business ethos was to make almost nothing backwards compatible to force users to incessantly buy new stuff. It's exactly the kind of thing Apple would do.

[pdxindy]

The most recent Agreement which I linked a few posts before doesn't mention a transition period either, they probably took it out.

They did take it out.

I say that every time I bring this up.

Please read my analysis (and Urs's) above.

They took it out because they felt forced to... but it showed their thinking and that they cannot be trusted as a steward.

[pdxindy]

yea its a good point. Though I do have to say that LogicPro currently works very poorly with AUv3. It is very prevalent on the iOS platform, but I personally only know of one AUv3 plugin on MacOS...and it is considered Beta because some stuff doesn't work properly yet and a lot of stuff about LogicPro's general architecture seems to get in the way of it.

Apple is a LONG ways away from pulling the plug on AU2's working anymore, if they did it would be a catastrophe for LogicPro users everywhere.

I thought Apple's business ethos was to make almost nothing backwards compatible to force users to incessantly buy new stuff. It's exactly the kind of thing Apple would do.

That has nothing to do with VST2... that statement was just Steinberg trying to muddy the waters and shift blame to Apple for their own decisions which have nothing to do with Apple.

[Dewdman42]

I thought Apple's business ethos was to make almost nothing backwards compatible to force users to incessantly buy new stuff. It's exactly the kind of thing Apple would do.

Do you understand the difference between say, for example, that only macs newer then 2016 running macos 14.x can use the new version of logicpro that has now been amazingly updated to support AUv3 in true form for all the plentitude of auv3 plugins that are out there (not) (something that yes apple has done and will do again )

Vs

Removing auv2 support from macos making newer Macs unable to use all the Plentitude of auv2 plugins and only able to use auv3 plugins which are non existant as of now for the most part.

??!

We’re getting way off topic now, but no apple will not be abandoning auv2 until auv3 plugins become much more mainstream and logicpro itself actually can be made to use them properly. The latter thing would write off older mac users for sure and you can bet they will do that but until a huge majority of plugins are shipping in auv3 form; how would eliminating auv2 compatibility help them sell more macs?