Running commercial audio software on linux

[VariKusBrainZ]

If you have too type an essay to justify you know its wrong

[audiojunkie]

If you have too type an essay to justify you know its wrong

I have to type an essay for everything--it's in my blood! And of course I know it's wrong! The world is not black and white, however, and what shade of grey is this scenario where a person purchases a legitimate license, and doesn't share the software, but for his own use prefers a cracked copy? What shade of grey?

[mabian]

Can we lose any hope about being able to use XLN Audio Installer - and XLN plugins - in Linux due to recent updates incompatible with Linux? I guess I could find cracked versions of the plugins not using the installer, of course I would like to avoid that.

I'm on the fence of switching completely to Linux and not being able to use XLN stuff - especially RC20, DS-10, XO and Addictive Drums 2, would be sad...

- Mario

BTW, I found some interesting things about the XLN Oneline Installer:

https://forum.winehq.org/viewtopic.php?t=24079

https://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager. ... gId=106244

I know of a couple of people on the LinuxMusicians forum that use Addictive Drums quite regularly as well.

Old stuff, their installer now doesn't even install itself, unless there are magic winetricks that can help. Also the constraint to max 2 computers registered is not helping to make me want continuing using their plugins, but I have RC 20 on ton of projects I wanted to continue in Linux... I'll open a separate thread to find a good alternative.

[mabian]

You mention something that I hadn't considered, but seems ethical enough for me--cracked versions. Hear me out--if someone buys a software package, and then finds that the copy protection prevents the user from making it work on Linux, is it really so wrong at that point to grab and use a cracked version--especially if you have a legitimately purchased copy? I know that those who follow the exact wording of the license agreement would totally disagree. But if one were to consider the "spirit" of the law, things may be seen differently. Copy protection is to prevent piracy. It is to enforce that people legitimately purchase a licensed copy of the program. Well, if one has legitimately purchased a licensed copy of the program, and if one never shares that software with another, then that person is in keeping with the spirit of the law--in my opinion, at least. I don't use any wares or cracks at all, and I have legitimately purchased everything that I own that isn't free or open source--but that doesn't stop me from considering these things when stuck in a position such as this...

TBH, their plugins are officially supported on pc and Mac only, so the fact I cannot use them on Linux does not make a valid reason to use a cracked version. On the other side I payed for them, and I am not causing economical loss to them because there's no official Linux version available even with extra cash, so in practice there's no harm...

[fedexnman]

I miss my Linux PC days . I built a new PC Windows11 AMD 7600x cpu and AMD 7600gpu for light gaming and music 32gb ram 2tb SSD m.2 . Fans with led colors and the fan controller , cpu stuff lots of fun . I don't dare dualboot due to Windows11 secure boot stuff . But I may look into
installing Linux to an m.2 SSD external enclosure . Or a mini PC just to fool around with Linux native stuff like Renoise , and Ardour . I bought a Windows 11 license for like $5 somewhere using PayPal . Alot less headache than trying to get Windows VST yabridge and wine .

[glokraw]

You mention something that I hadn't considered, but seems ethical enough for me--cracked versions. Hear me out--if someone buys a software package, and then finds that the copy protection prevents the user from making it work on Linux, is it really so wrong at that point to grab and use a cracked version--especially if you have a legitimately purchased copy? I know that those who follow the exact wording of the license agreement would totally disagree. But if one were to consider the "spirit" of the law, things may be seen differently. Copy protection is to prevent piracy. It is to enforce that people legitimately purchase a licensed copy of the program. Well, if one has legitimately purchased a licensed copy of the program, and if one never shares that software with another, then that person is in keeping with the spirit of the law--in my opinion, at least. I don't use any wares or cracks at all, and I have legitimately purchased everything that I own that isn't free or open source--but that doesn't stop me from considering these things when stuck in a position such as this...

TBH, their plugins are officially supported on pc and Mac only, so the fact I cannot use them on Linux does not make a valid reason to use a cracked version. On the other side I payed for them, and I am not causing economical loss to them because there's no official Linux version available even with extra cash, so in practice there's no harm...

Using cracked versions boosts the street creds of cyber-thieves. Suffice it to say that someone who is smart enough to use a crack, is also smart enough to be unaware of nefarious capabilities included as the 'price of admission', or added later to a compromised system. Most every category of plugin has multiple competing products that are 'good enough' for music, if one's favorite is unavailable. I've heard the ice gets thinner the farther out you go...

[glokraw]

If you have too type an essay to justify you know its wrong

On the contrary, if the developer makes it difficult for you to use your legitimately purchased copy of their software, I think at that point, IT'S YOUR DUTY to use the cracked version of their software, and also announce it proudly.

You have a responsibility as a buyer, to either determine a product is acceptible for your use, or assume the risk of making a purchase without thorough confirmation. If there is a duty, it is on customers to adequately review their purchases for the benefit of forum readers.

If you get stuck with a product that doesn't work for you, just find some one with a system known to work with the product, and give it to them, or sell it at a nice price. Happiness can be contagious if we spread it around enough

[uOpt]

You have a responsibility as a buyer, to either determine a product is acceptible for your use, or assume the risk of making a purchase without thorough confirmation. If there is a duty, it is on customers to adequately review their purchases for the benefit of forum readers.

The stated specs on most tech products are not sufficient for this. For example, few plugin vendors state what kind of DRM (if any) they use.

[mabian]

Just for test, I tried installing a "dark side" (tested on VirusTotal first) RC-20 installer. It crashes in Wine instantly.
I wrote to XLN support asking if they can provide standalone installers, but I already see the answer - which is fair and expected, but why not trying...

Bye bye XLN, on Linux at least, you were pretty good for me

- Mario

[audiojunkie]

You have a responsibility as a buyer, to either determine a product is acceptible for your use, or assume the risk of making a purchase without thorough confirmation. If there is a duty, it is on customers to adequately review their purchases for the benefit of forum readers.

The stated specs on most tech products are not sufficient for this. For example, few plugin vendors state what kind of DRM (if any) they use.

Yes, the copy protection situation bothers me a lot! So far, everything I use can be restored off of a backup (along with keyfile or serial number) and restored to a new computer, even if the company is gone. Disclaimer: I’ve got some plugins from the days that I used windows that are C/R, but I haven’t used them yet on Linux. That said, I’ve been buying some Windows apps lately, with the intention of trying to use them on Linux with WINE, and it has been as painful as getting teeth pulled trying to get a straight answer out of some of these developers. In some cases, I’ve not been completely confident that they have been entirely forthcoming—giving only the vaguest of answers. Granted, there are some developers that have been fantastic. Those are the ones I feel I can trust.

When it comes right down to it, I give my money to those developers who give me less hassle than they give the pirates. I feel strongly about how pirates have so little hassle with their cracked and pirated software, yet legitimate, honest users who purchase the software are made to jump through hoops like a circus animal in order to get software that they paid for to work properly. That is what is so wrong with copy protection. I’ve said many times that I don’t mind developers protecting their software from piracy, but it’s got to be hassle free for paying customers. It has been successfully done by other developers—ie, U-he, TAL-Software, etc. So there is no excuse why others can’t do so also.

[glokraw]

That said, I’ve been buying some Windows apps lately, with the intention of trying to use them on Linux with WINE, and it has been as painful as getting teeth pulled trying to get a straight answer out of some of these developers. In some cases, I’ve not been completely confident that they have been entirely forthcoming—giving only the vaguest of answers. Granted, there are some developers that have been fantastic. Those are the ones I feel I can trust.

I have cars made in Germany, Japan, and Detroit. They each go to a mechanic familiar with such cars. It would be futile to ask for in depth service at the wrong shop. Devs are smart enough to know their limits as a business, but as enthusiasts, are free to experiment. U-he being a great example, designing new hardware, and creating cross-platform ports, with hopefully enough financial rewards to offset some of the costs.

Your dilligent reporting indicates great improvements will soon hit the wine vineyard, and I'm looking forward to learning the ins and outs as they come into distros.
Cheers

[glokraw]

I feel strongly about how pirates have so little hassle with their cracked and pirated software

Thieves, regardless of their market sector, be it banks, bars, accounts, homes, or software etc, are not known to 'live long and prosper'. Anyone consorting with pirates should cut them off, until proof is shown that they are running legitimate licensed software. Just a matter of time until a crooked associate gets an opportunity to steal from you, and jumps on it.
Cheers

[glokraw]

I found an iso from Komplete that was not yet installed in my wine on this setup,
and used the command below (same one I've used for many years) to extract the iso to a folder named 'iso'

sudo mount -t udf -o unhide /home/me/Monark_b6668dfe-ccfa-43a1-b3fa-dd8bf0dbbcfd.iso /home/me/iso

The executable and support files appeared as expected in /home/me/iso, and I installed the software with the wine-staging 6.22 that came with the AVLinux I often use. I installed Monark, a Reaktor ensemble recreating a punchy monosynth, (along the lines of U-he's native linux Repro 1 and 5 which fortunately require no fancy dance-steps to install and register. And a new Repro update is now in the wilds

iso-AVLinux.jpg

[glokraw]

Some good news, SynthMaster 3 demo is working in a recent AVLinux, that has
kernel 6.6.9-1-liquorix-amd64 #1 ZEN SMP PREEMPT
nVidia 9400GT pcie video card
Intel i7 quadcore cpu
Linux Reaper V 727
wine-stable 9.0
xfce desktop
trimmed-down but fully updated and lightly customized AVlinux (debian MX Linux base)
Latest yabridge plugin wrapper

In the pic, I turned on SynthMaster One's midi out (on it's arppegiator), to play sounds on
SynthMaster 3. Santa is aware of current sales strategeries...

KV331 product registration is pretty simple, no dumb 'product manager' tools etc
I enjoy SynthMaster One, and Synthmaster 2, and the new version attempts to leverage their fine capabilities into a new and more powerfull instrument. ( I missed an earlier sale because my credit union was scared of sending money to Turkey. They have been warned

SM3 arpped by SM One.png

[audiojunkie]

That IS good news! I picked up the everything deal a while back.