NI is now part of Soundwide with plugin alliance etc! Lots of free stuff...

[ghettosynth]

So.....if you're already loaded up with stuff, which of these freebies would you recommend as worthwhile?

Just take the PA stuff because you get it all in click. The NI and iZotope offerings are meh and f**k meh respectively.

[j wazza]

Incidentally, as a measure of showing how great the hysteria is, this thread has now been almost entirely dominated by the subject, even though there's no subscription option even being hinted at in the Soundwide announcement. Maybe it'll happen in time, but such is the paranoia here that it's all anyone can think about. Bizarre. Just download the freebies and look out for good sales.

Here's what Dirk from PA said in his Facebook post about Soundwide, I'd say this is more than a hint that a subscription model is coming:
...
For a few bucks per month you can use everything you need, and once your new song is on Spotify and Apple Music, who cares about "owning" all the tools and sounds...?! ... we are even working with external agencies on new website technology, subscription technology, etc. "

ffs but oh well, if those 3 companies go sub only i would just use what i already have from them and not give them another penny, theyre not good enough to force peoples hand on subs
lets just hope more companies dont join, but i doubt the best ones like uhe and softube will, why associate with worse sounding software

this is such bullshit though, i care about owning the tools, i think most people do

[BONES]

For me there are 4 main problems with subs:
1. Issue of ownership - the biggest one. Sub runs out and you end up with nothing, you can't finish your old projects.

First of all, you don't own any software you have on your computer. What you buy is a license to use it. Secondly, if you are so stupid that you don't renew a subscription for something you are actively still using, then that's your problem. Thirdly, subscription based products often (sometimes?) keep working once the sub expires, so you can still open old projects. You just can't edit anything or open them in new projects.

2. Second hand market is dead

As it should be. I find it incredible that it ever existed.

3. No need for innovation anymore - the cash flow is set up so why pull new or existing clients with something original?

Except there is bound to be churn so you need to keep refreshing your offering to attract new users to replace those who stop renewing. PA and Presonus are two I can think of who add new offerings to their subs based products more regularly than U-He or Synapse do.

4. Quantity over quality - more mediocre plugins added to the sub to keep people convinced the sub it's worth it

This completely contradicts your previous point.

I can definitely see a nightmare scenario where most audio software will go sub only in the future

Then you have a far more vivid imagination than I do.

Clearly. Agree to disagree...

I am not about to agree to do anything because addressing your concerns means useful improvements don't happen.

[AnX]

Unsubscribed 4 times from PA so far, still getting emails.... is William working there now?

[0degree]

First of all, you don't own any software you have on your computer. What you buy is a license to use it. Secondly, if you are so stupid that you don't renew a subscription for something you are actively still using, then that's your problem. Thirdly, subscription based products often (sometimes?) keep working once the sub expires, so you can still open old projects. You just can't edit anything or open them in new projects.

You own a license and don't own software just like you own a hardware but don't own any hardware patents, know-how etc. I think you're just splitting hairs here for the lack of any argument

As it should be. I find it incredible that it ever existed.

LOL, so we also shouldn't be able to sell our hardware, right?

4. Quantity over quality - more mediocre plugins added to the sub to keep people convinced the sub it's worth it

This completely contradicts your previous point.

No it doesn't - one can just copy paste algos from one product to another and voila - new plug in the sub!

Then you have a far more vivid imagination than I do.

I could also say you lack of imagination apparently

[BONES]

You own a license and don't own software just like you own a hardware but don't own any hardware patents, know-how etc. I think you're just splitting hairs here for the lack of any argument

No, it's more like the rights you have when you borrow something. If I buy a physical product, I own it and i can do whatever I like with it, without restriction. OTOH, any restriction can be placed on a software license, as long as they are lawful. e.g. NFR licenses. And sometimes when you buy a hardware product that also comes with bundled software, you can sell the hardware but the software doesn't transfer with it, especially if it's 3rd party stuff.

Of course, your response addresses only one of three points I made, so I assume you've got no comeback with respect to the other two.

LOL, so we also shouldn't be able to sell our hardware, right?

That's your stupid logic, not mine. In my experience selling software licenses is pretty much unique to music software. e.g. I worked for Autodesk for 6 years and I know for a fact that all their product licenses specifically disallowed you to resell it, even things like 3DS Max or Maya that cost US$3500. When someone won a case against a software company over their rights, Autodesk pretty much stopped selling licenses on the spot and moved to a subscription only sales model. So yeah, I am surprised there was ever a viable second-hand market for music software and, equally, I am not surprised at all that vendors favour subscription over sales.

.. one can just copy paste algos from one product to another and voila - new plug in the sub!

Maybe you'd be stupid enough to fall for that but I think there is ample evidence around here that doing shit like that doesn't work, which is probably why I'm not aware of anyone, other than me, really doing it (and I gave my plugins away, so I didn't care they were mostly rehashes of earlier instruments).

I could also say you lack of imagination apparently

When it comes to ways of being a fuckwit, I certainly hope so.

[dionenoid]

You own a license and don't own software just like you own a hardware but don't own any hardware patents, know-how etc. I think you're just splitting hairs here for the lack of any argument

You never own software. It's not a physical product so different laws apply. That's a key essential difference. One that many can't seem to grasp for some reason.

[Scrubbing Monkeys]

Who owns who doesn't matter to me.....just deliver like CBS did with Fender not like who ever owns AIR.

I can‘t tell if you‘re joking. The context doesn‘t indicate irony… unless you‘re happy with AIR, which Autocorrect tries to keep me from typing.

You do know that the CBS era is universally considered the era of inferior quality for Fender? Cheap parts, wonky innovations and overall zero second hand value compared to Pre-CBS.

Actually was serious I realize CBS was a step down. And maybe overall a bad comparison but they kept the brand alive and moving. Few will do it better than the original. But I wanted to set the bar low. AIR on the other hand is breathing but not really alive. Nearly abandonware. I like AIR stuff just wish they would keep up. I would gladly buy it all over again just to be able to see it.

[0degree]

When it comes to ways of being a fuckwit, I certainly hope so.

I just read your other posts on this forum and I can now clearly see there's no point having any discussion with you. I'm assuming it must be very hard for you to have any meaningful conversation without insults but that's not my problem.

[0degree]

You own a license and don't own software just like you own a hardware but don't own any hardware patents, know-how etc. I think you're just splitting hairs here for the lack of any argument

You never own software. It's not a physical product so different laws apply. That's a key essential difference. One that many can't seem to grasp for some reason.

I never implied you own a source code but you still own a license which represents the actual product.
You buy a product and you should be able to resell it

[Dirk Diggler]

I find it entertaining to see so many folks having problems with FREE software.

Before you poo poo this FREE offering, try them out and just remove what doesn't work for you.

I hate the subscription model as well, but that's not what this is all about.

[arkmabat]

Yeah but why is it free? Bigger picture.

[vurt]

Yeah but why is it free? Bigger picture.

because you don't have to pay for it
that's generally why something is free.

[CapnLockheed]

You never own software. It's not a physical product so different laws apply. That's a key essential difference. One that many can't seem to grasp for some reason.

Golly gee! Now I'm all confused. Can you explain to my old ignorant boomer ass what the difference
is between software and Non-Fungible Tokens and why I can sell one but not the other? After all, NEITHER are physical products...both are just 1's & 0's right? Please enlighten me oh wise one.

"Dogecoin isn’t an NFT. But this GIF of a dogecoin is."

https://opensea.io/assets/0x3b3ee1931dc ... 8a5405/576

[fese]

You own a license and don't own software just like you own a hardware but don't own any hardware patents, know-how etc. I think you're just splitting hairs here for the lack of any argument

You never own software. It's not a physical product so different laws apply. That's a key essential difference. One that many can't seem to grasp for some reason.

Actually, that is not really true. The question of “ownership” vs “license to use” of digital goods is not finally resolved, and probably differs between countries.
A lot of the terms in the EULAs are not as clear as the vendors like them to be and some could probably challenged in court, if someone had the money. This is what happened in the famous Usedsoft vs Oracle case, which led to the ruling of the European court of justice that the sale of a software, even a digital download, is a transfer of ownership and thus could also be resold.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_goods