Quantcast
Cytomic "The Glue" Bus Compressor Effect Plugin - Page 88 - Gearspace.com
The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Cytomic "The Glue" Bus Compressor Effect Plugin
Old 14th August 2016 | Show parent
  #2611
Cytomic
 
andy-cytomic's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by fgimian ➡️
Is anyone concerned about the new authorization system in place? The current system does not allow you to deactivate an authorization and allows up to 5 authorizations. Once you reach 5, you get 1 authorization per year.
I want to allow fair use of Cytomic software. Any time a customers with two computers has emailed me asking for another authorisation to cover broken / sold / whatever computer I have helped them.

The currently system is one authorisation per year total. The first 5 years of authorisation are available at purchase time, but I want to change this as I feel it is too limiting and open to problems with license transfers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fgimian ➡️
This (for me) is a huge deal as I want to be able to re-install my OS or buy a new machine as often or as little as I like without such a strong restriction. At a minimum, a way to deactivate an authorization would be a huge improvement.

I absolutely adore The Glue (and The Drop) but this has me worried about the future and is also a little unfair that the authorization system changed when customers like me purchased it knowing it didn't use challenge / response protection.
I want to provide enough authorisations to reasonably cover two of your personal machines without issue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fgimian ➡️
There has to be trust between paying customers and software vendors and such practices only lead to the software being less troublesome to those who steal the software, than loyal customers who are paying for products. If someone intended to break the license agreement, why would they pay for the product? ... No other software I own (I own a good amount of stuff) places such strong restrictions on use, even software like Omnisphere and Sylenth1 which use challenge / response protection allow de-authorization or infinite automated re-authorizations.

I've discussed this matter with Andy via email and he fails to see the problem but wanted to ask your thoughts guys. What do you think?
I want to switch this over to two authorisations per year automatically, with another one available upon email request. This should easily cover updating both of your computers that are covered by the license more than every year! What do you think about this?

Now, I already offer infinite re-authorisations on the same hardware id, this is automated an in place. I have a warming limit of 10 re-authorisations, and would like people to email me letting me know what they are doing, but I then increase it. It is not possible to de-authorise a computer securely - period. Other venders are not able to do this securely unless they use dongles, and I am not going there.

I do trust my customers, and always grant more authorisations to let people run their software on up to two of their machines from a single license. I need to encourage customers / studios with more than two machines to purchase another license, and to do this I need to limit the authorisation count to something reasonable. Being able to run a single license on two machines is much better than a dongle, where you can only run it on one machine.

Please provide me your feedback on this!
Old 14th August 2016 | Show parent
  #2612
Lives for gear
 
🎧 5 years
Thanks for considering this, Andy. I'm not a copy-protection expert, but I'll tell you my concern.

Quote:
Originally Posted by andy-cytomic ➡️
One authorisation per year means you can buy a new computer or re-install your computer every year, which is loads.
One time I reinstalled my O.S. and all my plugins about 4 times in one week. In hindsight it was because some of my RAM was bad and wreaking havoc, but before I diagnosed the cause of the problem, I'd re-installed everything multiple times. Not likely to happen again, but it did happen. I'm not going to be extreme and say I'll never buy the Drop if you continue with this limitation, but it is something for me to consider while weighing options. I'll hope you find a solution that still protects you from people who want to use a single license for too many machines.
Old 14th August 2016 | Show parent
  #2613
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnbruner ➡️
I'm with you. A limit on how many times I can install the software is a definite negative.

Please fix this Cytomic. The Drop has a good reputation, but it's not my only option, and I won't buy it if it won't allow me to reinstall O.S. as often as I want to or need to.
So glad to hear others feel the same way, thanks for your reply!

Quote:
Originally Posted by andy-cytomic ➡️
One authorisation per year means you can buy a new computer or re-install your computer every year, which is loads
Honestly, one auth per year is not loads mate, it is barely scraping by for most people. Particularly on the Windows side of the fence, re-installs are common every 4 - 6 months.

Quote:
Originally Posted by andy-cytomic ➡️
I need to prevent excessive authorisations, otherwise unscrupulous studios will just buy one license on all their machines, which is clearly not ideal. So the new idea is 2 authorisations per year, but if you need an extra one that year just email me and I'll grant it. I'll also not show the authorisation count any more, as I think this is why people are getting worried.

I want my customers to be able to run a single license on two of their personal computers without issue, if you want to run Cytomic software on more machines than that then I recommend you buy another license. I feel that 2 authorisation per year, which an extra upon request will cover this just fine. What are your thoughts?
It's strange to think that a professional studio would pay for your product only to break the license agreement. If they wanted to do that, they may as well pirate it.

Why not simply use the computer's MAC address as the only indicator for generating the authorization. That's the only way to uniquely identify a computer. When I installed Bootcamp / Windows on my Mac, I had to re-authorize Windows, OS X on the same Mac was a different authorization. Why? It's the same computer.

I should also note that I personally only own one computer. I'm not trying to circumvent any system, but I do re-install from time to time and don't like this looming over my head. Right now I've been demoing heaps of products and made a bit of a mess on my Mac, so i plan to re-install in the next month when Komplete 11 Ultimate arrives in the mail.

Quote:
Originally Posted by andy-cytomic ➡️
I want to switch this over to two authorisations per year automatically, with another one available upon email request. This should easily cover updating both of your computers that are covered by the license more than every year! What do you think about this?

Now, I already offer infinite re-authorisations on the same hardware id, this is automated an in place. I have a warming limit of 10 re-authorisations, and would like people to email me letting me know what they are doing, but I then increase it. It is not possible to de-authorise a computer securely - period. Other venders are not able to do this securely unless they use dongles, and I am not going there.

I do trust my customers, and always grant more authorisations to let people run their software on up to two of their machines from a single license. I need to encourage customers / studios with more than two machines to purchase another license, and to do this I need to limit the authorisation count to something reasonable. Being able to run a single license on two machines is much better than a dongle, where you can only run it on one machine.

Please provide me your feedback on this!
So firstly, I respect and agree with your avoidance of dongles. I only use one for Cubase and even that is a pain in the butt when i go mobile. So please, no dongles, no iLok crap, I agree 100%.

But here is something to think about:

At a certain point, you need to trust your customers. If someone wanted to be dishonest, they could tell you that they uninstalled it from a machine when they didn't. So even granting more authorisations as you are now still relies on trust between you and your customers. This is no different to a customer accepting your license agreement during purchase or clicking "Yes" to a dialog box which asks if they are only running the plugin on two computers during authorization.

Personally, I see a few solutions to this problem:

* FAVOURITE OPTION: Switch back to keyfiles / serial numbers and ask users to explicitly answer Yes to a prompt with your conditions when they license their plugin (or similar)

* GREAT ALTERNATIVE: Bind the authorisation to something HARDWARE specific, e.g. MAC address, MAC address + CPU, maybe the model could also be used if that's available (e.g. on Mac's there is a model identifier). The OS should absolutely NOT be used as part of this auth key at all, it is irrelevant, but right now an OS install does play a role.

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnbruner ➡️
Thanks for considering this, Andy. I'm not a copy-protection expert, but I'll tell you my concern.

One time I reinstalled my O.S. and all my plugins about 4 times in one week. In hindsight it was because some of my RAM was bad and wreaking havoc, but before I diagnosed the cause of the problem, I'd re-installed everything multiple times. Not likely to happen again, but it did happen. I'm not going to be extreme and say I'll never buy the Drop if you continue with this limitation, but it is something for me to consider while weighing options. I'll hope you find a solution that still protects you from people who want to use a single license for too many machines.
Exactly, I'm with you. I've been through times like this too.

Just my thoughts of course, curious to see what others think.
Old 14th August 2016 | Show parent
  #2614
Lives for gear
 
comfortablynick's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by andy-cytomic ➡️
Now, I already offer infinite re-authorisations on the same hardware id, this is automated an in place. I have a warming limit of 10 re-authorisations, and would like people to email me letting me know what they are doing, but I then increase it. It is not possible to de-authorise a computer securely - period.
So if the plugins can be re-authorized to the same hardware ID infinitely, wouldn't this cover the OS reinstall issue? It seems the hardware ID would stay the same, but maybe not.

Interesting that you can't securely allow de-authorizations. I suppose in this case I would prefer iLok, since it allows me to use the plugins on whatever machine I'm working on. No worrying about how many authorizations are left. I'm probably in the minority, though.
Old 14th August 2016 | Show parent
  #2615
Lives for gear
 
21 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by andy-cytomic ➡️
We could switch over to using dongles, then you can only run it on one computer at a time - some people would prefer this, but I'm not one of them. I would prefer supporting people to easily run their license on up to two of their personal machines, so I'm open to ideas, and my current best idea is two authorisations per year, which another an email away. How does that sound?
Let's say you went the iLok route and offered two authorizations per purchase. That would allow simultaneous use on up to two machines, but no more than that. Slate and Empirical Labs are both offering the two authorization approach, which apparently doesn't add much to the costs on their end.

Some of the downsides of this approach are: 1) changing CP schemes this late in the game would really piss off existing customers, 2) there's still a large number of people out there who hate iLok's (more so on KVR than here), 3) the cost of iLok protection, 4) next time Slate decides to release a free plugin your new buyers may find themselves unable to authorize (and other fun server nonsense).

Some upsides of this approach are: 1) you can limit simultaneous use to two computers and be comfortable that's actually happening, 2) iLok is one of the more effective CP schemes, 3) just about every commercial studio and a big chunk of the hobbyist market has an iLok, 4) users will know their plugins will still work barring any major OS changes if Andy gets hit by a bus or wins the lottery, whereas an online CR based method can disappear and leave users out in the cold.

I don't mind the current approach and think it's reasonable, but C/R systems are my least favorite approach (CP favs are none, serial number, ilok, and CR in that order). I'm a Windows user, but I haven't had to do a full reinstall in a long, long time, but I did recently buy a new PC and a laptop so the number of auths per year is reasonable to me. That said, I've been burned by CR systems in the past from small companies that went under, so I'd prefer a more permanent (iLok, serial, or no DRM) approach so that's never an issue. Just my two cents.

BTW, love the new website, and I look forward to the mentioned updates and especially some new plugins (let's tie a bow on the Drop already, call it done after the next update, and make some new plugs).
Old 15th August 2016 | Show parent
  #2616
Cytomic
 
andy-cytomic's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnbruner ➡️
Thanks for considering this, Andy. I'm not a copy-protection expert, but I'll tell you my concern.


One time I reinstalled my O.S. and all my plugins about 4 times in one week. In hindsight it was because some of my RAM was bad and wreaking havoc, but before I diagnosed the cause of the problem, I'd re-installed everything multiple times. Not likely to happen again, but it did happen. I'm not going to be extreme and say I'll never buy the Drop if you continue with this limitation, but it is something for me to consider while weighing options. I'll hope you find a solution that still protects you from people who want to use a single license for too many machines.
Where possible I use the motherboard ID, or other system invariant IDs so you can re-format the hard drive and re-authorise without triggering another authorisation. Some systems don't offer "nice" ids like this so I fall back on other methods, which can trigger another auth. In such cases I recommend you email me and talk about it, I will always be lenient and allow more authorisations. I have a debugging tool that also lets me know which ID is being used, so I normally get the customer to run that so I can improve the system.

Thus far every customer can run Cytomic software without fail on up to two of their personal machines. If there are any customers having issues please email me, but so far every person that needed more authorisations I have granted them straight away.
Old 15th August 2016 | Show parent
  #2617
Cytomic
 
andy-cytomic's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by comfortablynick ➡️
So if the plugins can be re-authorized to the same hardware ID infinitely, wouldn't this cover the OS reinstall issue? It seems the hardware ID would stay the same, but maybe not.

Interesting that you can't securely allow de-authorizations. I suppose in this case I would prefer iLok, since it allows me to use the plugins on whatever machine I'm working on. No worrying about how many authorizations are left. I'm probably in the minority, though.
I am improving the system all the time, and it mostly does allow you to replace hard drives, re-format etc without triggering another authorisation. If you replace the motherboard then this will trigger another authorisation. In that case just email me and I'll issue another. Everyone will get 2 authorisations per year, and an extra one upon email, so that means after the first year you can replace both machines every year and still have more authorisations to spare. If you see any issues with this approach please let me know! So far there has been no one comment on this, so I would appreciate some feedback before I code it on the server some time this week.
Old 15th August 2016 | Show parent
  #2618
Cytomic
 
andy-cytomic's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by fgimian ➡️
So glad to hear others feel the same way, thanks for your reply!
Honestly, one auth per year is not loads mate, it is barely scraping by for most people.
I feel the same one, one authorisation per year isn't ideal, which is why I'm changing it - and this decision was made BEFORE anyone posted here.

Please comment on the proposed system so we can move forward. The new system is 2 authorisations per year with an extra available upon email request.


Quote:
Originally Posted by fgimian ➡️
Particularly on the Windows side of the fence, re-installs are common every 4 - 6 months.
The is absolutely fine and will not re-trigger authorisations. I use the motherboard ID and will be using the primary network interface ID in the near future. BTW having to re-install every 4 - 6 months sounds like a major flaw in the Windows operating system, so I'm glad to hear you have a unix (Mac) based system as well!


Quote:
Originally Posted by fgimian ➡️
It's strange to think that a professional studio would pay for your product only to break the license agreement. If they wanted to do that, they may as well pirate it.
Pirated software has risks and more importantly no tech support, both of which don't cut it when you're running a decent studio. Cutting a few corners with regards authorisations is totally possible and I want to encourage that not to happen. There is also educational studios that I need to be able to support and lock down licenses to specific machines to prevent theft, so basic serials don't cut it, I need challenge / response and machine IDs since I don't like dongles.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fgimian ➡️
Why not simply use the computer's MAC address as the only indicator for generating the authorization. That's the only way to uniquely identify a computer. When I installed Bootcamp / Windows on my Mac, I had to re-authorize Windows, OS X on the same Mac was a different authorization. Why? It's the same computer.
I already do this, I use the motherboard ID and I will be moving over to using the primary network interface ID, which is already in place for me test builds and will be released within the month. Most computers can be re-authorise without triggering another authorisation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fgimian ➡️
I should also note that I personally only own one computer. I'm not trying to circumvent any system, but I do re-install from time to time and don't like this looming over my head. Right now I've been demoing heaps of products and made a bit of a mess on my Mac, so i plan to re-install in the next month when Komplete 11 Ultimate arrives in the mail.

So firstly, I respect and agree with your avoidance of dongles. I only use one for Cubase and even that is a pain in the butt when i go mobile. So please, no dongles, no iLok crap, I agree 100%.

But here is something to think about:

At a certain point, you need to trust your customers. If someone wanted to be dishonest, they could tell you that they uninstalled it from a machine when they didn't. So even granting more authorisations as you are now still relies on trust between you and your customers. This is no different to a customer accepting your license agreement during purchase or clicking "Yes" to a dialog box which asks if they are only running the plugin on two computers during authorization.
Actually it is quite different. With an email I can talk to someone and improve the copy protection system to handle their use case. I can build more trust with this instead of an impersonal "yes" button. Also once I solve that particular issue the customer is having they never need to email again, they are covered and happily using their software.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fgimian ➡️
Personally, I see a few solutions to this problem:

* FAVOURITE OPTION: Switch back to keyfiles / serial numbers and ask users to explicitly answer Yes to a prompt with your conditions when they license their plugin (or similar)
This will prevent me from being able to support studios and education institutions, since the single key file is easily copied by students / visitors to the studio.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fgimian ➡️
* GREAT ALTERNATIVE: Bind the authorisation to something HARDWARE specific, e.g. MAC address, MAC address + CPU, maybe the model could also be used if that's available (e.g. on Mac's there is a model identifier). The OS should absolutely NOT be used as part of this auth key at all, it is irrelevant, but right now an OS install does play a role.
I already do this. The OS is not part of the authorisation where possible, but some systems don't report a unique hardware ID so I have to gather other metrics with then can possibly re-trigger an authorisation. There is no way around this possibility.



Quote:
Originally Posted by fgimian ➡️
Exactly, I'm with you. I've been through times like this too.

Just my thoughts of course, curious to see what others think.
Thanks for your observations, I'd like to hear what you think of my comments in return and the new system of 2 authorisations per year with an extra upon emailing
Old 15th August 2016
  #2619
Reviews Editor
 
Diogo C's Avatar
I'll echo Funkybot's post, pretty much agreed with everything on it.

The thing that makes me concerned a bit concerned is that system relies too much on you Andy. It works and I fully trust you and that makes me feel safe, but what if "life" gets in the way at some point? Stuff happens - knocks on wood a zillion times - but yeah man, it does happen. In that regard I'd favor the more permanent solutions - as "permanent" as possible.

Having said that, the system you have in place is absolutely fair and works well. I finally moved my HDD to a SSD with SuperDuper and haven't lost my The Drop authorization.

...and please get a new plugin out there as soon as possible!
Old 15th August 2016 | Show parent
  #2620
Cytomic
 
andy-cytomic's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
I know of no Cytomic customers that cannot currently run the software they have paid for on up to two of their personal machines. If this is not the case please, please contact me and post here to let everyone know! The current system needs updating sure, but, to my knowledge, every single customer is still totally covered.
Old 15th August 2016 | Show parent
  #2621
Cytomic
 
andy-cytomic's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by diogo_c ➡️
I'll echo Funkybot's post, pretty much agreed with everything on it.

The thing that makes me concerned a bit concerned is that system relies too much on you Andy. It works and I fully trust you and that makes me feel safe, but what if "life" gets in the way at some point? Stuff happens - knocks on wood a zillion times - but yeah man, it does happen. In that regard I'd favor the more permanent solutions - as "permanent" as possible.

Having said that, the system you have in place is absolutely fair and works well. I finally moved my HDD to a SSD with SuperDuper and haven't lost my The Drop authorization.

...and please get a new plugin out there as soon as possible!
Thanks for the positive feedback! This is how the system should be running, and I will add support for the primary network interface ID to make it happen more reliably for Windows customers.

All authorisations are granted by the server, the software knows nothing of authorisation counts, only if the authorisation works. The authorisation servers will continue running indefinitely, it only costs USD 5 / month to keep them running. If even this small amount becomes unfeasible then I have pre-compiled binaries to generate authorisations ready to distribute to customers, so you will be able to indefinitely authorise the software.
Old 15th August 2016 | Show parent
  #2622
Cytomic
 
andy-cytomic's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Funkybot ➡️
Let's say you went the iLok route and offered two authorizations per purchase. That would allow simultaneous use on up to two machines, but no more than that. Slate and Empirical Labs are both offering the two authorization approach, which apparently doesn't add much to the costs on their end.

Some of the downsides of this approach are: 1) changing CP schemes this late in the game would really piss off existing customers, 2) there's still a large number of people out there who hate iLok's (more so on KVR than here), 3) the cost of iLok protection, 4) next time Slate decides to release a free plugin your new buyers may find themselves unable to authorize (and other fun server nonsense).

Some upsides of this approach are: 1) you can limit simultaneous use to two computers and be comfortable that's actually happening, 2) iLok is one of the more effective CP schemes, 3) just about every commercial studio and a big chunk of the hobbyist market has an iLok, 4) users will know their plugins will still work barring any major OS changes if Andy gets hit by a bus or wins the lottery, whereas an online CR based method can disappear and leave users out in the cold.

I don't mind the current approach and think it's reasonable, but C/R systems are my least favorite approach (CP favs are none, serial number, ilok, and CR in that order). I'm a Windows user, but I haven't had to do a full reinstall in a long, long time, but I did recently buy a new PC and a laptop so the number of auths per year is reasonable to me. That said, I've been burned by CR systems in the past from small companies that went under, so I'd prefer a more permanent (iLok, serial, or no DRM) approach so that's never an issue. Just my two cents.

BTW, love the new website, and I look forward to the mentioned updates and especially some new plugins (let's tie a bow on the Drop already, call it done after the next update, and make some new plugs).
I don't trust Pace. Their authorisation system has repeatedly and reliably demonstrated it fails spectacularly and leave people unable to run the software they have paid for. As you point out this has just happened again last week, so this unacceptable. My system is reliable and I'm in control of it, which means I can guarantee service to my customers. Worst case is a customer buys a new computer or motherboard and is in the process of re-authorising EVERYTHING on their system and they have to wait to Australian business hours to get an extra auth. That seems fine to me.

My authorisation server is reliable, no outages unless the entire server is taken out, and then I have backups so I can switch to a new server within the day. It costs around USD 5 per month to run my authorisation server, and it will continue running indefinitely. Failing all that I have pre-built binaries, one for mac and one for win to issue authorisations locally.

So, how many times have you been unable to access the Cytomic authorisation servers in the last 4 years? The web page was down for a little bit when the server crashed, but I had the authorisation part back up and running within 24 hours, and have now moved to a new, more reliable, hosting service. So that makes once in four years I know of. Now how many times have the Pace servers been down in the past 4 years?

PS: thanks with regards the new web page! I've got a bunch of new filter models already coded and want to release them as an update to The Drop, once they are in there I'll tie a bow on it I've also got a new release for The Glue to get done, then it will be on to new products.
Old 15th August 2016 | Show parent
  #2623
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by andy-cytomic ➡️
Thanks for your observations, I'd like to hear what you think of my comments in return and the new system of 2 authorisations per year with an extra upon emailing
Thanks Andy. Assuming I can install any OS (OS X or Windows) on a single machine as many times as I like and this does not trigger re-authorisation, then I think that 2 per year is very reasonable.

There will be the odd case where you have some hardware faults and swap your machine a few times, but as long as you're accomodating to those via email, then that's fine.

Right now as described on my system, a Windows install did count as a separate authorisation to my OS X install on the exact same hardware. It's possible I may have used Wifi vs my Thunderbolt Ethernet adapter when authorising on one of the OSs. In this case, my Thunderbolt Ethernet adapter kinda turns into a dongle on my MacBook Pro ... could this be a problem? I'm going to be getting a Thunderbolt dock this week with its own ethernet adapter and w ill be switching over, would this cause a new challenge code to be generated for example?

Most important thing is that I can re-install my OS on the same machine as much as I want and not trigger a re-auth.

Kindest Regards
Fotis
Old 15th August 2016 | Show parent
  #2624
Lives for gear
 
🎧 15 years
Sounds fine Andy.

Or ... iLok.

(You know it makes sense!)
Old 15th August 2016 | Show parent
  #2625
Lives for gear
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by andy-cytomic ➡️
Where possible I use the motherboard ID, or other system invariant IDs so you can re-format the hard drive and re-authorise without triggering another authorisation. Some systems don't offer "nice" ids like this so I fall back on other methods, which can trigger another auth. In such cases I recommend you email me and talk about it, I will always be lenient and allow more authorisations. I have a debugging tool that also lets me know which ID is being used, so I normally get the customer to run that so I can improve the system.

Thus far every customer can run Cytomic software without fail on up to two of their personal machines. If there are any customers having issues please email me, but so far every person that needed more authorisations I have granted them straight away.
Thanks for describing the process. I also share diogo_c's concern...

Quote:
Originally Posted by diogo_c ➡️
The thing that makes me concerned a bit concerned is that system relies too much on you Andy.
... but I don't consider it a big deal with your company, since you seem trustworthy, and you've made provisions:

Quote:
Originally Posted by andy-cytomic ➡️
... The authorisation servers will continue running indefinitely, it only costs USD 5 / month to keep them running. If even this small amount becomes unfeasible then I have pre-compiled binaries to generate authorisations ready to distribute to customers, so you will be able to indefinitely authorise the software.
On the general topic of relying on companies after the initial product-delivery, I'll mention that Spitfire Audio refuses to provide me with free updates (bug-fixes and added content) they've released to normal customers, because I criticized their product on a forum. So, counting on a developer's honor and integrity after purchase isn't always a good idea. But, I don't have concerns like that about your company, so your copy-protection scheme probably won't deter me from buying the Drop (and I'm happy with Glue).
Old 15th August 2016 | Show parent
  #2626
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnbruner ➡️
Thanks for describing the process. I also share diogo_c's concern...

but I don't consider it a big deal with your company, since you seem trustworthy and you've made provisions:


On the general topic of relying on companies after the initial product-delivery, I'll mention that Spitfire Audio refuses to provide me with free updates (bug-fixes and added content) they've released to normal customers, because I criticized their product on a forum. So, counting on a developer's honor and integrity after purchase isn't always a good idea. But, I don't have concerns like that about your company, so your copy-protection scheme probably won't deter me from buying the Drop (and I'm happy with Glue).
Really? I just bought Albion ONE and the Harp the other week and do really love them, but that's extremely unfair of them. All products have flaws and customers have the right to have an opinion since they paid for the software.

Have you considered bringing this up on the vi control forums? Spitfire appear to hang out there quite often and lots of people on the forum are well versed in Spitfire products since that forum is primarily about orchestration.

Hope that you get that sorted because their products ain't cheap!!!
Fotis
Old 16th August 2016 | Show parent
  #2627
Lives for gear
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by andy-cytomic ➡️
I don't trust Pace.
Just to say, in xx years, I've never had a problem with Pace or iLok. On the other hand, I have had issues with non-iLok plugins. (not yours of course!).

Also just to also say, I work on other systems from time to time, and when that happens, I lose access to The Glue (unless they have it).

Not complaining, just relating my experiences.
Old 16th August 2016 | Show parent
  #2628
Cytomic
 
andy-cytomic's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by bing81 ➡️
Just to say, in xx years, I've never had a problem with Pace or iLok. On the other hand, I have had issues with non-iLok plugins. (not yours of course!).

Also just to also say, I work on other systems from time to time, and when that happens, I lose access to The Glue (unless they have it).

Not complaining, just relating my experiences.
Definitely not taken as a complaint, thanks for the feedback! How about a temporary "roaming" authorisation? I could easily code add a one week temporary authorisation, so you could install The Glue on a machine that isn't one you normally use to get on with work. This would have two benefits: you can get on with work using the tools you love, and new people get to fall in love with it as well. What do you think? What is the most practical period of time? One week? Two weeks? I think probably one week, but then once that has ran out you can add another week easily - but you'll have to re-authorise each time. Looking forward more of your feedback!
Old 16th August 2016 | Show parent
  #2629
Cytomic
 
andy-cytomic's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by fgimian ➡️
Thanks Andy. Assuming I can install any OS (OS X or Windows) on a single machine as many times as I like and this does not trigger re-authorisation, then I think that 2 per year is very reasonable.

There will be the odd case where you have some hardware faults and swap your machine a few times, but as long as you're accomodating to those via email, then that's fine.

Right now as described on my system, a Windows install did count as a separate authorisation to my OS X install on the exact same hardware. It's possible I may have used Wifi vs my Thunderbolt Ethernet adapter when authorising on one of the OSs. In this case, my Thunderbolt Ethernet adapter kinda turns into a dongle on my MacBook Pro ... could this be a problem? I'm going to be getting a Thunderbolt dock this week with its own ethernet adapter and w ill be switching over, would this cause a new challenge code to be generated for example?

Most important thing is that I can re-install my OS on the same machine as much as I want and not trigger a re-auth.

Kindest Regards
Fotis
Hi Fotis! Thanks for the feedback, and it's good to hear that going ahead with 2 auths per year plus another on request you feel is reasonable. This gives me confidence to go ahead with the scheme.

Currently only motherboard ID is used, plus fallbacks, no network interface ID is being used. When I do implement network interface ID, it will always be the "primary" network interface on the motherboard. This interface doesn't have to be doing anything, it can be disabled completely. In your case if your motherboard only has WIFI and no ethernet then I will pick the WIFI ID even if you're not using it, not any thunderbolt / usb / anything else interfaces that are connected and active
Old 16th August 2016 | Show parent
  #2630
Cytomic
 
andy-cytomic's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnbruner ➡️
Thanks for describing the process. I also share diogo_c's concern...



... but I don't consider it a big deal with your company, since you seem trustworthy, and you've made provisions:


On the general topic of relying on companies after the initial product-delivery, I'll mention that Spitfire Audio refuses to provide me with free updates (bug-fixes and added content) they've released to normal customers, because I criticized their product on a forum. So, counting on a developer's honor and integrity after purchase isn't always a good idea. But, I don't have concerns like that about your company, so your copy-protection scheme probably won't deter me from buying the Drop (and I'm happy with Glue).
It sounds completely unethical to me if you have paid for software and you are being refused the rights of regular customers. How does your posts on their forum possibly impact your consumer rights and license agreement? I don't even consider Spitfire audio to be software developers, they sell content for Native Instruments products! I can only recommend that you demand a refund if they are not honouring their license agreement, even if they are only content providers.
Old 16th August 2016 | Show parent
  #2631
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by andy-cytomic ➡️
Hi Fotis! Thanks for the feedback, and it's good to hear that going ahead with 2 auths per year plus another on request you feel is reasonable. This gives me confidence to go ahead with the scheme.

Currently only motherboard ID is used, plus fallbacks, no network interface ID is being used. When I do implement network interface ID, it will always be the "primary" network interface on the motherboard. This interface doesn't have to be doing anything, it can be disabled completely. In your case if your motherboard only has WIFI and no ethernet then I will pick the WIFI ID even if you're not using it, not any thunderbolt / usb / anything else interfaces that are connected and active
Sounds great Andy. Honestly just want to say how grateful I am for taking on our feedback. I hope I haven't been too painful here, but I do worry about these sorts of things when I purchase software, particularly when I've come to rely on it so much. It's so nice to see a dev who truly cares about their customers and listens like you do.

Cheers
Fotis
Old 16th August 2016 | Show parent
  #2632
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by andy-cytomic ➡️
It sounds completely unethical to me if you have paid for software and you are being refused the rights of regular customers. How does your posts on their forum possibly impact your consumer rights and license agreement? I don't even consider Spitfire audio to be software developers, they sell content for Native Instruments products! I can only recommend that you demand a refund if they are not honouring their license agreement, even if they are only content providers.
+1 (and this is coming from someone who JUST bought heaps of Spitfire Audio products ... because they honestly sound amazing)

I can't imagine why a company like Spitfire Audio who have built a pretty solid reputation for themselves would be so cruel to a paying customer. I certainly hope they never do that to me after I just sunk > $1,000 AU into some of their products.
Old 16th August 2016 | Show parent
  #2633
Deleted fa7843c
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by andy-cytomic ➡️
It sounds completely unethical to me if you have paid for software and you are being refused the rights of regular customers. How does your posts on their forum possibly impact your consumer rights and license agreement? I don't even consider Spitfire audio to be software developers, they sell content for Native Instruments products! I can only recommend that you demand a refund if they are not honouring their license agreement, even if they are only content providers.
You would better know much more than many, being an Aussie and running a worldwide business, regarding the legal requirements within different jurisdictions-- notwithstanding the ethical-- to not withhold refunds on such a perfunctory basis (at best,) particularly if the practice approaches malfeasance (at worst) on Spitfire's part.

There are plenty of other good devs/content providers out there-- Project Sam, Orchestral Tools, LASS just to name three-- that this is insane.

I really have to raise an eyebrow, however; would Spitfire really do this? If so, wow; they should be banned.
Old 17th August 2016 | Show parent
  #2634
Cytomic
 
andy-cytomic's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by MusiKLover ➡️
You would better know much more than many, being an Aussie and running a worldwide business, regarding the legal requirements within different jurisdictions-- notwithstanding the ethical-- to not withhold refunds on such a perfunctory basis (at best,) particularly if the practice approaches malfeasance (at worst) on Spitfire's part.

There are plenty of other good devs/content providers out there-- Project Sam, Orchestral Tools, LASS just to name three-- that this is insane.

I really have to raise an eyebrow, however; would Spitfire really do this? If so, wow; they should be banned.
Ok, you're right, we've only heard one side and it sounds bad, but it is only fair to let the other party chip in as well.

johnbruner can you please start a new thread here on GS to openly discuss the issue with Spitfire? This will hopefully work out best for everyone and a good solution found!
Old 17th August 2016 | Show parent
  #2635
Cytomic
 
andy-cytomic's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by andy-cytomic ➡️
Definitely not taken as a complaint, thanks for the feedback! How about a temporary "roaming" authorisation? I could easily code add a one week temporary authorisation, so you could install The Glue on a machine that isn't one you normally use to get on with work. This would have two benefits: you can get on with work using the tools you love, and new people get to fall in love with it as well. What do you think? What is the most practical period of time? One week? Two weeks? I think probably one week, but then once that has ran out you can add another week easily - but you'll have to re-authorise each time. Looking forward more of your feedback!
The more I consider a temporary one week license on top of the two per year the more I like it. This way if your computer dies you can get back up and running straight away while you email for a new permanent license. I have always liked that with a dongle you can install and use your software on any machine you want, and this I think would be a useful way for an authorisation file based system to do this.
Old 17th August 2016 | Show parent
  #2636
Lives for gear
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by andy-cytomic ➡️
Ok, you're right, we've only heard one side and it sounds bad, but it is only fair to let the other party chip in as well.

johnbruner can you please start a new thread here on GS to openly discuss the issue with Spitfire? This will hopefully work out best for everyone and a good solution found!
If I need to defend what I've said, I can post evidence (records). I'm not going to start a thread on Gearslutz, though, since that would predictably result in Spitfire-fans pitching a fit and mods concocting some reason or another to blame me. I already posted about it on VI-Control and Reddit, but mods swiftly censored the information. Spitfire-criticism has also been censored from KVR.
Old 23rd August 2016 | Show parent
  #2637
Cytomic
 
andy-cytomic's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnbruner ➡️
If I need to defend what I've said, I can post evidence (records). I'm not going to start a thread on Gearslutz, though, since that would predictably result in Spitfire-fans pitching a fit and mods concocting some reason or another to blame me. I already posted about it on VI-Control and Reddit, but mods swiftly censored the information. Spitfire-criticism has also been censored from KVR.
I hope you can find a resolution to your issues with the company you're having trouble with. There is no need to defend what you've said, but I would like to steer conversation back onto Cytomic products is all
Old 23rd August 2016 | Show parent
  #2638
Gear Addict
 
Hardsinc_'s Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnbruner ➡️
If I need to defend what I've said, I can post evidence (records). I'm not going to start a thread on Gearslutz, though, since that would predictably result in Spitfire-fans pitching a fit and mods concocting some reason or another to blame me. I already posted about it on VI-Control and Reddit, but mods swiftly censored the information. Spitfire-criticism has also been censored from KVR.
Wow, I use some of their products, it's great stuff, that's a bit messed up though. If it were me, I'd check what legal options were available and the likely outcome, i'm not implying court but there are other options that are no cost to to you more than likely, watchdogs and the like, Fair trading laws etc.

You'll be surprised how quickly things can change when you apply the right type of pressure in the right place. i've gone from people ignoring calls to getting payment owed in two phone calls.

It's always nice to read their "heartfelt apology" too.
Old 23rd September 2016
  #2639
Here for the gear
 
🎧 5 years
Hi there,

I've been demoing The Glue for a few days and have to say that I absolutely love it!! Where has it been all my music making life and why am I always so late to every party?!

Just a quick question for Andy though - I'm sure you're mega busy so I'm sorry to ask, but as I'm a Cubase 8.5 user, I wondered if you are still working on a VST3 version? I saw it mentioned a few posts back.

Thanks so much!

Last edited by Navi The Fairy; 23rd September 2016 at 05:56 PM.. Reason: Fumble fingers
Old 1st October 2016 | Show parent
  #2640
Lives for gear
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Navi The Fairy ➡️
Hi there,
...but as I'm a Cubase 8.5 user, I wondered if you are still working on a VST3 version? ...

Thanks so much!
Re: sidechaining - in The Glue, is the internal sidechain still active in Cubase (which requires VST3 for external sidechaining)?

(Sorry for that nooby question).

Is there an ETA for VST3?

Thanks -

Last edited by alexis; 1st October 2016 at 04:01 PM..
📝 Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 4616 views: 615431
Avatar for smoke
smoke 7th May 2021
replies: 98 views: 39199
Avatar for dfghdhr
dfghdhr 5th June 2021
replies: 295 views: 74346
Avatar for anguswoodhead
anguswoodhead 26th March 2013
replies: 1296 views: 181832
Avatar for heraldo_jones
heraldo_jones 1st February 2016
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearspace Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…

Forum Jump
Forum Jump