NAMM: Steinberg Copy Protection Mandatory [Archive]

Garritan

01-26-2005, 04:24 AM

Brian2112

01-26-2005, 04:37 AM

...And thus they will recieve not $1 from me ever again. That's a shame:( ... they make great products.

The current standard of copy protection employed with its latest generation DAW and VSTi products is among the most successful in the industry today. Supplier of this successful technology is the German copy protection specialist, Syncrosoft GmbH.

Depends on how you define "success". If licenses are easily transferable (i.e. just buy a new dongle if something happens) that would be an improvement over the old schemes.

KevinKauai

01-26-2005, 04:42 AM

Daag Nabbott

01-26-2005, 04:46 AM

Not that it matters, but I wonder if the recent Yamaha merger has any bearing on this news. (I mean Yamaha did buy them recently, didn't they?)

Brian2112

01-26-2005, 04:48 AM

... but whatever software-producing folks need to do to protect their products from being used by folks who didn't pay their way is FINE with me.

I agree Kevin:) . The problem is a misunderstanding of the pirate mentality on the part of software developers. The better the scheme – the more challenge to disable – the more likely it is to be cracked. I am no pirate, but I have been a hacker for many years now. You’ll just have to trust me on this.

...2112:o

KevinKauai

01-26-2005, 05:17 AM

Styxx

01-26-2005, 10:32 AM

I have to admit, I don't quite understand what is being said here. I own Cubase SE, what does this mean in laymans terms to me? :confused:

J.B

01-26-2005, 10:40 AM

Yeah, copy protection, first topic that i read here, what a coincidence and what a sad topic for me, indeed... because I'm currently very frustrated about GPO's one. At the moment it seems that it holds me, who payed for GPO (Well, used on ebay, but nearly at full price) away from using it. Last weekend, the trial period runs out, and so I cannot longer use it :(

The previous owner still had not transfered his 'licence' to me - and I wonder, if he ever will... I have already payed him and received the 4 CDs, the manual with the serial number, the package - even the small paper "Welcome to Personal Orchestra... Let the music begin!". But trying to activate GPO with the Registration Tool leads to a "Licence already in use"-Error...

Ok, well, for this case NI had a support email formular. I filled it out (Real Name, SerialNumber, HardwareNumber), send it with a Link to the ebay-Auction i won - as some kind of (well, i admit, poor) proof - and a short description, that I want the Licence to be transfered to me, because I am now the owner. They mailed me back, including some confuse text and a 'licence transfer formular" which the former user should sign and fax or mail (real mail not electronic) Oh, thats realy a proof... I could even send this myself, faking the signment if I want to cheat - they could never find out - But I mailed this formular to the one i got GPO from - and since then (and another try...) i wait for a reply... and wait... and now I cannot use GPO anymore :( :( :(

I even mailed NI again, making the suggestion, that I could take a digital picture of the package, CDs and my "personal identity card" - or could go directly to their office here in Berlin(Germany) showing the package to them! No, no, no - "Hi dude, Sorry, we cannot transfer a license... please continue to try to contact previous owner" thats NI's reply. Ha, Ha Ha... :mad: :mad:

So what is it, I want to say: Copy Protection is realy, realy stupid - and more a frustration to the rightfull owner, than to the filthy pirate who crack it anyway in no time (even if it would be the most stupid piece of software on earth (and that of course, GPO ist not at all, it is a great product! I enjoyed my little first steps making music with it a lot) if it is protected, he will crack it) - or to the mindless user, who saves all the pain and all the money, downloading what he wants, without annoyance, without difficulty straight from the internet :mad: q.e.d.

...

Oh, i read my post again, i really got upset, i'm sorry :( But it may be an advise to make sure, that the license is transfered as soon as possible if you buy GPO or something else from NI used.
And it is a 'hands on experience' around the subject 'copy protection'... (not a good one)

Perhaps, is here anyone who experienced the same with NI? Any tips, what I can do? Or anyone who was in a similar situation and got it solved?

Joseph Burrell

01-26-2005, 10:41 AM

Styxx, it will not affect you. I'm sure on their lite products, they won't bother. Now if you ever upgrade, you'll need to be prepared to use the dongle.

Link F.

01-26-2005, 10:55 AM

Styxx

01-26-2005, 11:07 AM

Styxx, it will not affect you. I'm sure on their lite products, they won't bother. Now if you ever upgrade, you'll need to be prepared to use the dongle.
OK, now my dad used to say, A question never asked is a stupid one, so here come the next question, What the heck is a dongle? I think Tim Horton's doughnut shop sell dongles. :confused:

J.B

01-26-2005, 11:23 AM

OK, now my dad used to say, A question never asked is a stupid one, so here come the next question, What the heck is a dongle? I think Tim Horton's doughnut shop sell dongles. :confused:

Is that realy a question? Well, a dongle is a small piece of Hardware, like some kind of USB-Stick or well, my Logic 4.8-serialport-"Dongle" - something which contains a unique key-code.

"dongle" is one of the words used in Germany for this kind of Device... maybe elsewhere it means 'donought' ? Who knows? That would at last be some kind of customer service - Not some stupid dongle in the package - but a nice donought to eat against frustration with the new UserInterface or something... ;)

Styxx

01-26-2005, 11:30 AM

Is that realy a question? Well, a dongle is a small piece of Hardware, like some kind of USB-Stick or well, my Logic 4.8-parallelport-"Dongle" - something which contains a unique key-code.

"dongle" is one of the words used in Germany for this kind of Device... maybe elsewhere it means 'donought' ? Who knows? That would at last be some kind of customer service - Not some stupid dongle in the package - but a donought to eat against frustration with the new UserInterface or something... ;)

I thought so.

J.B

01-26-2005, 12:00 PM

But I also like "Dongles" much more than this annoying "licencing"-scheme on
some mysterious server - used by GPO - complete out of range for me to solve or do anything about it. A hardware key I could immediately use, straight out of the box. Plug it in, ready, go.

If there would had been a hardware protection key in the GPO-package I could still use it :(

My Creamware-DSP-Audiocard has a hardware key (for Plugins), logic has a hardware-key, now Steinberg has a big hardware key, only poor GPO has none. They should build it into a small modulation-wheel or keyboard-pedal and ship it included! :D - or inside this small "4Control"-Midi-CC-Controller made by NI... :rolleyes:

Joseph Burrell

01-26-2005, 12:27 PM

After my recent adventures with NI's authorization tool, I'd have to agree at this point. This challenge/response nonsense is loosing its luster for me rather quickly.

qbert

01-26-2005, 12:27 PM

I love Cubase SX (2), but hate the dongle! There are always folks reporting problems with the License software over at Cubase.net and it's very unnerving to use one with a portable computer!

I also hope Yamaha brings Steinberg into the 21st Century and goes with "user managed" copy protection ala NI products or Sibelius.

Christopher Duncan

01-26-2005, 12:34 PM

because I'm currently very frustrated about GPO's one.
Hi, J.B., and welcome to the family. :)

Your problem has nothing to do with GPO or the license scheme it uses. You were ripped off by someone on Ebay who took your money and then didn't give you the ability to transfer ownership. If GPO had used a USB hardware key, he could have just as easily taken your money and not included the key. If GPO had no copy protection whatsoever, he could have shipped you everything but the installation CD. Any way you look at it, the only scheme you're a victim of is the seller's, and I would strongly encourage you to contact the fraud department of Ebay to pursue this matter. You paid for a product and did not receive what you paid for - that's fraud, regardless of the copy protection scheme used.

You might try to return the product, get your money back, and buy from a more reputable source. In any event, once you've resolved these issues, I'm sure you'll find this a very helpful and supportive community of folks as you begin making music the GPO way. Hope it all works out for you. :)

Christopher Duncan

01-26-2005, 12:45 PM

Hmmmmmmmm. Personally, I believe that hardware things seem somewhat redundant in the face of the technology of "license stamping" that Native Instruments uses, but whatever software-producing folks need to do to protect their products from being used by folks who didn't pay their way is FINE with me.
As a musician, author and ex software developer, I have three very good reasons to care about the protection of intellectual property, and along those lines I agree with you wholeheartedly. Piracy is rampant and casually accepted as "no big deal", so I support them in their efforts to get paid for their work.

That being said, I wish there was a better way. Hard disk activation schemes can be problematic when there are hardware or computer changes, particularly if the company is no longer in business or organizationally incompetent (far too common). USB dongles provide a nice alternative to that.

I use Nuendo, which is now a $2500 product. Because of the dongle, I can install it in the studio and also on my laptop and use it on either. That means I can take it on the road with me and work in hotels, planes, etc. However, if I lose that little USB key (all too easy to do when travelling), I'm screwed to the tune of $2500. Because of this, I will never take it on the road, and will instead use Sonar for remote recording.

I still prefer USB to the hardware activation schemes, but as I said, I wish there was a better way. Yet another example of dogs without honor screwing things up for the rest of us.

Styxx

01-26-2005, 01:01 PM

J.b. Try this if you need more help.
http://worldlawdirect.com
I had a problem like yours a year ago and the advice was quite helpful. It's free.

Marcussen

01-26-2005, 01:33 PM

I teh dongle linked to my cubase? I'm just thinking about what you said about loosing the dongle and getting screwed for 2500. If I loose my dongle, cant I just buy a new one?

Brian2112

01-26-2005, 02:10 PM

I trust ya, Brian, but I would question the overall wisdom of deciding NEVER to purchase a product which uses any particular hardware or software protection scheme as having any but the most minute influence on the buying decision -- certainly NOT the top-of-the-stack go or no-go decision factor.

Perhaps, it is not the protection scheme that makes me decide not to buy, but rather the implementation in terms of the company’s customer service. Now, it must be said that there are plenty (and I’m sure the vast majority of users) of Steinberg products who have never had a problem. But I sure did:

In the early 1990’s I bought a new Macintosh and Cubase Score. At the time, the cost was around $700 for Cubase Score. I hooked up the dongle, and composed away! I loved Cubase. I even purchased a sealed box for the dongle for taking it into the studio. It was stuck to me like fly-paper – never leaving my sight. Then in one session, I left the studio to grab some lunch (and didn’t take my dongle, which I usually did religiously). When I returned the dongle was lost in the studio. Session cancelled. I called Steinberg and they said “Well, sorry – you lose the dongle – you lose the program”. Finally, the studio called and had found my dongle. It didn’t work anymore. I called Steinberg and told them. They said “Oh good! Just send it to us (in the mail no less, insured for $700), and we will repair it.” Great news! Then I go to the post office one day to find the dongle in the mail with a letter attached saying that it was beyond repair (no visible damage), and that they were very sorry but offered me a $50 discount to repurchase. I threatened legal action, I complained, I ranted. In a rage, I came home, disassembled Cubase, and gave the dongle check a false positive (to rescue all my work) (time of crack: – 25 minutes). Finally I discovered that court costs to recover Cubase would only cost more money. Instead of paying lawyers, I bought a P.C. and Cakewalk and have not looked back.

Initially, I was not going to purchase NI stuff because I re-format my drives every six months. But they introduced the de-activation/re-activation procedure (Bravo!). I own Giga (upgraded to G3), Kontakt (will upgrade to 2) and Halion2 (WILL NOT UPGRADE as it requires a dongle).

To add salt to the wound – Steinberg stuff is #1 on the pirate ‘hit list’ because it is somewhat of a challenge to crack. So in addition to punishing a paying customer (and losing one) they lose far more with a self defeating scheme. That’s just been my experience. I’m sure I’m not in the majority. The policy now may be more reasonable. But I am out of that game.

...2112:)

robgb

01-26-2005, 02:14 PM

Styxx, it will not affect you. I'm sure on their lite products, they won't bother. Now if you ever upgrade, you'll need to be prepared to use the dongle.

I use Nuendo, use a dongle, and don't see that it's that big of a deal. It would be a drag, however, if I had several dongles to deal with. USB ports are in short supply.

tgfoo

01-26-2005, 02:53 PM

So does this mean that libraries using the new Halion player will come with a dongle as well? :( I don't like dongles, cause I know that I'll lose it if I use it a lot (especially with my laptop....)

Markleford

01-26-2005, 03:59 PM

Since I completely disabled usb on my aging DAW I've gotten better performance from it. I don't know why that is, but it's a good reason for me to keep it disabled. I'm glad I don't need a dongle to run my software.To my knowledge, the USB controller is constantly polled for new devices to "plug and play" via an interrupt (to varying degrees of efficiency, depending on the age of your motherboard and drivers and the hardware profile used in your OS). This eats up a little slice of time that should be going to actual DAW tasks (as does Windows File Indexing Service, IM/email checks, etc), which is more noticable on slower systems.

So yes, USB can definitely impact usage of your DAW.

- m

J.B

01-26-2005, 06:21 PM

Hi, J.B., and welcome to the family. :)
:)

Thanks! I hope I could really join soon, not only in spirit but also by using GPO - there is a lot I have to learn about orchestration and making music - i cannot await it, and this is surely the right place to do so, with all this talented people - I listened to a lot of demos, before I decided to buy GPO - and they were great! :)

Your problem has nothing to do with GPO or the license scheme it uses. You were ripped off by someone on Ebay who took your money and then didn't give you the ability to transfer ownership.

Oh, but he had delivered every piece of physical thing, the product is made off. The Box, Manual and CDs. So from now on, I should be the owner and should have all possibilities to use the product imediately. I see this 'license'thing as something alien, not truely be part of the product. It is something virtual I cannot control. If there would be a defect CD or something missing - I would totaly agree with you, but this is not the case.

And I am not that fast with calling someone a Thief or pushing this to a court. Here in Germany this also would take perhaps years and cost me lots of money until I finally - if ever - would see 'salvation' from this problem. But if nothing helps, i indeed would have to go that 'dirty' route, but I don't like it at all...

...and perhaps the previous owner had some good reasons, why he couldn't transfer the license... maybe he was on holidays and got taken away by a great ocean wave... or had an accident or no time and no internet at all. Whats then? Any solutions for that case from NI? I think, there must be a way, to get one owns license to work by one self - not including anything done from the previous owner (because he may be - for whatever reason - no longer be able to do something...).

To make it clear what I mean... this license got nothing to do with how the product works. A CD, a manual this all is part of the engine - it could work without licensing. If the CD is broken, the engine won't run, If the manual is non-readable I would not have a clue, how the machine work - but the machine would still be there. ... ...Well, O, I think I got your point. I bought a house but not the key - so I have to break in my own property - or stand a year in the rain and snow until i beg, force or do lots of other strange, and ugly things to the previous owner - if i could find him - to get the key. How would a judge decide? "Sorry, you don't own the key? Then stay off that property - The House belongs to the keyholder?"

So, I see this license-scheme indeed as an alien burden - because if there would be another system - I wouldn't suffer. This special scheme involves lots of communication going around, lots of people, lots of things who you cannot rely on. So it could very easily happen, that something didn't work the way it should. And that - in my opinion - is something like a Software-bug - an error introduced by the way, the product works - and not a feature that isn't delivered by the previous owner...

You might try to return the product, get your money back, and buy from a more reputable source.

And buying from a reliable source... well i am not that rich that I could spend my money easily - so i depend heavily on ebay. And the one i bought it from, has lots of good reputation points on ebay. I also have only very good experiences, buying on ebay. I bought my creamware card there, my Korg Oasys PCI Soundcard, Logic... everything I need to make music.

And returning GPO... ouch!!! I was so happy that it arrived a day before christmas! I don't want to give it away. It is mine, I bought it... I saved money for it... I want to continue to use it... now... please... *sigh*

Hope it all works out for you.

I hope it, too, thanks. I'm still so angry on NI not accepting any kind of proof that I am the owner. Could someone understand that? They won't believe you, even if you stand in front of their office waving with GPO - or throwing the package at the head of the support manager... In good old computer game days, copy protection was granted by the manual. You have to lookup a word on page xyz and there you go... I could read it out loud to them... or to increase the pain to NI... I ... I ... I could sing it "Welcome! Welcome to Garritan" We have cherished, O cherished this symphonic sound of orchestra! Music is everywhere... yeah everywhere, can you hear it NI, can you heeaaaaar it? On television, movies (well how could I get there?), in interactive games (Oh I could program one) live performances (Thats what I do you see, NI?) radio and public venues... It is hard to escape the power, NI, could you understand? It used to be so nice, it used to be sooo good... so NI, please can you hear me, is there something, I'm yelling S.O.S! Well I try, to go on, to go on... to go oooon, yes I try, to go on, to go on, to gooo on... (...Well, hope that 'abba' or the dear god-father is not the only source I can rely on... ;) ) Oh, oh, i am going insane... If i were in USA i'm sure I could accouse NI on court, that they harm my pychic health... and got a million bugs out of it... well, its a software company, they should have lots of 'bugs'

provette82

01-26-2005, 06:35 PM

I have a firm policy in life....never EVER buy used software....and don't eat blue food.

Paul O

Christopher Duncan

01-26-2005, 06:53 PM

Hey, N.B.

I certainly feel your pain. However, back in the good old computer game days, the Web didn't exist and make it possible for people to distribute millions, and I do mean literally millions, of games, songs and other pieces of copyrighted material to their friends for free, i.e., without paying the people who created it. In today's world, that's a very, very common practice. Anyone running a business who doesn't protect themselves against this reality deserves to go out of business for being stupid. Harsh, perhaps, but true just the same.

Software producers, and musicians for that matter, lose money every year because of piracy, both organized and casual. We haven't found a reasonable way to protect musicians from song theft via file sharing. However, for software developers, licensing technology offers at least a little assurance that they'll be paid for what they produce. That may be inconvenient, but not nearly as much as telling your wife and kids there's no food this week because you didn't get paid. The need for licensing technology sucks. It is nonetheless imperative from a business point of view.

The bottom line is that when you buy a product, you need to receive all of the pieces of that product, virtual or otherwise, in order for the transaction to be fair to you. Software licensing information is an extremely normal part of a software purchase these days, regardless of your views on whether it's convenient or not. If you don't get it from the seller, you didn't get all the pieces, and the seller is at fault, not the software manufacturer. Ultimately, the responsibility lies with you and the person you made the purchase from, not the manufacturer. If I buy a car and the seller doesn't transfer the ownership paperwork, then as far as the government's concerned, I don't own the car, no matter how much money I gave him.

I don't know what I dislike the most - USB dongles, hard disk authorization codes, challenge and response procedures, or any of the rest. From a consumer's point of view, they're all a huge PITA, and I resent the heck out of being put through this after I've spent my hard earned money. However, that resentment isn't directed at the manufacturers, but rather the people who made this necessary. If you don't like crossing the moat, don't blame the keepers of the castle. Blame the bandits who raided so often that a moat was necessary.

I do hope you get it all worked out, but unless the seller is willing to cooperate, it doesn't look good. I would actively pursue a dialog with the seller and, failing that, ask EBay to intervene, as I'm sure they must have a department for this.

Christopher Duncan

01-26-2005, 06:54 PM

I have a firm policy in life....never EVER buy used software....and don't eat blue food.

Paul O
I'd eat blue food before I bought used software. But then, I like M&Ms... :)

Brian2112

01-26-2005, 07:09 PM

Yes, I must concur with Christopher.

One thing to keep in mind is that by U.S. law and most International Law for that matter, The Use of the License is what you are really buying…not the medium on which it is distributed or even the content.

I'd eat blue food before I bought used software. But then, I like M&Ms... http://www.northernsounds.com/forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
Don’t eat Blue M&M’s Christopher!!!!http://www.northernsounds.com/forum/images/smilies/eek.gif
I heard that they make your hair fall outhttp://www.northernsounds.com/forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif .
j/k
…2112http://www.northernsounds.com/forum/images/smilies/tongue.gif http://www.northernsounds.com/forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif

Garritan

01-26-2005, 07:40 PM

OK, now my dad used to say, A question never asked is a stupid one, so here come the next question, What the heck is a dongle? I think Tim Horton's doughnut shop sell dongles. :confused:

Dongle:
http://a-mego.com/eng/proimages/6/1/new%20bt%20dongle%20class%20I%20-%20200.jpg
Blue Donut Dongles:

http://www.crystals.co.nz/crysta7.jpg

J.B

01-26-2005, 07:45 PM

Thats why I prefer Hardware-Dongles. Even if there is some 'license'thing going on in the background - I have a piece of Hardware in my hand and could do with it what I want, and don't have to think twice about it, it's aaall right... with that Dongle.

Maybe, in times where everything is going virtual, urges are great, to have at least something to hold in reality...

And I could accept Hardware-Dongles as a CopyProtection, If there MUST REALLY be something like that (I don't believe that a lock could permit a thief with lock-picking ability and the 'right' ah wrong Attitude to break in. If he want to do that - he would do it anyway - rendering the lock completely useless in this Internettime, where it would take me five minutes to get keygenerators and copy-protection-cracks for every piece of Software on this planet - So even if i have no lockpicking ability, and only the bad intention - I could do what I want, nearly unstoppable only by the speed of the DSL-Internet-Connection).

Well, at least they could improve their licenseing-scheme, so that it is possible to do a license-transfer on his own. Maybe they could make it like the online-credit-institute I use - sending personal keys to be used for each transaction. So, if I got this list delivered with the rest of the Software-Package - by using this keys during communication I would prove that I own the product and its codes. Well something like that. Everything that could help to make it possible that I can proof that I am really the Owner.

Also, at NI, they should see, when the same Software-Key is used by 1000 People who download the software, not buying it. If that is not the Case with that key, and it is only used by two to three people (computers) over some month, well, for sure, it is an autorized owner of that software who tries there to login.

J.B

01-26-2005, 07:50 PM

Oh, look at these beautiful donut dongles!!!! I wish I had one for GPO! With build in w-lan-sender and receiver! It is even trackable via GPS per Satellite... so everyone in charge know where the product was going to... great for sales-management and advertising... you would never have known how many pinguines on southpole had bought GPO without that!!! More Fishsounds and WhaleSounds and a Icestorm-machine, please... the ultimate frozen orchestra...

Garritan

01-26-2005, 07:54 PM

... you would never have known how many pinguines on southpole had bought GPO without that!!! More Fishsounds and WhaleSounds and a Icestorm-machine, please... the ultimate frozen orchestra...

At least three penguins that I know of...http://www.northernsounds.com/forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif

http://www.garritan.com/images/penguins.gif

Garritan

01-26-2005, 07:58 PM

I added a poll to see what type of protection scheme people prefer. If you have other ideas besides those listed above please let me know.

Gary Garritan

stevegoers

01-26-2005, 08:30 PM

I will NEVER pay for a product that requires a dongle. Never.

The challenge/response method doesn't bother me at all, especially with NI's system of a)allowing two simultaneous installs and b) allowing the user to disable an authorization in order to put the software on a new machine. It's worked fine for me so far.

As a happy longtime Cakewalk user, I've paid for every single upgrade since 2.0 for Windows. And Cakewalk has rewarded me with a simple honor-code liscense.

kbaccki

01-26-2005, 08:36 PM

After my recent adventures with NI's authorization tool, I'd have to agree at this point. This challenge/response nonsense is loosing its luster for me rather quickly.

I've aithorized/reauthorzied NI B4, Kontakt, and Garritan player a couple of times each and have never had a problem of any kind with their auth process. Can someone tell me exactly what people have experienced with their authorization process that I haven't?

- Keith

tgfoo

01-26-2005, 08:40 PM

I've aithorized/reauthorzied NI B4, Kontakt, and Garritan player a couple of times each and have never had a problem of any kind with their auth process. Can someone tell me exactly what people have experienced with their authorization process that I haven't?

- Keith

I believe the problem Joseph had was were NI products won't authorize properly if they are installed on your system drive (the hard drive wiht you OS) and it isn't your C: drive. I've had this problem as well and another person that I talk to has had it too.

kbaccki

01-26-2005, 08:42 PM

I actually prefer the dongle to all other protection schemes.

It works in the backdrop - it doesn't require an internet connection (unless upgrading and then can be done from a different computer) and I like to reinstall XP every 6 months to clean out my system, this causes a huge problem with the NI protection schemes. Every time I reinstall Windows it gives me a new system ID and I have to go there deactivating machines for Kontakt and GPO.

And now that it can all go onto one dongle - even better.

Mr. F., you shouldn't have to reauthorize if you follow this little recipe:

1.) install XP, device drivers

2.) make a disk image of your C: drive -- use Norton Ghost or equivalent (my favorite is a floppy-bootable linux utility called "partimage"); store the disk image in a safe location (i.e., NOT on the C: drive!), write it to CD, whatever

3.) install your apps, authorize GPO, Kontakt, whatever; copy the NI authorization code to a text document

Now when you want to "clean out" your system, just drop the disk image onto the C: drive. When you reinstall the NI product the auth code should still work. I do this all the time.

- Keith

Link F.

01-26-2005, 08:55 PM

Thanks Keith - that sounds like it will save me a whole dayof tracking down key codes and reauthorizing numerous players. :)

kbaccki

01-26-2005, 09:25 PM

To my knowledge, the USB controller is constantly polled for new devices to "plug and play" via an interrupt (to varying degrees of efficiency, depending on the age of your motherboard and drivers and the hardware profile used in your OS). This eats up a little slice of time that should be going to actual DAW tasks (as does Windows File Indexing Service, IM/email checks, etc), which is more noticable on slower systems.

So yes, USB can definitely impact usage of your DAW.

- m

The worst case scenario is that you get a bad implementation. Either the design of the mobo causes USB functionality to eat PCI cycles, bad USB drivers, etc. I found these little nuggets that demonstrates even a contemporary USB implementation can be problematic:

http://www.pro-networks.org/forum/viewstory.php?t=43056

http://techreport.com/reviews/2004q4/radeon-xpress200/index.x?pg=17

I posted those in a synthax forum in response to learning of Magix' decision to make samplitude 8 dongleized:

http://www.synthax.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=544#544

There's a low likelihood that one would run into a major incompatiblity by enabling USB on a DAW -- but who wants to be that poor sucker that drops 100's or 1000's on software only to find out that she needs to go drop more dough on a different mobo because the USB implementation is causing random audio glitches? No thanks. BTW, I've always disabled all mobo devices that are not absolutely necessary (and XP services, etc.).

- Keith

kbaccki

01-26-2005, 09:31 PM

I believe the problem Joseph had was were NI products won't authorize properly if they are installed on your system drive (the hard drive wiht you OS) and it isn't your C: drive. I've had this problem as well and another person that I talk to has had it too.

Ahh, I have a vague recollection of people complaining about that. Pretty lame limitation.

Joseph Burrell

01-26-2005, 10:46 PM

I voted for none. Just a serial number or something when I install the application would be just dreamy. However, asside from my endless troubles authorizing Kontakt this last time, challenge/response isn't all that bad. None of them are the mark of the beast, but I'd rather not bother with any of it, since I don't think its makes that big a dent in the 'warez' universe anyway.

Christopher Duncan

01-26-2005, 11:45 PM

Don’t eat Blue M&M’s Christopher!!!!http://www.northernsounds.com/forum/images/smilies/eek.gif
I heard that they make your hair fall outhttp://www.northernsounds.com/forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif .
j/k
…2112http://www.northernsounds.com/forum/images/smilies/tongue.gif http://www.northernsounds.com/forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif

I'm coming for you, Brain. And I'm bringing my scissors... :)

billp

01-27-2005, 12:33 AM

One thing to keep in mind is that by U.S. law and most International Law for that matter, The Use of the License is what you are really buying…not the medium on which it is distributed or even the content.
There was a thread a while back on the SONAR forum where this was discussed. According to someone in that thread, in the EU, software can be sold--licenses transferred--just to complicate matters some...and I seem to remember reading this in a license agreement recently. If this is true, it would eat into the bottom line some, since you'd have a secondary market to which the vendor is not party, and have a growing base of customers running back a version or two, running software from the secondary market. It's possible (and I admit I don't know any of this for sure) that the EU companies might be more aggressive about protecting their...er...bottom lines.

But I agree with you that if you're going to make your good paying customers jump through hoops to use the software, you better be good and ready to help them out if there are problems, which there will inevitably be. If they think the pirates are eating into the bottom line, imagine what would happen if they were to alienate enough good paying customers, and get a bad name on the street.

Somehow, Cakewalk has managed to thrive with no copy protection.

dcoscina

01-27-2005, 01:38 AM

Garritan

01-27-2005, 02:50 AM

I recall one software that you had to have the CD-ROM inserted to run the program.

M.A.S>

01-27-2005, 03:08 AM

I hear what you're saying. But what about N.I. giving 2 licences out per library? Is Steinberg going to charge for the extra USB dongle. That's not only stupid but a friggin rip off!

Ahhh but...

It is not the intent of NI or most other companies allowing two installs that they be used simultaneously.

It is provided as a customer convenience to those working 'on the move'. IE; a laptop. If you want to run it on two machines at the same time, that's not allowed in the agreement(s).

For instance, I will soon be running Kontakt (and for convenience sake probably also GPO) on at least two machines in the same studio at the same time.

Thus, I will be having to purchase additional licences for both products.

With this 'one instance at a time' clause in play, and following the letter of the agreement, the use of the dongle is not only no more limiting, but for some it may actually be of greater convenience, as they could place the software on multiple machines ie: studio A, studio B, laptop... (eula permitting), as it's just hard disk filler without the dongle.

Will Steinberg charge for an extra dongle? You betcha (IF you can even get one without buying a new full retail package.) You would only need the second one for simultaneous use, and that's no different than playing by the rules with a systems like NI has.

Michael

Brian2112

01-27-2005, 04:24 AM

The term “Copy Protection” itself is unfortunately very inaccurate. The best one can hope for is a “Copy Deterrent”. A developer can have some degree of control with regard to simultaneous use of a single license as stated in the post above. As far as “Protection” there’s no such animal. The people who crack these schemes are not musicians who sit around and think “Oh, I’d like to have Sampler X! I think I’ll crack it!”, these people are usually computer nerds who are motivated by only one thing: THEY ARE IN IT FOR THE KILL (they look for a challenge or an expensive package - not necessarily music). Throwing it up on a hack site is just an ego thing –NEXT! It is the dishonest musician (or non musician) who hits the site and thinks to themselves “Oooh! That’s a $950 program I can download for free! I’ll take it!” Then they usually burn it on a cd and forget about it, or (in the case of the dishonest musician) they might fire it up and use it.

Now, I am not at liberty to discuss some things, but I can tell you that I was asked by a (non-musical) company, many years ago, to test their new copy protection scheme. I invited the developer to my house. He laughingly said “Oh no, if you can do it at all, I expect weeks or months.” I said “Humor me”. He came over, handed me the medium – if I recall, it was something like 5 minutes and 24 seconds later, I handed it back and said “Keep it, I have my own copy now”. It was a small company, but (I was told) a team of 10 had worked on it for one year and had spent god knows how much on R&D. How was I able to do this? Simple. Companies (and sometimes governments), typically do not understand the enemy that they are fighting. This particular company’s R&D did not include a study of the tools that hackers can employ, their psychology, motivation, education, level of computer knowledge, and so on. In the old days, a hacker (note that there IS a difference between a hacker and a pirate), would typically disassemble a program and examine the code – line by line, to alter, modify, or remove parts of code. Today, there are programs distributed freely -both in the “hacker” and “pirate” communities that are every bit as sophisticated as Cubase, Sonar, Pro tools, Logic, DP..etc. that allow the pirate to just load up a memory and I/O monitor (and/or code), search for anomalies, and eliminate them at the click of a mouse button. Examples in a mock program (using English instead of code):

;DF Subroutine: Poll USB port for presence of Dongle

Poll USB port(s)

if no dongle then end program

if license <> dongle license then end program

return; (Continue running program if all tests pass)

In the above (extremely simplified) example, I have a lot of options. I can just delete the subroutine (but the code usually catches that later). I can just leave “return” and delete the three lines above it, or the most effective and evil:p :

;DF Subroutine: Poll USB port for presence of Dongle

Poll USB port(s)

Dongle=1

License=dongle license

return ; (Continue running program if all tests pass)

Techniques such as this (though this is just a demonstration of one) apply to any software or hardware protection scheme. Instead of a dongle, check for a bad sector intentionally planted on a cd so that it cannot be duplicated…etc…etc…

Bottom line…No Win Scenario! Except one…I have to go to bed now, but I will post that tomorrow (If my car doesn’t explode):p :D

...2112:)

Brian2112

01-27-2005, 04:42 AM

I'm coming for you, Brain. And I'm bringing my scissors... :)
LOL!!! I think your going to need a lawn mower!:D

blue

01-27-2005, 04:57 AM

OK probably the wrong post and wrong opinion for a first time poster to northernsong, so please take it easy on me. But hey I have been in the 3d graphics research world for 25 years (similar to the computer music in many ways) and the graphics lab (NYIT) I did research at for many years had an amazing early “digital sound lab” in it ( run by Carter Burwell who left it to become a movie composer - does all the Coen Brothers movies), we had one of the first Synclaviers and had a (my memory is weak here - we are talking 20 years ago) a Sage modular system. We would get amazing sounds out of it from a squeaky chair as input. We also had one of the first digital recorders a big black box with sliders on the front – name?) - I remember sneaking it out the back of the lab, so the director wouldn’t notice it missing for the weekend so we could lend it to David Hykes and The Harmonic Choir allowing them to record an early digital album in the Cathedral of St. John the Divine in uptown Manhattan. I only played in there late at night since my work was in 3D human animation.

Anyway hardware dongles came and went in the high end 3d software world years back - they were quite unstable in many ways and were a real failure. I hated them myself (ran the 3D artists at the ATG group at Electronic Arts and we would literally be swapping them all the time just to get a working one). They such your time away just like copy protection problems.

My aged radical view is no software protection at all. And simply close out community / tech support / upgrades to those without a registration number. Just think how much small software developers would save (in time and money) if they didn't have to pay for all the protection costs and headaches. I feel that most people who get pirated copies of software are the ones who really would not have bought the product anyway. They are typical “wannabies”, collecting rather than playing. The best protection IMHO is build a tight community that people want to be part of - that they want a reputation in – like you guys seem to have here with GPO - you get a reputation by being part of the community and that means buying the software and supporting the effort.
Most people who have pirated software, collect tons of it, which means they are simply not real and surely would not have bought all that if there was better protection. While better protection means less people getting unauthorized copies, I'm not sure that translates into more real sales. Software protection has been around as long as software and it gets more and more expense for the small developers. I sometimes think the real exploitation is these protection companies taking money from small developers. I know I am being fast and loose with the facts here but at least understand my main point. From the software developer point of view does:

the money they save on
- not having to pay for protection +
- no tech support labor on dealing with registration/protection problems +
(this is a huge cost and time sink)
- never having to code around protection issues in your software designs +
- happiness of your users

IS Greater than/ Less than or Equal to ( I ask you) then

- the money you loss on copies that would have been bought if no pirating
(actual software that would have been bought not all the pirated software).

My point is, it is at least closer than you might imagine if not a plus on the no protection side. I also think, some of the pirated copies get you fame that does sell real copies -- the people who would not have bought your software but want to play with it and yak about it and say it is the coolest (which is what wannibies do since they can’t actually create anything with it) does hype a product and get real buying people looking at it so it is a cheap form of adverting in a way. Remember this is software - it is virtual (and has little per product cost) – you want to maximize your total income not protect every piece (it is not scarce like a guitar which has a high per piece cost). By the way I got paid good money in Silicon Valley, consulting HP, Macromedia and others on this babble. Yes the bubble burst but some understanding of the reality’s of data (which software is) versus scarce physical things (guitars) still holds some weight.

Just to try and get out of this opinionate long mess, I am really excited (and ready to buy!) the strad strings when it comes out. I found this site via research talk about synful, which got to northernsong, realized that there was some real thoughtful people here including Gary and now want to be part of it. The work I do in graphics uses similar approaches (conceptually at least) which means modeling a knowledge domain of something rather than just a brute force capture. I do it for emotive 3d expressive faces. I have some new software (an art experiment), that extracts structure and emotion from music and drives a realistic expressive face from it using a fuzzy rule based system. If your interested there is some info and movies ( and even an academic paper) at my research site:
http://ivizlab.sfu.ca/research/musicface/
other face/avatar/3d research at http://ivizlab.sfu.ca/research
and art at www.dipaola.org/gallery

I’m interest in synful and/or solo strad strings to create software (using genetic programming ) to emotional drive music and movement ( faces) at the same time from one meta “composition” (using emotional syntax that relates to both). Yea I know, moreold hippie babble.

Sorry for the long post,
Blue (steve dipaola)

Brian2112

01-27-2005, 05:06 AM

Sorry for the long post,
Blue (steve dipaola) Hehe! You beat mine 2 back!:D Yours is a good post! Well, I bet you know what I was talking about huh? AutoCad free for everyone!:p ...LOL:D
Welcome Blue!:)

...2112:)

Houston Haynes

01-27-2005, 10:58 AM

I wonder how much money the music industry has made with the advent of low-cost, high-availability solutions like iTunes, Music Match, Sony Music Connect, the pay-version of Napster, etc? And I wonder how much of that money has been made from folks that at one time traded files without a fee? It's probably a minority, but it's made enough legit users to justify the legit services' existence.

Arguing that copy protection is **useless** because someone, somewhere has cracked it and pirated a version out onto the web is wrong-headed. That will always exist. The equation is and always will be about supporting paying customers instead of supporting all users. The cost of losing some paying customers to an objectionable scheme should be offset by the fact that you're not spending resources on non-paying users. There's a secondary angle that the paying users should feel like they're gaining something unique in their licensing of the software that the majority of the people out there can't get for free. I've read more than one time that folks who brag about paying for their software (the nerve!) don't assert that they're paying for the software, per se, but for the support on it from the company when they want to call in and ask a question.

Some companies have a policy of leaving their software products relatively open to piracy as a way to "capture marketshare" on the cheap. But those same companies can suffer in the "public perception" market and unintentionally downgrade the value of their software. Plus, they might spend a lot of their resources supporting users that have not paid for their product. You make your choices and take your chances. I'm with Chris on the notion of natural selection in the software business. (And BTW, I *do* eat blue M&Ms with no effect on the hair of my head, but I've not been able to grow a full beard ever since... :D )

I think that Steinberg's answer to piracy has not *just* been about adding a dongle. They've also been very aggressive about getting lower-tiered versions of their DAW apps into bundles with hardware and other software. They place a respectible amount of functionality into a relatively inexpensive package. The kicker is that they also allow those registered users to upgrade to the higher tiers of their sequencers relatively cheaply. It's a way of offering "a way in" for non-paying users without overtly saying "if you actually pay for your software license, we'll sell it to you at a discount". Wink wink, nudge nudge.

On a larger scale - Steinberg is doing a lot of things right with their most recent decisions to "de-couple" their dongle from individual product offerings. It makes sense to allow a user to pay for one dongle once (instead of each time they buy a Steinberg app) and apply each license to the same key. I actually have three separate keys spanning two machines - one for Cubase SX2, one for Nuendo 2, and one for HALion 3. I *could* apply the license from HALion 3 to one of my other dongles, but I'm not entirely convinced that I want to dedicate it to one machine. So, I like having the option of moving the HALion license around without having to go to the license manager software app and move it from key to key. However, once the HALion player comes out with the original content distribution, I might just do that (using the editing ability on the full version of HALion3 to create sounds and then copy the FXP/B patches to the other machine so that they can be loaded up in either environment).

I also have Kontakt and GPO installed on both of my machines, and have never had any trouble with their licensing scheme - perceptually or in practice. As such, I use Kontakt two out of three times I look to a sampler (because most venders I use provide their sample libraries in HALion and Kontakt format) simply because Kontakt is more mature and robust at the moment. However, I would have preferred that they sub-license some of their protection technology instead of the growing pains of growing their own - and spent more internal resources on an editor that didn't give me a headache. ;)

I've also used iLok dongles on my machines, and never had a problem with it. As many complaints as I've read about **every** licensing scheme, I've never had a lick of trouble with any of it. But then again, I'm really picky about my computer systems and have learned to not trip over myself in that area - and that might still be a challenge to the broader marketplace. As computer systems and operating systems mature into a model that dongles can remain transparent to the user, the level of objection to it will decline. I think that's the reason why Steinberg went forward with this plan - the fact that *most* systems can support the technology without serious performance impact to the user. It's a tribute to the maturity of the marketplace as well as Syncrosoft's effort to make their scheme work on as many machines as possible.

I consider myself to be a professional, even if my main source of income right now is in testing financial systems software. I prefer to license and use software that gives an indication that the provider is doing their part to make sure they're only spending their time and resources on paying customers like me. Steinberg's solution is like many others in that it makes a good compromise decision based on the reality of the non-paying marketplace and the ability to provide paying customers with a fairly mature protection model. It's been a long time in coming - but now that it's here I believe that it will stand up as being equal to (and perhaps better than) other protection schemes.

And a note about the poll - I think we all understand that it's not a scientific result - even if everyone on Northersounds responded. It doesn't ask enough questions in the right way in order to establish who's answering and why they've given their answers. A person who's looking for a Fisher-Price toy to kill time might answer differently than someone shopping for a surgical tool. So I think it would be a mistake for someone to extrapolate too much "information" from those responses. I don't mind C/R or dongles, but I'm definitely against secret handshakes - as I'd just forget it or do it wrong once and be out of the club for good. :eek:

Markleford

01-27-2005, 11:40 AM

I'm an "Other" guy. For applications I like the idea of registration for updates and support, but otherwise no authorization scheme. And as others have mentioned, I think that "Community pressure" is great for encouraging legality: I personally accept it as my duty to mercilessly mock acquaintences who use cracks. :)

For sample content, I believe that the best deterrent is to lock it to a player that has wonderful performance capabilities that the raw samples would lose if converted to another format. Sort of like stealing the strings off a guitar: they're a lot handier to use with a fretboard and pickups! ;)

Having a software dev background, I'm also of the mindset that cracks and warez can't be stopped. They just won't. Ever. And efforts made in that direction intended as anything more than a deterrent to the "casual pirate" is a waste of development resources. Challenge/response is a happy medium here, I think. Dongles, on the other hand, are a bit far over the top: leave my hardware alone!

And PACE? *shudder* Evil.

- m

dcoscina

01-27-2005, 12:12 PM

The only thing I like about the dongle is that it doesn't require internet verification. Obviously N.I. has ways around this but they aren't immediate as a dongle. But I do agree that USB ports gte used up very quickly. I have a Dell Dimension with 6 USB ports and all are in use except for 1 that I leave open for peripherals such as digital cameras or whatnot. But I've got 2 USB 2 harddrives running, midi interface, printer, internet modem (no ethernet), etc. I wouldn't want to use up one port with one hardware per program. I've got a lot of programs.

Cakewalk is one of the few companies wherein there really is lax copy protection. As a paying Sonar user (starting at Sonar 2.0 now up to 4) I hope they aren't losing too muhc money. Heck, my first foray into Sonar was a copy off Morpheus to try it out. And after 1 month, I decided I was going to use it often so I bought it. One, I feel better about supporting a great product, and two, cracked software comes with problems that I cannot afford when I'm working on a project.

But getting back to the dongle thing- I use EWQLSO Silver and Gold Editions, Gigastudio 3 Solo (laptop) and Orchestra (desktop) w. SAM Solo Sessions and VSL, Spectrasonics Atmosphere, Edirol Super Quartet (which Gary inplied eariler- it occasionally prompts the user for the CDrom to boot up- what a pain in the a**), HALion String Edition (quite wonky) and Kontakt and Kompakt programs. If each one required a hardware dongle, I'd need 12 USB ports!!!! THat would be a little inconvenient. And I'll be buying Gary's Big Band library when that comes out too!!!

Is it Steinberg's idea to limit users to their products only? Nice try. With my experience with HALion String Edition, they can keep their products. Not very solid!!!!

Houston Haynes

01-27-2005, 12:27 PM

You're missing the point - the new Steinberg policy is to sell the dongle separately and allow you to put multiple license keys on one dongle device. This is a good thing.

Don't use HALion String Edition as a "whipping boy" against the use of dongles. It was created for Steinberg by a subsidiary that no longer has a direct relation with the company. I think that there is a reason for that - and that this too is a good thing for everyone involved.

It will be interesting to see if other companies "piggy-back" their products on a Syncrosoft licensing scheme, with the expectation that Steinberg will create a broad base of users that will already have them on their machines. I would imagine that smaller companies (not just sample developers) will be looking into this - a rising tide lifts all ships, and all that.

Styxx

01-27-2005, 12:36 PM

Hmmm, I think I am beginning to understand this better with Houston Haynes most recent reply. Still need to read more.

Jonny Lost

01-27-2005, 01:01 PM

Hey guys,

Interesting topic. I know several people who pirate programs off the internet. I've been trying to get them to stop, but no one's listening. I just tell them, "If you buy GPO, you freakin' idiot, it ships with a form of every piece of software you pirating!" They usually just go, "Sure they do, ladie. Mr. Smee, hoist the flag! Aie, where's me eye patch, Matie?!"

I've never actually had to deal with a dongle. To be truthful, I didn't know what one was until Gary showed the picture of the dongle and dough nuts! Hmmm.. Doughnuts!

So, here's my comment. You think that they could name those something other than "dongle!" Everytime I hear that word, I imagine some little kid getting his mouth washed out with soap. :-)

Mother - "What did you say young man?"
Kid - "I said that i need to find my dongle!"
Mother - "That's it. I've had it with your filthy mouth. You just wait till your father gets home!!" (By the way, that used to be my mothers favorite threat!)

:-)

Jonny

Link F.

01-27-2005, 01:31 PM

...I would imagine that smaller companies (not just sample developers) will be looking into this - a rising tide lifts all ships, and all that...

Yeah, it's just too bad that developers are required to buy 1500 copies up front, I don't think too many of the smaller companies can afford this, when they are the ones who need the protection/deterant the most IMO.

qbert

01-27-2005, 02:05 PM

You're missing the point - the new Steinberg policy is to sell the dongle separately and allow you to put multiple license keys on one dongle device. This is a good thing.

Sounds dangerously like putting one's eggs all in one basket to me. What happens when you lose your dongle (in the midst of hurried field sessions - or maybe when your cat uses the thing for a play toy, etc., etc.)

I HATE the feeling that I have to baby-sit this device or else suffer the arduous and surely stressful task of getting a replacement. By comparison, re-registering GPO when my G5 hard disk needed reformatting was quick and painless (same for Battery 2 and Sibelius). It even took less time than re-installing the Syncrosoft License Control Center and downloading and running it's update patches!

JP

Link F.

01-27-2005, 02:19 PM

Sounds like you need to train your cat and keep it out of the studio if you want any of your equipment to last.

I have a dongle on my system - been there for two years now, through road trips, moving apartments twice and still works as well as it did the first day I got it. I don't see what the big deal is - if you guys are that rough with your toys sounds like you should spend a few more years on FruityLoops. :D

Brian2112

01-27-2005, 03:17 PM

And PACE? *shudder* Evil.

- m

Pace: about one hour, twenty minutes.

I had the same problem with Autotune (from reformatting/changing my drives) as I did with Steinberg. Now look, why should I care what protection schemes are used? I can crack or find cracks for all of them. But I no longer use Autotune and Cubase - Why? Because I want to play by the rules! Any Dev who wants to verify my purchases, I invite them to check my NI registrations, and/or their sales records (note: my GPO purchased through Alexander University/Truspec). My concern is this: I believe it hurts the developer more than the user! I don’t mind being inconvenienced if it will help protect the developers. But (in my case) Steinberg and Antares violated their own license agreements. I paid to use the license. It is simply their job to make sure that I always am allowed to use it (as long as I don’t violate the agreement). Steinberg did not do this, and Antares accused me of being a pirate. It is not the protection that turned me off (as I said earlier), it is the manner in which the company implements it. (The other reason I don’t use Autotune anymore is because I now demand that singers hit the dang pitch in one take!):p :D

Note to Houston: I think you made some good points. I hold you in the highest regard. We disagree a bit on this, but it isn’t personal my man!:o

...2112:)

Przemek K.

01-27-2005, 03:29 PM

I HATE the feeling that I have to baby-sit this device or else suffer the arduous and surely stressful task of getting a replacement. By comparison, re-registering GPO when my G5 hard disk needed reformatting was quick and painless (same for Battery 2 and Sibelius). It even took less time than re-installing the Syncrosoft License Control Center and downloading and running it's update patches!

JP

Exactly. What I fear most is that my Cubase SX dongle won't function after some time, or in the worst case gets stolen.

How will you proof to Steinberg that your dongle got stolen?

I think in such a case I have to pay another 720 Euro for Cubase SX 3...what a F...ing RIPOFF.

There is at least one company called "Propellerheads" and they have the least intrusive copyprotection scheme...its only a serialnumber.

A serialnumber that dont change unless you upgrade. No dongles, no challenge/response, no asking for CD after 2 weeks and so on.

Thats great.

Joseph Burrell

01-27-2005, 03:35 PM

Sometimes I wonder if piracy isn't even more rampant now that it ever was. I'm sure the advent of Interet access for the majority of the populace plays a very important role in this, but I wonder too if all the hubbub over piracy does the inverse of what the developer is after. The more its talked about the more it becomes fixated in a persons mind. I never thought much about it until getting involved in programs that used it heavily. Then it was brought to the forefront and it became apparent to me how much piracy was going on, where it could be obtained, and how to do it. For some folks, once that avenue is presented to them, its a hard to resist the tempation. Its kind of like anything to do with the media. The more its in the public eye the more prone people are to its influence. That's why I don't watch TV. But, if the software developers see a definite need for it, then there's nothing we as consumers can do about it with the exception of buying programs that are more light on protection schemes or are open source. If you want Nuendo, well, that comes along with it now. Are you prepared to deal with it? Is it really that big a hassle? Is there another program that performs similarly without this hassle? These are the types of questions that you have to ask yourself as comsumers.

Brian2112

01-27-2005, 03:41 PM

OH, AND ANOTHER THING...:p

I wonder if Steinberg/Yamaha (or who ever owns it now) is aware that the new PC spec is doing away with USB:eek:

amb

01-27-2005, 03:50 PM

I hate the dongle !!

I use Nuendo at home but have been searching for other options for laptop to take my projects to and from school . Steinberg allows me to install Nuendo on as many machines as I want but only use it on one at a time - this is fine but I will not take the dongle out of the house !!!

Even if I only owned a laptop I would not take the dongle out w/ me since it costs so much to replace . I wish there was a better solution .

RodneyR

01-27-2005, 04:51 PM

My wife's family business is primarily graphics & construction plan reproduction. This field has had to use dongles on some essential software for about 15 years now. They regularly malfunction and occasionally get lost; thus are generally unreliable for the consumer. They are more reliable than they used to be but are still a serious posterior pain. I would never support in any way a company that used dongles.

Being rather intolerant of the current US occupation with smoke & mirrors rather than reality, I did some actual research on copy protection schemes last year. Assuming my sources were correct, there is currently no effective form of copy protection--at least in regards to the cracking/piracy/wares problem(& the availabilty of so many pirated wares programs certainly supports this). What CP reduces is the regular user giving copies to friends(and this occured before the net became so popular). So, other than indicating a paranoid schism with reality, what CP protection really does is indicate the company thinks anyone using their programs is a probable thief. I can see where this would not bother anyone who was actually a thief; but, frankly, it pisses me off. In addition to this, as Brian has noted, the more difficult the CP to crack the more of an ego enticement it is to the pirate/cracker. This is certainly no secret and often remarked at various sites on the net. Thus in the real world, CP is counterproductive to its publicly stated purpose.

Given the current situation, I certainly see the need for some sort of identification process to ensure valuable and costly support resources are not spent on thieves(unauthorized users). But CP very obviously does not reduce wares/piracy.

For those of you who insist on believing CP is efficacious, I have a couple of excellent bridges I can give you a great deal on :rolleyes: :D .

May the Muses bless your endeavors,
Rodney

qbert

01-27-2005, 06:12 PM

Sounds like you need to train your cat and keep it out of the studio if you want any of your equipment to last....I don't see what the big deal is - if you guys are that rough with your toys sounds like you should spend a few more years on FruityLoops. :D

I was kidding about the cat! -Doh!

The big deal is that it's a tiny piece of cheap plastic which is totally liable for your large $$ software investment. Fine if you tuck it behind a hub for a couple years - not so fine if you're on the move between desktop and laptop computers.

JP

Christopher Duncan

01-27-2005, 07:51 PM

Note to Houston: I think you made some good points. I hold you in the highest regard. We disagree a bit on this, but it isn’t personal my man!http://www.northernsounds.com/forum/images/smilies/redface.gif
Copy protection, which we all would rather not have to deal with as consumers, is probably one of the most heated music related topics we could discuss here. And yet, even though we all have strong feelings on the matter and see things differently, we're still able to voice our opinions without being rude or unkind to each other.

You guys may get tired of hearing me say this, but once again, it's this spirit that truly elevates the GPO community into a class all its own. And I do believe class is the operative word here. http://www.northernsounds.com/forum/images/smilies/smile.gif

Rabban

01-27-2005, 08:24 PM

Is it Steinberg's idea to limit users to their products only? Nice try. With my experience with HALion String Edition, they can keep their products. Not very solid!!!!

Don't use HALion String Edition as a "whipping boy" against the use of dongles. It was created for Steinberg by a subsidiary that no longer has a direct relation with the company. I think that there is a reason for that - and that this too is a good thing for everyone involved.

I am very curious. What is the problem with Halion Strings Edition? I recently purchased it since it was on sale but I have not got around to installing it yet. Does it not play nice with other products (I use many products from Spectrasonics, Sonic Reality/IK Multimedia, Native Instruments)?

Cheers,

Rabban

ixm

01-27-2005, 10:10 PM

I love the challenge response NI system that GPO is using.

As far as the USB dongle, it is more of a pain to use, but ultimately has little bearing for me. It isn't enough of a hassle to deter me. Someone correct me if I'm mistaken but it seems to provide strongest protection, does it not? I remember reading a Cubase thread at KVR where they said sx3 has not been cracked yet after all this time, whereas I keep hearing stories how NI's system has been easy to crack. Troubling times indeed for developers.

kitekrazy

01-27-2005, 10:15 PM

I voted for none. Just a serial number or something when I install the application would be just dreamy.

but I'd rather not bother with any of it, since I don't think its makes that big a dent in the 'warez' universe anyway.

Cakewalk still uses the serial number and it doesn't look like they are going to go broke any time soon.

It definitely doesn't dent the warez universe. It often provides more challenges.

People who own software that has unique copy protection (like PACE) will get the crack or a warez copy. After the problems with Gigastudio 3, I can't say I blame them.

Jordo

01-27-2005, 10:21 PM

Who cares if anything gets hacked or cracked anyways. The people who use the hacked/cracked version will never buy the product anyway.

kitekrazy

01-27-2005, 10:29 PM

I never thought much about it until getting involved in programs that used it heavily. Then it was brought to the forefront and it became apparent to me how much piracy was going on, where it could be obtained, and how to do it. For some folks, once that avenue is presented to them, its a hard to resist the tempation.

But they miss out on product support and a hard copy of a manual. Sure people will download an illegal copy but not all of them use it.

Some companies don't provide a good working demo of their product for a consumer to make a choice so they'll get a warez copy. I've done that on occaision and found the product was not what I expected and save my money for something else. Few companies offer a money back quarantee.

Houston Haynes

01-27-2005, 10:39 PM

I wouldn't want to distract from this thread with a sub-text on HALion SE. Check out the Cubase forums (and their archive) for more info - try the search function.

There are several things I'd like to point out here:
There was mention made that smaller companies had to "buy in" to a certain number of dongle units in order to take advantage of Syncrosoft protection - that that contrvenes my core point. I don't know what kind of business model that Syncrosoft and Steinberg have devised - but to me the smart money is on allowing smaller companies to license the Syncrosoft protection and licensing scheme so that they can authenticate users who have already paid for the Syncrosoft dongle in using a Steinberg product. This not only allows smaller developers in the door for a smaller fee, but also promotes a culture of acceptance for the technology and a cheaper buy-in for everyone. This will help to eliminate one of the principal barriers to wide-spread adoption of this technology -- per-unit cost. Using the old saw of "I pirate software because their protection treats me like a criminal" is bogus, completely and totally utter nonsense. You don't go around stealing cars because alarms and keyless entry pisses you off. You don't go around burning down houses because they have an electronic alarm system. You don't trash someone land because it's surrounded by an electric fence. Software is property, and if you are using it without permission - YOU ARE STEALING and there's no justification for it. Period. As someone pointed out, dongles are not inherently bad - but the companies support for them can seem to be a bit stilted. I protect my investment for software the same way I protect my hardware - insurance. I have logged each and every asset in my studio, and have gone over the contents with my insurance agent and attorney (yes, I have an attorney) in order to make sure that if and when something disasterous happens that I can get prompt replacement. That means that I pay a premium on my policy, but it also means that I get my stuff back sooner rather than later. There are a lot of posts that try to excuse their objection to dongles by admitting that they've not take the proper measures to protect their investment. I believe that the laws of natural selection apply here as well as to developers who don't protect their products. You get what you deserve.

Finally, I'd like to point everyone to a site - http://www.imsta.org - that is not only centered on bringing together the industry to understand how to counter the threat of piracy, but to find ways to re-tune the culture of permissivness around it. I had a long talk with Ray Williams on the day after their NAMM meeting (see the site for more information on his background and involvement with IMSTA) and was impressed that he had no illusions about what he's up against. But the good news is that they had most of the major software developers (and many of the smaller players at the show) in one room thinking and discussing this issue. Not everyone agreed on the issues - in fact hardly anyone agreed - but the conversation has started and I believe that it's in the best interest of my future as a musician to care about and support this effort.

From http://www.imsta.org/newsite/piracy.html
Piracy Information

Virtually everyone reading this knows of someone using pirated software or has used or is using pirated software themselves. Is it wrong? Of course it is. Teams of people work many hours to create software products. They do this professionally. This means they live from their paychecks. If everyone pirated software then these teams would not dissappear and lots of software titles will vanish because people working in software development will have to find another ways to feed themselves and their families.

A recent survey of the National Association of Music Merchants revealed a troubling trend. While sound card sales have doubled from 2002 to 2003, software sales have remained stagnant - out of step with the increase sales of a related product. Afterall, sound cards are no good without software.

If you factor out the segment of software owners who are upgrading their audio hardware, or the segment who use the software bundled with the soundcard, you are still left with a big chunk of people buying high quality sound cards without making the accompanying software purchase.

No matter how many ways you look at this there is no way to escape the fact that for the first time we can see concrete indications that a large segment of people involved in high quality audio production [i.e. they visit a music store to buy an audio card] are choosing not to buy software. They buy the hardware and use a crack of the software.

An informal survey of music retailers in the United States shows that an average of 13 sound cards are sold for every software application.

Even in big studios charging hundreds of dollars per hour choose not to buy a $200 virtual instrument but instead use a cracked copy. Many hours are lost in these studios to problems related to combining cracked and legitimte software. It is shameful and inexplicable that professionals involved in the creation of intellectual property fail to make the connection between the sanctity of musical and visual content and code. Both are intellectual property and both are protected by law.

If you are unconvinced that software theft in the music software world is at epidemic proportions, conduct a survey of your peers. You might be surprised at how many people are using cracked software. The worst part is that many of the people using cracks can well afford to buy the legitimate copies but choose to use a crack out of pure moral failure.

If you find that everyone in your peer group is using legitimate software then we salute you because it is honest, responsible people like you and your peers who make it possible to have the amazing software the world enjoys. Thank you.

What's the solution?

We don't have a solution but we do have a starting point. We have to begin to acknowledge that software is a valuable component of the music making process. No less than a mixer, guitar or powered speakers. We have to begin to buy all the software that we use. We have to begin to ask the people around us to buy all the software they use and to keep pirated software away from our workspace.

Apart from the fact that software theft is illegal, the moral argument carries equal weight. If you are serious about your work, serious about music and serious about your career then you must be a contributing part of the industry and not a liability. You do have a role to play, you do have a function and c responsibility to make sure the industry is here for the next generations of musicians and creative people. No one likes to have their music downloaded when it's for sale. No software company can stay in business in the face of rampant and unchallenged software theft.

Do the right thing - buy the software you use.

marce

01-28-2005, 01:07 AM

Maybe some distribution politics in the "3rd world" can be welcome.
with much effort, i can say: I dont use any kind of pirated software. But if you live in LatinAmerica, you will found that have chance to get modern software and librarys at the same level you are using, are few. Why? because software makers want to sell things at the same level price that sell in 1st world. Is not easy to get a near to modern computer here. And after that you need buy expensive software, and i see that GPO, by example, is relatively cheap. But if i want buy it, i must, literaly, live 1 !/2 without spent any cent of my month pay to buy it.
Said this, i can count with the fingers of my right hand the people that here cares about buy software in the right way. And still i have 3 free fingers.

Well, sorry my little rant, only want to give you another VIEWPOINT.

Houston Haynes

01-28-2005, 01:18 AM

Maybe some distribution politics in the "3rd world" can be welcome.This is an interesting viewpoint. I'm curious - how much would you pay for an American guitar in your country compared to buying in the states? What about purchasing American hardware audio recorder or microphone? an American car?

Would it be the same? less? more?

Would a purchaser of your software be more likely or less likely to pass around a sample library to all of his friends if he paid, say $100 for it instead of $300?

marce

01-28-2005, 01:29 AM

This is an interesting viewpoint. I'm curious - how much would you pay for an American guitar in your country compared to buying in the states? What about purchasing American hardware audio recorder or microphone? an American car?

Would it be the same? less? more?

About hardware, it can be another story, since when they are imported in quantity, they reduce their price. But, by example a u$S 70 mixer console can be sold here at u$s 165.(american cars, like ford, have industry here or Brasil, that reduce costs)
Software is worst, since nobody import software in quantity, you must personally do the import.
By example, GPO cost U$S 249, isnt? well, add the u$s 40 of shipment, and add u$s 125 of taxes (im not joking). Well, that means more than what i win in a month at work (a teacher with 10 year of work).
That dont justify piracy (btw i dont know nobody using a Pirated GPO) but gives you something to think about. And be aware that here is not theworst economical situation in LatinAmerica

About the price of librarys, sometimes i wish be able to pay the same that an American guy, 249, that is much for me, but at least i feel in the same condition. Txs and shipment, simply kill you.

rwayland

01-28-2005, 01:36 AM

http://www.sonicstate.com/news/shownews.cfm?newsid=1965
NAMM: Steinberg Copy Protection Mandatory

New USB dongle guards crown jewels 24-Jan-05

Steinberg announced that their USB-based hardware copy protection device as a separate product. Accompanying the product launch is the announcement that customers who purchase Steinberg VSTi products released for the first time after 1st January 2005 and who do not already own a Steinberg USB key copy protection device as part of their Steinberg product will be required to buy a Steinberg Key as a required component to be able to run the VSTi software. However, existing Steinberg Cubase SX/SL, HALion, Hypersonic and Nuendo customers already in possession of a USB Key will no longer have to obtain a USB Key that they do not need, and will be able to buy future Steinberg VST instruments at a reduced price as a result.

The current standard of copy protection employed with its latest generation DAW and VSTi products is among the most successful in the industry today. Supplier of this successful technology is the German copy protection specialist, Syncrosoft GmbH.

"This system offers many benefits for Steinberg customers," explains Claus Menke, Steinberg's Head of Product Management. "The introduction of the Steinberg Key will extend the highly successful current generation of the Syncrosoft copy protection system to all new Steinberg VSTi products, helping to protect not only our investments, but also that of our customers and dealers," Menke continues.

Pricing and availability
Steinberg Key will be available for €19.90* from February 2005.
*SRP includes 16% German VAT. Prices subject to regional variations.

-----------------------
Thanks Houston for sending this in.

I don't think there will ever a a copy protection system that someone won't crack. If anyone remembers, Zork was considered to be invincible to cracking, but I didn't know that when I broke into the code. It seems to me that the solution lies in an encrypted ID that must be matched with a user ID and serial number, and an activation process. But, as somebody pointed out, Cakewalk has never used a dongle or a key, and seems to survive rather well. The only dongle I ever used was around 1982, on a Commodore 64, and they were easy enough to bypass. I found it an immense nuisance, and decided I would never again use one. As for other schemes, I am opposed to any that slow down the operation.

GPO as it operates now, seems to present no problems. But an important consideration to me is the ability to make a safety backup of the original CD's, which I have always done. You can never know when the cd wil hit the floor just at the moment your spiked shoe is descending to the same touchdown point. Not so long ago, a lens fell out of my eyeglasses, somehow landed under my foot. CD's usually hit the floor by the caster of my swivel chair, where I can neither see nor reach.

That's enough ranting now. Time to go on the front porch and check the forecasted weather . We are expecting high winds, heavy rain, high waves, heavy surf, and flooding. My kind of weather. If you stay out of the way of the occasional moving mountain, you won't get hurt, and it keeps the tourists out of my flowers.

Richard

cold c

01-28-2005, 08:37 AM

People should remember that although it will be possible to buy a dongle to store all licenses, Steinberg will not replace any licenses on a dongle that is lost (otherwise anyone could simply claim they 'lost' the dongle).

I already own SX3, SX2, VST 5.1 and I will not be purchasing any more software that adds value (risk) to that (or any similar) idiotic system, that renders any piece of software (that by its nature should be transferable, back-up-able, repairable, etc.) an untrusting useless backwards hardware bound piece of crap that is a mild inconvenience ('interesting challenge') for the crack makers and zero inconvenience for the crack users.

As someone already pointed out earlier, if I lost a key for a house or car I own I could easily get a new key or replace the lock, this is not possible with their dongle system. The use of software by its nature should allow the user this convenience.

Using the old saw of "I pirate software because their protection treats me like a criminal" is bogus, completely and totally utter nonsense. You don't go around stealing cars because alarms and keyless entry pisses you off. You don't go around burning down houses because they have an electronic alarm system. You don't trash someone land because it's surrounded by an electric fence. Software is property, and if you are using it without permission - YOU ARE STEALING and there's no justification for it. Period.

There is also another slightly different situation however, if you actually own the software and can not use it due to the copy protection employed (one example is a piece of software that would require the original CD every few weeks, but crash the computer whenever trying to re-authorise from the disc, or take hours to re-authorise) with no support from the manufacturer, one option is to use the 'unofficial version' that does not require authorisation from the disc. However this is still technically breaking the license agreement and possibly some laws concerning copy protection etc. but could someone realistically be prosecuted for doing this?

Of course, I voted for no copy protection at all, it is now one of the main factors in me buying software, I now stay away from all dongles, C/R, or similar. This has already stopped me purchasing Acid Pro 5 and Izotope Trash and will probably prevent me from purchasing other C/R software, which is a shame because I was interested in the Garritan Stradivari instrument that is being released. In some respects I suppose this is a good thing as it means I will spend less money on software.

I recently upgraded my OEM version of Nero to get some extra features, it uses a simple serial number delivered by email (not C/R) and the entire upgrade process took about a minute.

However, I realise that a serial number is not an effective method of copy protection and therefore a product may as well use none at all, and I really wouldn't want to input 100 serial numbers when I upgrade components or re-install my software on new system build.

Also, a big thanks to those developers that don't use any copy protection at all, especially to those plugin developers who don't install components external to the plugin directory and allow the backup of the plugin directory as a whole.

I agree with some earlier posters (like blue (http://www.northernsounds.com/forum/showpost.php?p=251275&postcount=51)) that the direction of the copy protection should shift to official support, so official registered users benefit from frequent updates and extra features. Of course potential customers should not be excluded from viewing the community/support as it will allow them to see the full beneifts before purchasing the product, and if necessary a separate area for potential customers (non-registered users) to ask questions about the product or demo version etc.

And also, thanks to those developers that use no copy protection and have friendly license agreements (allowing the installation on more than one PC etc.).

No to C/R and dongles, thanks.

Styxx

01-28-2005, 09:45 AM

Cold c - This struck me to be courious - This has already stopped me purchasing Acid Pro 5 and Izotope Trash and will probably prevent me from purchasing other C/R software, - I had upgraded to Acid 5.0 and although it offers many new editing to midi, I am leaning more toward uninstalling. It seems after installing all I've had is Windows problems and problems with system stability. Could you elaborate a little more on exactly what all this copy protection jive cosmic debris means in Acid 5.0? :confused:

cold c

01-28-2005, 11:08 AM

Cold c - This struck me to be courious - - I had upgraded to Acid 5.0 and although it offers many new editing to midi, I am leaning more toward uninstalling. It seems after installing all I've had is Windows problems and problems with system stability. Could you elaborate a little more on exactly what all this copy protection jive cosmic debris means in Acid 5.0? :confused:

Most of the issues related to Acid Pro 5 are probably not related to the C/R copy protection but the poor design and implementation of the software in general.

The system requirements for it don't specify that MDAC (database drivers) or MSDE (sql server engine) need to be installed. By default the sql server windows service runs in the background using memory whether Acid Pro 5 is being used or not. The application is bloated, and given that I could not get a file to audition from the media library without it crashing (repeatedly), and the number of times Acid Pro 5 crashed when detecting the VST plugins directory (very many), I doubt the stability of the rest of the program.

There is also the .NET runtime that needs to be installed (which starts yet another windows service).

Just using the software and trying to automate an effect, or attempting to record (with the in-process dialog box) demonstrates the lack of time they spent on this version.

I would have probably put up with most of these issues just to use the 'reverse' feature, but the addition of C/R (it used to just use a serial number in earlier 4.0 versions) put me off completely.

It would not surprise me if installing it contributed to system instability, I would be careful even when uninstalling it, make sure you have recently backed up etc.

If you are a rewire user and experiencing instability there, Acid Pro 5 may have overwritten the rewire.dll file so check with your software manufacturers for the correct version.

Markleford

01-28-2005, 11:13 AM

Cold C: I believe that iZotope Trash is now free of that scheme. They experimented with changing *all* their products to a pseudo PACE mechanism at one point, but got so much bad feedback from existing customers that I believe they backpedalled a bit and supplied an alternative. You might want to look into that again.

- m

Joseph Burrell

01-28-2005, 11:18 AM

Yes, all iZotope products now use a simple C/R system.

Houston Haynes

01-28-2005, 12:00 PM

People should remember that although it will be possible to buy a dongle to store all licenses, Steinberg will not replace any licenses on a dongle that is lost (otherwise anyone could simply claim they 'lost' the dongle).

That's why I expalined in great detail that I went to great pains to shop for a line of insurance for my property in case of any loss. Steinberg should not be expected to be your insurer in case of theft, act of God, or act of Murphy.

Seriously, if a meteorite flies in through my window (I hope I'm not here at the time) and smashes into my TASCAM FW-1884, do I complain to TASCAM to get a free replacement? No, I file a loss report and get the insurance company to write me a check, which they've promised to do on the same day. I've done all of the due diligence with my insurance agent and attorney (yes, I still have an attorney) to ensure that my insurance will provide the coverage I need and I'll get the money in a timeframe that will let me continue on my gigs. I consider myself to be a professional and expect everyone to behave accordingly, even if it costs me a few extra dollars.

What most people fail to understand is that software and perceived as different than hardware, but in the musical context DAW software is the same as a tape deck and should be treated accordingly from a risk management standpoint. I worked in a recording studio in North Carolina where the owner was complaining about how expensive it was to have their 2"/32 track tape deck repaired. I asked him if he was buffering money out to a "separate fund" to pay for tranportation back and forth to Atlanta, downtime in the studio, etc. and of course he said "HAYULL no, I've got a business to run and margins are TIGHT!" So we talked the real costs of ownership all the way through and the very next week they had installed four TASCAM DA-88 and paid an extra fee to the supplier that in case one of them failed that he'd get a loaner/replacement the same or next day. They also doubled their hourly rate if someone wanted to use the analog deck. ;)

My point is that the *true* cost of ownership of professional software doesn't stop with the purchase from the vendor. If you're really serious about what you do, you'll think it all the way through and take measures to protect yourself. Don't rely on the courtesy of the software company to get you out of a jam. If you can't trust yourself to *not* lose a critical component of your studio, then there are plenty of options out there to suit your personal "business model". It's great that there are so many software companies out there providing such great tools, but I would never expect any of them to bend over backwards to compensate me for my own acts of stupidity - that's what insurance companies are for... :D

Styxx

01-28-2005, 12:03 PM

cold c, I still thing I am going to uninstall and do a system recovery for the point before I installed. I purposely did a set point just for this reason alone. Although the midi upgrades were nice, the overall problems I believe Acid 5 has cause are not worth keeping the software upgrade. Acid 4 never gave me a problem. Midi I can do in Cubase.
Plus, I am coming to a point where I have experiment enough with several different programs that I will be settling down with Sonar 4.
I am not a patient person when it comes to issues and problems like this. I am a point and click let me work on my projects without reprogramming software kind of guy. If I have to spend hours on end fixing stupid software problems then it only takes away from my work with music.
You understand what I am saying.
I just didn't realize how many problems can arrise out of using these types of software. And, now the topic of this thread ... Copy Protection. I can't vote on any one because I just don't understand it all completely! One aspect I gathered for myself is if I have to do half the requirements in any one of these just to work my music...!:mad:

Brian2112

01-28-2005, 12:50 PM

I agree with Houston to a point here. If I buy a diamond ring for my wife and I lose it, Wal Mar…err….Macy’s;) doesn’t owe me a new ring. However, we have a choice in this matter. I prefer my own insurance which is to do business with a good company that allows you to make backups or has some reasonable scheme. The difference is that a diamond ring is a tangible purchase. A software license is not tangible. A dongle is simply a tangible device that holds information/confirmation about an intangible item. Did that make sense?:confused: :D

Anyhoo, despite the way some license agreements are written, it has been upheld in U.S. Federal courts that users have the right to make backups of software for the sole purpose of archival protection. As I said earlier, I bought Antares Autotune. Now, I could simply go get the crack and continue using it…but I don’t. That is illegal. I could use my own crack, as long as I don’t distribute it…(and yes, that IS legal to a point). However, disassembly or alteration of the code is in violation of the license agreement, hence, I lose my license, and by using it now, I am back to illegal. So I don’t use it at all. With regard to Sonar, I type in my code on install and forget about it. That’s just a no-brainer for me. Sonar and Cubase are on relatively equal ground in terms of quality, and features. And yea, I do stupid crap like lose stuff, break stuff, and knock stuff over. It happens no matter how careful I am. If you're as perfect as Houston, I guess there’s no worries…J/K pal:D .

...2112:)

Houston Haynes

01-28-2005, 01:25 PM

Here are my final thoughts on the subject: (and it's about time, too) ;)

It's really easy to slide down the slippery slope of grousing over the various inconveniences that software companies put us through in order to run their software. I think that many of the DAW "affectinados" today come to this world with a "Fisher-Price toy" mentality. They want to open the box and play. They don't necessarily want to share unless it's to show off what they can do with the toy without involving others. If a company is marketing to that (rather large) segment of the buying publc, then a dongle or C/R protection scheme is probably going to cost you more than it's worth to you or your customers. Allowing hacking/cracking or pure pass-around of your product in the expectation/hope that users will become customers might be part of your business model, and as such it could work out for your business.

However, if you're designing a technical, creative, or collaborative tool that is geared for professional use in a high-availability, high-demand environment - then you deserve to be rewarded for targeting that smaller market by receiving 100% of the money due to you for providing such a product. The number of people that would object to a strong protection scheme in that tier would be a tiny minority (there would probably be more people in that tier that would simply object to the design of your product), as it's mainly a "Pro Tools world" where dongles and hardware-tied authorization is part of the cultural norm. The cost to those companies of having non-paying users is high and expecting them to become paying customers is not predictable or absorbable as with the "Fischer-Price model".

These considerations require something that not many objectors will really try to do - empathize with the people that are trying to run a software business. That's somewhat to be expected, as most of these folks are youg, reasonably well-educated, and have not had any opportunity to understand profit and loss in the real world. The core of this market is the highschool-to-college-age male with disposable income provided by others. There's a bit of "tacit enculturation (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=enculturation)" in that lack of willingness that says "to be selfish is OK". Everyone has to decide for themselves if that frame of thinking is acceptable.

I think that Steinberg is laying the groundwork to be successful and is attempting to provide a framework in which plug-in and sample library developers (through their HALion player technology) can have the opportunity to be successful too. To me, this means that more effects, instruments, and sound libraries will be made available at cheaper prices (as companies can afford to go with a lower pricing model - with a lower cost of buy-in for their protection scheme and broader sales due to the lower price point and stronger protection) and the overall health of the market will improve. Considering the overall improvement in the strength of the Syncrosoft technology, along with the improvement in their driver transparancy - I think they're on the right track and it would be reasonable to assume that they will continue to optomize that for broader technological and cultural acceptance.

Digidesign has been using this model with the iLok system, and I can't see why it won't work here - in fact it will likely be more successful as the premium cost of that system does not exist for Steinberg. Again - I reiterate - I don't think that this will stop piracy, but I think that it's a step in the right direction for changing the model for doing business in favor of those who choose to deal honestly - both from a business and creative standpoint.

I also talked to a buyer for Guitar Center who said that they simply don't take on new sample libraries that are in an "open" format. Unless they're tied to a player technology or some other form of property protection, they look at it like they're loading up the store with boxed gear and leaving the doors unlocked at night. I'd imagine that Steinberg/Yamaha's decision has found a lot of friends in the retail stores and distribution business - which also means more product in stores at competitive prices, which in the end benefits consumers. Sounds like an "everybody wins" scenario to me - but only time will tell this tale.

"Now I'm done -- the subject is Steinberg and Syncrosoft - talk amongst yourselves..." :D

cold c

01-28-2005, 01:44 PM

Cold C: I believe that iZotope Trash is now free of that scheme.

Yes, all iZotope products now use a simple C/R system.

Thanks, I have emailed their sales address to try and clarify whether the C/R authorisation scheme detailed on their web page has been superseded.

What most people fail to understand is that software and perceived as different than hardware, but in the musical context DAW software is the same as a tape deck and should be treated accordingly from a risk management standpoint.

Right, but with real software, you can take measures to reduce the risk of software corruption or similar. This is not thanks to the courtesy of the manufacturer, it is an inherent property of real software, the software can be backed-up/archived to CD, DVD, external drive, network storage server etc.

Obviously software bugs pose a risk, but if the software was properly tested in the first place, and backed up, then risk comes from the hardware dongle or any 3rd party dependency (in this case some C/R copy protection schemes).

I'm not a professional so why buy extra insurance for a risk I can avoid in the first place?

If waldorf had used C/R for their software would we all have to resort to the 'unofficial' versions to get our plugins to work?

If you want to compare the service responsibilities to that of a hardware company that's fine but Steinberg have been a mainly software company for around 20 years now, there is no excuse when other companies are managing with more sensible copy protection schemes.

As it stands, someone could potentially have the original receipt, box, serial number, DVD, start guide, registration card, be registered with both Steinberg and the local distributor, but no dongle (which can be replaced for a few pounds) and have to pay a few hundred pounds for another 'license', that makes sense.

I am going to uninstall and do a system recovery for the point before I installed. I purposely did a set point just for this reason alone. Although the midi upgrades were nice, the overall problems I believe Acid 5 has cause are not worth keeping the software upgrade.

Many people have reached a similar conclusion on Acid Pro 5.

After uninstalling be sure to uninstall the MS SQL server desktop engine from add/remove programs if it is not already uninstalled, as well as the .NET framework if no other application is using it.

And given that other apps are incorporating some Acid functionality (like SX3 automatically stretching acidized files) there is less reason to use it.

If you still have system instability after the uninstall-

If you get random blue screens or shutdowns check the usual things like system temps, memtest, prime95, and background processes that shouldn't be running.

If you get specific reproducible bugs check with any recently installed/updated plugins.

Hopefully the system restore will be enough though.

The idea of simply "painting with audio" in Acid isn't worth much when there are issues with using it that aren't simple.

Houston Haynes

01-28-2005, 02:13 PM

I'm breaking my implied code of silence... shame on me...

If you want to compare the service responsibilities to that of a hardware company that's fine but Steinberg have been a mainly software company for around 20 years now, there is no excuse when other companies are managing with more sensible copy protection schemes.

Actually - there are several valid reasons for this decision: Steinberg is a business - not just a software company. They happen to be providing their product in software form, but they are a music and pro audio company. Any company can choose any model they wish in which to do business, but they should not be constrained to how you perceive the software should be distributed. If they owned 80% of the market like Microsoft, it might be different - maybe. As it is you have lots of choices and should feel free to go elsewhere and "not have a dog in this fight". Steinberg is now owned by Yamaha, a company that has struggled with entering the software arena while protecting their intellectual properties. Going full-on with Syncrosoft and remaining a relatively open native processor platform is a better decision than simply embedding Steinberg sequencer technology into Yamaha hardware. It's better for them as a business and better for musicians and engineers that use their products. It allows flexibility in choice that you don't necessarily get with a Pro Tools type system.

I have ACID Pro 4 but have not gone to 5 yet due to issues with the .NET framework. I have two machines - one is an "office" machine that is fully equipped to stand alongside my "primary" machine, but it's basically my skunk room. I use Dantz Retrospect to automatically archive both system images on a weekly basis, with audio projects on a nightly incremental backup schedule. When the time comes that more people are reporting success with .NET and SAP5, I'll set aside my "office" machine and give it a whirl. I'm not saying that what anyone is doing is "right" or "wrong", but I'm trying to illustrate that in a world where music buys groceries, these kinds of things are to be expected, planned and accounted for beforehand. I don't think that dongles, C/R authentication, or underlying technology platforms are any different in that respect. It all comes down to your personal "business model" and if you want to think that software is fundamentally different than hardware, good luck to you.

Christopher Duncan

01-28-2005, 02:13 PM

Perhaps in the future, software can become hardware, thus solving the problem of virtual schemes and making it much more like Brian's diamel, er, diamond ring. This concept might require a bit of explanation...

We already have USB "thumb drives" and other USB based storage devices that the operating system recognizes as another hard drive. I don't know for certain, but I suspect the same applies to Firewire. Now, what if when you bought a software product, it shipped in a self contained USB/Firewire drive. No installation onto the hard disk required. Just plug it in and use it. Want to use it somewhere else? Just remove it, plug it into a different machine, and use it. Of course, in Brian's case, it might be a little harder getting that ring back to use somewhere else, but USB/Firewire ports are a little more forgiving in that regard. :)

Now, just like a diamond, a book, a music CD or a DVD/VHS movie, you have an actual, physical product. Care for it, insure it, hide it from petty theives, etc., just as you would any other product. This eliminates all the various fuzzy "ownership" problems caused by software being, well, soft. However, there are also other benefits.

With 15 years of professional software development behind me, I can't count the number of times that my software, or software I personally use, has been trashed because of the whims or incompetency of some other hardware / software installation. In the Windows development world, this is affectionately (okay, maybe not so affectionately) known as "DLL Hell", although DLLs are far from the only victims / culprits.

Computers are useless without software, and yet, ironically, the most evil and hazardous thing you can do to your computer is install software on it. I would love to see the advance of technology to the point that tiny little plug in devices become autonomous pieces of functionality. Use the internal hard drive to store data. Plug in your programs like you'd stick a key in your car, and just drive them.

I have a spindle of CDs sitting on top of the computer I'm using at the moment. In that same space, I could have a USB hub that could house 100 programs. Double that if it used the back as well. To eliminate the hassles of software installations, and to rid myself of copy protection schemes made necessary by dogs without honor, I'd happily stick such a device on top of my box and live happily ever after.

As with any technology, it's never this simple. However, we are fast approaching the point where this could be technically feasible. Hmmm, perhaps I should copyright this idea before anyone uses it. But then, how would I protect the copyright? Questions, questions... :)