Starting to hate iLOK

[ghettosynth]

So now you are conveying that you don't understand the technical details.

Not "now". I said from the beginning that I don't know much about how iLok works beyond the many user reports of various iLok issues.
I'm kind of annoyed with myself for allowing myself to be sucked into long tedious topics about copy-protection, all out of fear of loosing access to products I have legitimately bought! I should not need to know the intricacies of how a copy-protection works, but I sure will voice my concerns.

Your concerns are born of ignorance.

Laughable!
My concerns are born of the fact that there appear to be software vendors who may not be willing to provide a replacement software licence when a computer dies, when said licence could not have been de-activated prior to the computer crashing!

Which is completely a function of your ignorance of how iLok works and its value proposition.

You don't understand how iLok works. Please go read the thread and learn something and stop talking to everyone else like they're the ones that don't understand. The entire point of iLok is that you have possession of the license and the control of that asset is not dependent on any online process.

I'm not telling anyone how iLok works.

Clearly, but you are drawing nonsense conclusions about how you think it should work based on your ignorance.

soft-iLok appears to be designed to make people's life difficult in case of emergencies.

Yes, to the ignorant I'm sure that it seems that way. If you understood how the system worked you'd realize that soft-ilok is a compromise that involves additional consumer risk. The fact that vendors think that you should be responsible for your own risk is not a problem from my perspective. That's exactly what entitlement looks like.

IMO, soft-ilok is a mistake and I suspect that Pace may consider ending it at some point in the future when their cloud service is online. Even if they don't. You can probably expect fewer vendors to allow it going forward. Given that Pace is able to have better control over the cloud service and that they are currently telling vendors that soft-ilok isn't secure, you can probably expect that most vendors will see the cloud service as a viable compromise to the soft-ilok that is a better balance of risk against market penetration.

[himalaya]

Don't bother himalaya.. ..some here simply don't get the valid point. Of course a license which get lost simply because a computer dies (one day every computer dies and most of the time without warning) is a no go. To say this is in the responsibility of the customer is laughable.

I know, I know. I should not bother. I think I've said enough on the topic...maybe to add that I don't hate iLok per se. I do not hate any copy protection system as I understand its function perfectly well. No issues here at all. I choose not to use a dongle out of practical reasons, which are: I travel with my laptop a lot, and can not risk forgetting to take the dongle from my studio, or from the place I visited. I can not risk it getting damaged while working in transit or in a hotel. I can not risk loosing it. So the soft-iLok option seemed like a great solution ( I also do not mind C/R copy protection, in fact I prefer it over dongles).

But the OP's message was total news to me, in that I really didn't know that if a computer dies, some companies may not be willing to provide a replacement licence, a file with some numbers, not a physical object (so all the analogies using physical objects are laughable beyond belief). Thus my active involvement in this thread.

It's astounding how some people here put up this weird defence wall, completely failing to see certain points. This is software. I can be made to work in ways developers envision. So far, in my mind, the soft-iLok system is in need of further development to allow better management of licenses when a computer dies. No hate, just a customer who would like to see a more customer centric licence management soft-iLok software.

[ghettosynth]

I know, I know. I should not bother.

That's the most sensible thing that you've said yet.

But the OP's message was total news to me, in that I really didn't know that if a computer dies, some companies may not be willing to provide a replacement licence, a file with some numbers, not a physical object (so all the analogies using physical objects are laughable beyond belief). Thus my active involvement in this thread.

That's a all a CD is, or a money order. It's an asset, it's the thing that you've purchased, now you've lost it and you want the vendor to replace it for you? It's your responsibility not to lose it. There is a very easy way to mitigate this risk. Before you turn off your computer, transfer your license to the cloud. Now, when you turn on your computer, transfer it back. If you are unable to turn on your computer, then you can sleep easy knowing that your license is stored in the cloud.

It's astounding how some people here put up this weird defence wall, completely failing to see certain points.

You owe everyone an irony meter. There's nothing weird about liking a system that is specifically designed to give the user control over what they paid for as an alternative to holding control of it in a central bank.

Again, YOU DON'T GET IT.

This is software. I can be made to work in ways developers envision.

Let me guess, you've never in your life taken a class in Number Theory have you? In fact, you don't even know what it is, right?

[pekbro]

I really don’t get the logic that this is not the customers fault. The software worked as designed in this case. Deactivate it before you build a new system. It’s not rocket science. Granted this might not be the best solution, still that’s the way it works. If you don’t agree with it, don’t use it it. Simple as that. Actually, with the cloud you should be able to just move all licenses to the cloud with just a few clicks so you can keep working while you build a new system, assuming you have access to another computer.

If the hardware fails, that’s another story, but that did not happen here.

[el-bo (formerly ebow)]

You say you feel me on the g.a.s thing, but I'm not sure you do. I don't need to find alternatives to Exponential audio's reverbs, nor Ircam's or Flux's, nor Waves' or any others. Why? Because I have three Valhalla reverbs, Spacemaster2, and Space Designer (Logic). I likely don't need all of those, but this is what I have. I even own an EA reverb (The freebie), but since it needs physical iLok I've not even tried it

I'm just referring to the perception of GAS as a phenomenon, not all acquisition of tools is GAS.

It's not because I think these are the best, that I don't even need to look to your list, it's because I'm happy with what I have.

Ok, here comes a cluebat, other people would NOT be happy with your inferior choices. So when I say "show me alternatives", it's not about you. It's about that you took offense to my claim of my experience as if it was about your music. You can either accept that it's true, or you can prove it wrong and that will require to you to show alternatives.

In my experience, as I said, and what drew your ire, is that, on average, the better developers employ hardware protection. They are typically going after a more professional audience that is going to see the value in that type of protection and that aren't going to whine about $40 and a USB port.

The entire point was trying to help some of you understand the value proposition of iLok. If that has no value to you, then you aren't the target market. As I see it the soft iLok is a compromise and we've seen several vendors reject that option because it's been easier to crack. I really don't see that changing. It comes with the territory.

Gas, imo, is acquisition for it's own sake, or when there is no real need. There's nothing wrong with buying gear, and there are many ways that can be rightfully justified

And stop talking about ire and offence. You still haven't addressed your own bullshit accusations, and comments upon entry into this conversation.

Ok, here comes a cluebat, other people would NOT be happy with your inferior choices. So when I say "show me alternatives", it's not about you. It's about that you took offense to my claim of my experience as if it was about your music. You can either accept that it's true, or you can prove it wrong and that will require to you to show alternatives.

Inferior choices? Your idiot is showing.

Again, I'm not saying you were targeting my music. My position is that there's nothing I need that necessitates iLok. Clearly that is a personal statement. You then brought this idea to me - that there are certain plugs for which there are no alternatives. Clearly, there are excellent plugs that necessitate a physical iLok, I just have no interest in them. You've already accuse me of not being able to have a subjective opinion, so why would I be able to offer alternatives.

They are typically going after a more professional audience that is going to see the value in that type of protection and that aren't going to whine about $40 and a USB port.

Time was when vendors maintained such an aura. However, these days, the market is anyone who is prepared to pony up the cash. And from everything I've heard you say about your own noodlings, you likely don't fit into these parameters you are setting, either.

As for whining? Again, I am not whining about iLok. I just don't need or want one. And I'm currently running 13 peripherals off of the 2 ports that my laptop has. This includes having to unplug some things for others, on occasion. So, there is no room. I'd try to explain it another way, but I need you to confirm that English is your first language.

[himalaya]

I really don’t get the logic that this is not the customers fault. The software worked as designed in this case. Deactivate it before you build a new system. It’s not rocket science. Granted this might not be the best solution, still that’s the way it works. If you don’t agree with it, don’t use it it. Simple as that. Actually, with the cloud you should be able to just move all licenses to the cloud with just a few clicks so you can keep working while you build a new system, assuming you have access to another computer.

If the hardware fails, that’s another story, but that did not happen here.

Some of us picked up the topic taking about a situation when the computer dies. There appears to be no simple way to deactivate the soft-iLok'ed licenses. A customer is at the mercy of the software developer. Should they be? That's the question. In my mind the answer is lucid: no, they should not. There should be a simple way to de-activate licenses or for the software vendors do the right thing and just provide a new license without the customer pleading for it. It's not a physical object. It costs nothing to manufacture. It can be provided. Customer service...and all that....

[ghettosynth]

Inferior choices? Your idiot is showing.

Cool it on the name calling or I'll get a moderator to help you with that.

Yes, your choices are inferior. Sean does great work but his work is not in the league of IRCAM and other premium reverb vendors. Seriously, you cited Spacemaster LOL! I have Spacemaster, I like Spacemaster, even Sean has criticized it as an inferior choice and it is. That doesn't mean that it's not useful.

You're overrating your interestingness. I'm not engaging you as you see fit, that's just something else that you're going to have to get over. I'm engaging the forum as I desire. If you wonder why I ignore much of your posts you'll just have to accept that I don't think that you are saying much that's worthy of a response. The more you start demanding responses to your whining, the more I LOL!

[ghettosynth]

I really don’t get the logic that this is not the customers fault. The software worked as designed in this case. Deactivate it before you build a new system. It’s not rocket science. Granted this might not be the best solution, still that’s the way it works. If you don’t agree with it, don’t use it it. Simple as that. Actually, with the cloud you should be able to just move all licenses to the cloud with just a few clicks so you can keep working while you build a new system, assuming you have access to another computer.

If the hardware fails, that’s another story, but that did not happen here.

Some of us picked up the topic taking about a situation when the computer dies. There appears to be no simple way to deactivate the soft-iLok'ed licenses. A customer is at the mercy of the software developer. Should they be?

Should or shouldn't isn't the point, they are. You are responsible to protect your own assets. If you want to take a risk by putting your expensive assets in a questionable safe, then why should anyone else be responsible for your bad choices?

Buy an iLok, then if it fails during the warranty period, you will have a valid complaint. You can view the annual fee as an extended warranty on your hardware.

That's the question. In my mind the answer is lucid: no, they should not. There should be a simple way to de-activate licenses or for the software vendors do the right thing and just provide a new license without the customer pleading for it.

Yes, and their should be a simple way to go back in time as well as a simple way to be able to move to another planet.

It's not a physical object. It costs nothing to manufacture. It can be provided. Customer service...and all that....

It is a SPECIFIC virtual object that is delivered by a mechanism that doesn't allow it to exist in two places. Consequently, in order to "replace a license" a vendor must give you a new license and it will cost him exactly the same cost as the old license minus the cost of customer acquisition. So you are, in fact, asking the vendor to do you a favor as the system, as designed, and by contract with the vendors, doesn't allow Pace to replace your license.

All of this is dependent on the vendor, in aggregate, trusting their customers not to be trying to crack their software. So you've discovered that not everyone trusts everyone else.

Welcome to the real world.

This isn't about you, it's about the value proposition that Pace makes to vendors and that contract doesn't allow them to intervene in most circumstances. It's not Pace's responsibility to replace your assets and it's not the vendors. If you don't like this, then don't choose Pace.

Now, does it indicate good customer service to DO YOU A FAVOR, yes, absolutely. So choose carefully.

[ariston]

Someone desperately needs to be right on the internet. How sad.

[himalaya]

The sheer arrogance, belligerence and idiocy displayed by ghettosynth is just unbelievable.
Just unbelievable.

By the way, somebody already mentioned this earlier, but a system like used by Celemony could be the solution. Here we can log-in and deactivate a license without having to beg the support to do it. Can it be done? It looks like! Can PACE re-design soft-iLok to be as friendly, they sure can, it's not cast in stone....

[dnekm]

I will only say this. There are ways and ways of protecting your property.

The best way is to treat your customers with the respect they deserve, not to treat them like criminals.

Copy protection, to me, places an undue burden onto the person who is paying you for your effort.

Even after having soundsets pirated out of existence I can still say this.

[el-bo (formerly ebow)]

Cool it on the name calling or I'll get a moderator to help you with that.

My mistake. I forgot we have an emoticon for that But, by all means, go whine at your favourite hall monitor, and see if you can't get yourself a badge to stitch onto your short trousers

Yes, your choices are inferior.

Nope! They are suitable for the task at hand

Sean does great work but his work is not in the league of IRCAM and other premium reverb vendors.

Unlike you, I don't do work that necessitates premium 'verbs

Seriously, you cited Spacemaster LOL!

Yup!

I have Spacemaster, I like Spacemaster

OOH, how very inferior of you

even Sean has criticized it as an inferior choice and it is

I'm such a rebel, liking something that Sean thinks is an inferior choice

That doesn't mean that it's not useful.

Bingo! See, I listed it as a plugin I use. Never once did I claim it was superior. But now I know you think it is useful, there is an air of superiority about it. So, thanks:tu:

You're overrating your interestingness.

Doubtful

I'm not engaging you as you see fit

You go, girl!

that's just something else that you're going to have to get over.

I might have to check with Sean, first

I'm engaging the forum as I desire.

Is it getting hot in here, or is it just me

If you wonder why I ignore much of your posts you'll just have to accept that I don't think that you are saying much that's worthy of a response.

I don't think it worthy of a response, either. Which begs the question, why would I wonder why you would ignore me?

The more you start demanding responses to your whining, the more I LOL!

I think we're done here.

[chk071]

Thought most companies do offer at least 2 iLok activations, so, nothing will be lost when you activated a license on one computer, and the hard drive fails (or similar). The better option of course is a dongle. And (hopefully soon) the cloud protection thing.

BTW, i also had my differences with ghettosynth in the past, but, i think either side takes this a bit too far. No need for hard feelings really. It's a sh***ty software protection discussion. Actually, like with everything online, or also in real life, i wished people would make it less of a political issue.

[ghettosynth]

The sheer arrogance, belligerence and idiocy displayed by ghettosynth is just unbelievable.
Just unbelievable.

LOL! You couldn't demonstrate invalidity in my points if your life depended on it. You might want to think twice about calling other people idiots when you're engaged in a conversation that so readily reveals the depth of your cognitive abilities.

By the way, somebody already mentioned this earlier, but a system like used by Celemony could be the solution. Here we can log-in and deactivate a license without having to beg the support to do it. Can it be done? It looks like! Can PACE re-design soft-iLok to be as friendly, they sure can, it's not cast in stone....

You know, you have some gall calling other people idiots and then posting nonsense like this. This demonstrates your complete ignorance of how these systems work. Yet, you are confident in your queries as if they make sense. That, my friend, is arrogance embodied.

This is Dunning Kruger hard at work. The uneducated, that's you, think that they're opinions are equivalent to knowledge and overestimate their abilities. The answer to your question would be self-evident if you had the slightest education on the matter. It's bad enough that you want to engage in a topic that you don't understand as if you do, but it's hilarious that you don't get how it reflects on you.

I've already given you the thread to read that would educate you on the matter. There a Pace representative discusses why this can't be easily done. Really, it's not too technical, you should at least try to understand it.

There are plenty of systems that don't require the "dead" computer to be online. Plugin Alliance allows you to deactivate any computer. Here comes the cluebat: They're not actually deactivated in the sense that you think that they are. Nothing is actually changed on the computer that contains the deactivated license, clearly. The only way that it's possible for this to be effective is if either the plugin or a proxy (e.g. a plugin manager) checks the validity of the license prior to use.

Again, for the absolutely clueless, THIS IS NOT HOW ILOK WORKS!

You want Pace to be an illusion of the system that it is. Now, whether it's better or worse for vendors is a different question, however, they are able to sell vendors on their system because it works the way that it does. Part of that is not pretending to deactivate a computer that still contains the license asset and part of that is not pretending to tell customers that they have the asset in their control when they don't.

[ghettosynth]

Cool it on the name calling or I'll get a moderator to help you with that.

My mistake. I forgot we have an emoticon for that But, by all means, go whine at your favourite hall monitor, and see if you can't get yourself a badge to stitch onto your short trousers

You can frame your incivility however you like to make yourself feel better. However, you know that you'll comply because you value your membership here. Go ahead though, puff your chest out a few more times if it makes you feel better about yourself. RawGH!

The more you start demanding responses to your whining, the more I LOL!

I think we're done here.

LOL! You promise?