Yes, I have quite a few, but does it really have to take so long?? The installers are't that big, and each one goes pretty quickly, but I've had to sit here and babysit the thing the whole time.

Has there ever been an attempt by either Avid or the plugin manufacturers to streamline this process?

Imagine this alternative:

1. I install Pro Tools.
2. Pro Tools looks at my iLok to see which plugins I've purchased and then downloads and installs the most current (and compatible) version of each plugin for me from all the various manufacturers, all in one unattended maneuver.

I see no real technical reason why something like this wouldn't be possible (of course building in a failsafe for manually installing when needed for version conflicts, bugs, beta testing, etc.). And, it'd give PT one hell of a selling point (and thus the financial incentive to develop it).

Indeed. Makes me reluctant to buy any more plugs. Too many different websites with logins and passwords...

Best...H

The last time I had to re-install everything from scratch (when I installed W7-64 fresh) it took me a week to get everything up and running 100%. The registrations are a killer and while it would be nice to have a central registry that all manufacturers would use, the methods of software license management and maintenance make it difficult. Plus not every manufacturer wants to be tied to the expenses of using the iLok (which costs them licensing money and can be a big inconvenience to their customers), especially when it's been shown to be ineffective in the past.

The best thing to do is just be organized. I keep a spreadsheet of all my software and licenses, and I keep a backed up organized folder with all my installers. With a good backup strategy, hopefully you only need to do this once every several years when you install fresh into a new version of an OS. Without one, well... after a few times you get one.

What exactly does it cost them in licensing $? (I'm serious- do you have any real numbers for this?)

The iLok 2 is supposed to solve this "ineffectiveness" (if your'e referring to the piracy problem). And, if anything, the iLok makes authorizations more convenient for me. I personally love not having to screw with challenge-response, serial numbers, etc.

This is a great idea- I should sit down and do that.

This last run lasted about a year and a half (before requiring a wipe and reinstall). Might have made it longer, but was running into constant kernel panics that neither Apple nor Avid had any further suggestions for (other than wipe and start over).

This time, I'm taking it a step further and imaging my drive with snapshot of a fresh install of the OS, PT, and all plugs that I can get back to easily and quickly. I can't afford to have what's just happened occur again. I've been down for two whole days, with clients waiting on mixes, and no way to solve it other than baby-stepping my ass through this tedious wipe-and-install process.

Just the same, even iLok aside, I see no good reason why this process can't be streamlined.

Yes, felt the same pain recently. I've taken to building a freaking spreadsheet to keep track of all of this stuff. Rows and columns for who is licensed with iLok, who is not, what was that serial number ? , do I need the disks, oops what was that auth code - oh shoot these guys do it differently and on and on.

For those of us that came from tape and through ADAT it's living proof there is no free lunch. All of that power and flexibility come with a price tag. One step forward two steps back. It's crazy.
cdlt

Yep +1 - installing and licensing plug-ins can be so tedious. Especially annoying when you have multiple plug-ins from a single company but are forced to install and validate each individually.

or the backup is already on your Ilok (or dongle of choice) ready to be re-installed (or simply automatically moved into place upon choosing to restore system) - a copy of all your settings folder settings everything would be saved there - these dongles are getting larger in capacity every day - talk about getting back up and running fast - and it would be updated either manually or automatically (your choice)

just .02

The last time I had to reinstall everything was about 5 years ago. That was when I upgraded from Vista to XP SP3. It was totally worth it.

But I do have a very elaborate system now to prevent having to reinstall everything:

After EACH significant change to my DAW, including installs, I do a partition back up of the C: drive. That way, if the recent install had a virus or crashes the computer or whatnot, I can roll back the changes to the previous backup.

It's time consuming (it takes 20 minutes to 40 minutes for the backup/restore procedures), but the time saved is astronomical. It would take me weeks to reinstall everything on my computer.

The other significant pattern I have adopted is to focus on portable freeware when I can. These wares don't require installation; you just copy them to your hard drive and are done. I even keep most of my portable wares in a single folder so I can copy one hundred some programs to my computer without having to install a damned thing.

Last but not least, I save printed and compressed versions of my registration codes and avoid software that requires a live internet connection (my DAW is offline anyhow). I also keep backup copies on DVD of the installers so I don't have to download them again.

Anybody running a DAW without a partition backup system is a masochist or very ignorant about this type of thing.

Just went through this a month ago. Took a lot longer than a week. It was complicated with the pains of moving to 64 bit Win7.

The most annoying? A music app that will remain nameless to protect the guilty. This is a fairly expensive app. Did a reinstall, and when I went to activate it, I got an error, with an instruction to call the company.

So I did. And was told that the activation server for that version was no longer available, and I would have to buy an expensive upgrade if I wanted to still use it! The existing program runs fine in demo mode under Win 7, so I have no reason to upgrade it (the new features aren't worth upgrading for to me). And it was purchased only 3 years ago.

I talked to the owner of the company, who apologized, but feels that he's justified in doing what he's doing. He's a small company, there was problems with the server, etc., etc. I'm NOT happy.

I'm a big believer in paying for my software. But here's a case of "no good deed goes unpunished".

js

who is the company ? i believe you should broadcast that information as much as you can.. Its about the only thing users can do to ensure companies stay accountable for crap products or unethical business practises.

As you say they will scream blue murder at piracy which is fair enough, but doing the right thing works both ways.. I find it hard to see how your situation isnt just as bad on the part of the company selling the product.

Ive noticed many of them seem willing to exploit the ambiguities of software as being a real product.. Did they advertise it may have a used by date of only 3 years ? As a user you dont control how they authorise their products so why does their server problems mean you just throw your money down the toilet ? Hard to see how thats fair especially if it wasnt a cheap item.

I'm hesitant to buy any new plugins because of this. I've got the basics covered and my main daw (Ableton Live) is very flexible and modular and most things can be created with it's plugins and resources (Suite Version + Max4Live).

One of the things I do own is Native Instruments Komplete. They have a service center that installs on your machine and authorizes/updates all products at once. Very convenient and I've only had one problem with it during the last 3 years (Kontakt library update got installed in the wrong location).

iLok is definitely an expense for the developer that uses it. I've read this many times and from developers themselves. For exact costs you have to contact iLok, prove you're a developer and ask for this information.

If iLok 2 works, all the better. I have two myself because I want to run the software they protect, not because I like the iLok. I'd much rather just deal with serial numbers, but I do understand why iLok exists. I don't think a lengthy iLok discussion belongs in this thread.

Things that bug me about re-installing music software:

1. Software that don't allow you to cut and paste the complete serial number, or only allows copy/pasting of smaller groups of letters. Why?

2. Software that you can't get authorized because they use challenge-response and the company has gone out of business. BTW, if your iLok holds licenses for companies that no longer exist and your iLok dies, can you get those licenses back?

3. Companies that change their website so all your old links to software downloads are no longer valid.

4. Companies that change the authorization system on you, requiring you to get a new installer and possibly a new authorization code or serial.

5. Companies that require you to log in before you can download your installers. Especially troublesome if you don't visit them often and you've forgotten your user name, password, or both...

6. Companies that don't label software version numbers in their installer names. Now this one I really don't get and it's very annoying!

7. Installers that don't tell you EXACTLY what folder they're going to install to and don't tell you if they'll be installing on that folders root or within another folder. Some installers will let you point to your plugin folder, and then either install the plugin in several nested folders within the folder you chose or in the root of that folder, which can get messy if many files and subfolders are involved. Look, it's really simple: let me install the plugin within the path I chose, show me the complete path the plugin will be installed in, and tell me if you'll be installing a bunch of files, a folder, or just a dll... it would be nice to know in advance .

8. Installers that insist on installing a whole suite of plugins when you've only purchased a license for one of them, requiring that you spend time uninstalling the ones you don't want. Devs, please keep promo out of your installers!

9. There should be a standard way that documents for software is installed. Sometimes they're included in the installer home directory in Program Files; sometimes they're installed in the VSTplugin folder along with the dll; and sometimes they're nowhere to be found and must be downloaded as separate files from the dev's site, and then you're not sure where to put them.

10. Companies that require you to have an active paid subscription to their support system for ANY installation issues you may be having with some of the older versions of their software; otherwise you're dog poop.

All this stuff makes an already lengthy process even longer and more agonizing. I sure hope some devs read this. It's also why I started to document all my software information in a central location, and keep the latest installers in an organized folder structure.

I have to admit that the re-installation of iLok protected software is easier because it bypasses most of the re-authorization issues. However, it also is a one-software/one-machine model of software licensing that I profoundly disagree with; I believe in the one-user model. Serials and challenge/response are more of a hassle on installation, but the freedom of use gained by them is immeasurable.

Feel free to post actual numbers or links to real information you've seen on this. Until then, the jury will remain out on just how significant an expense it is. I personally have no idea, as it could be anything from a nominal one time fee, to crippling ongoing royalties. You'll have to be more specific though if you feel the expense is relevent.

Seeing as how it's my thread (I'm the OP), and it's a big part of the topic I've raised, you don't really get a vote. It's a huge part of this topic, and of any discussion on plugin licensing.

Me too. Very annoying. Not an issue with iLok, thankfully.

This is a total non-issue. Here's why: If a plugin company has gone out of business, then regardless of whether or not you can still get your licenses back at the moment, you have to eventually face the reality that one day those plugs will no longer work. The OS and DAW will move on with newer versions of their software, and you will eventually upgrade your hardware. You will do all of this to stay competitive, and because eventually they all will become outdated and stop working, unless you update them.

Using plugins means maintaining an ongoing relationship with those companies. If they go out of business, it's just like finding out that the studio you mixed a project in no longer has a certain piece of gear. Who cares if you can't do an exact recall of that mix in 5 years? If the sound of that plugin was that unique/critical to the mix, you should have printed it. Otherwise, it's just a tool like many others, and you'll find a adequate substitute if need be.


Any legit plugin company should be maintaining a website that is easy enough to navigate so that it's as simple as logging in and downloading the most recent version for your system. I never trust old links, as even if they work, there's often a newer version that I ought to be using instead.

All the more reason for an industry-wide standard to develop (like iLok) where you can handle all of your authorizations in one place.

I agree with you there. I think the only reason for this though is to take yet another step towards fighting piracy. I guess it makes it that much harder for would-be crackers to access an installer. Hopefully with a better iLok (2), they won't feel the need to restrict access.

Agreed... But, if you just go download the current installer specified for your system, it's a nonissue.

Hmm.. I haven't run into that much. Most of the installers simply put the plug or a folder of stuff in the plugins folder. There are exceptions (like Waves) that put a Waves folder in you applications folder, but I haven't found it that bothersome. Full disclosure, I'm running PTHD9.0.5 on a Mac- maybe it's different in Windows world?

Yeah, that's obnoxious. Who's doing that?

I guess that answers my question above about what platform you're on. Seems like things are a bit messier with VST and Windows.

I think this hits on a much bigger issue surrounding the nature of plugins, licensing, and payments. We don't "own" these plugs, and they don't come with a warranty that says they'll work flawlessly on all future systems. I can understand that keeping them up to date does cost the companies time and money, and that it's reasonable to charge a modest update fee from time to time. However, it's also very much in the hands of the plugin developer, and DAW/OS developers how MUCH has to be changed to make the next incarnation work, and I don't support paid updates just for the hell of it, or because they added some silly new "feature" to justify the charge. Getting off topic, but Quickbooks is one of the worst offenders I've ever seen when it comes to planned obsolescence, and forced paid updates with overblown new "features" that really are just facelifts. But I digress...


Yes!
Huh? You've described exactly the opposite of the iLok model. The iLok model is a "one-user" model. If I need my plugs to work at another studio, I just take along my iLok, run the installers when I get there (if they're not already installed), plug in my iLok, and go! Challenge/Response would be so much more time consuming in that situation. In fact, the One User/ Many Machines aspect of iLok is one of the best parts about it.

The overwhelming majority of my plugs already use iLok; I just hope they can get the remaining bugs out with iLok2. FWIW, I'm now running an iLok 2 (as of about a month ago), and I didn't have a single problem with authorizations on any of the well over 200 plugs that are using it. I just wish the whole reinstallation process didn't take so damn long. :

I don't think we're talking about the same thing. By "one-user/many-machines" I mean having the ability to install and use a plugin on multiple machines at the same time, using the same serial number, for one user.

I run 3 computers in my studio including a laptop. One of the reason I had to get a second iLok was because of EWQLSO which I wanted to run off two different computers because of the streaming issues. With my serial or challenge/response licenses, I can legitimately install plugins and softsynths to all three (ergo "one-user/multiple machines").

Now I realize that serial and challenge/response can be abused, but it also assumes that we're not all thieves and supports an honor system that I find more respectful and human. Many companies that use them have safeguards that count the number of times registrations happen and red-flag them when they happen too often.

It's like privatizing correctional facilities: once it become profitable for someone to put people in jail, then excuses must be found to put and keep people in jail to sustain the system. I don't like the assumptions that the iLok mentality makes about the human spirit, nor the way these assumptions foster paranoia and distrust. That's how it's become a self-sustaining intermediate.

And just as you so insistently require proof that iLok costs developers money, I'd really like to see the evidence that iLok has in fact bolstered sales of music software. The end result for me is that I limit my usage of iLok protected software to only those instruments and plugins that I absolutely need, and I regrettably dismiss the rest. I don't see how this benefits the developers, but that's my MO.

However, assuming we're stuck living in an iLok world, maybe the iLok corp should make a key that is readable on a network and allow developers the option to let software run on multiple machines. That might palliate my major objection. But of course then they'd be selling less iLoks...

In the end it comes down to usage patterns and needs. But I'm sure the iLok corp is on your side. heh

Well then no, we're not talking about the same thing. I don't know any software company that will let you use one license to run on multiple machines at the same time. You'll have to buy multiple licenses to run on multiple machines simultaneously.

I'm not sure what type of streaming issues you were having, but I'm aware that it's common to dedicate a computer to streaming samples with guys that are running intensive sampling setups. AFAIK that still only involves one machine at a time though. Is your setup different?

Is that because the honor system has worked so well in other industries? It sure didn't work out very well for music sales. And would you drive a car with no key, and only a start button, and leave it unlocked wherever you went?


That's a poor analogy, although I tend to agree with you about how screwed up our prison system is. There is no profit motivation for the developers, it's a theft prevention system.

I'm not sure why you're so hung up on whatever implications you feel are made about the "human spirit" by using anti-theft or security systems, but these are facts of life (unfortunately). It's a big bad world out there, and while there are plenty of good natured people out there that we try to surround ourselves with, there are also those that would do us wrong, and take without paying. You wouldn't just waltz into an amusement park and leave hundred dollar bills on the ground, relying on the "human spirit", would you? Because while there are some honest folks that would take the money to lost & found, there are plenty (and I'm afraid way more) that would pocket it and move on.

I have made no such claim. Although, by it's very nature, iLok (if working properly) does prevent piracy, as you simply can't use the software if you haven't paid.

Is your motivation for limited your use of iLok plugins that you wish to run them on multiple computers simultaneously, or something else?

You'd have to change the way software licensing in general has worked for years.

Well, maybe not, because if another company came along and did what iLok does better or cheaper etc., I'd jump ship in a heartbeat. My sole motivation is to simplify the plugin installation and authorization process.

6 hours? That nothing. For me it takes two weeks minimum.

Companies that allow installation of software on multiple computers owned and operated by a single user include:

112dB
2C Audio (Aether & Breeze)
Audio Damage
Cakewalk
Camel Audio
DMGAudio
Fabfilter
Garritan
IK Multimedia
Liquidsonics
Native Instruments
Plogue
Schwa
Sonalksis
Stillwell
Truepianos
U-he

Among others. And most of these allow installation on both Macs and PCs for a single user.

Here's some quick notes on your other points:

- Streaming multiple sample-intensive libraries can be a real problem especially if combined with streaming a lot of audio tracks, although more recent tech has made this a lot easier. Orchestral libraries are very intensive in this dep't and it's been common for years for composers to have multiple machines, often each requiring an iLok.

- Money you can spend. I personally think that people accumulate software illegally like they accumulate playing cards; it's not for the use but for the show, because they can. So most of these "pirates" don't even use the stuff on a regular basis. My answer to them is "Get a life!" I don't think barbed wire is the answer; I believe education is.

- I like to just grab my laptop and know that I don't need anything else for everything to work on it. I like Logic and Reaper for that. Yes, I like the freedom of not being bound to a piece of silicon and plastic that could break, be stolen, or lost, and for which more of my money would be required to resolve any of those conditions. After all it exists to solve someone else's problem, but for some reason I end up having to shoulder both the trouble and the expense. I never spoke of the trouble: in 4 times I had to re-install Waves, I ended up having to call Waves support 3 of those times to resolve iLok registration problems...

By that, do you mean that they allow simultaneous use?

I'm not sure what that list is supposed to show me, as only two of them are manufacturers who's plugs I use (NI and IK Multimedia). And, IK by FAR is was the biggest PITA to get authorized and running again.

But for the sake of driving the point home about how many plugs do use iLok, here's the list of plugin developers using iLok:

* AbbeyRoad
* Almateq SRL
* Antares Audio Technologies
* Audio Ease
* Audio Research
* Brainworx Music & Media GmbH
* Celemony
* Cognitone
* Crane Song Ltd
* Creative Network Design
* Cube-Tec International GmbH
* Cycling '74
* Digidesign
* Dolby
* Drawmer
* DTS, Inc.
* DUY Research
* East West Sounds, Inc.
* Eiosis
* Elysia GmbH
* Euphonix Inc.
* Eventide, Inc.
* Flux
* Focusrite Audio Engineering
* GRM Tools
* Intelligent Devices
* iZotope
* KIWA International Ltd
* Lawo AG
* Lexicon
* Line 6, Inc.
* M-Audio
* Mark Of The Unicorn, Inc.
* McDSP
* MDW Massenberg
* Minnetonka
* Mu Technologies
* Neyrinck
* Nomad Factory
* Notion
* Oxford Digital Limited
* Parsek srl Markbass
* PGMT Ltd.
* Plugorama - Muse Research
* Princeton Digital LLC
* PSP Audioware
* Quiet Art Ltd.
* Remote Control Productions
* RNDigital
* Serato Audio Research Ltd.
* Slanecon Digital
* Softube AB
* solidThinking Inc.
* Sonalksis
* Sonic Studio
* Sonik Architects
* Sonnox Ltd.
* Soundfield
* Soundminer
* SoundToys
* Source Elements
* SPL Germany
* SRS Labs, Inc.
* Synaptricity
* Synchro Arts
* Synful
* Synthogy
* Tac System, Inc.
* Tanager AudioWorks, Inc.
* TC Electronic
* TC-Helicon Vocal Technologies, Inc.
* The Sound Guy, Inc.
* Ultimate Sound Bank
* Unique Recording Software
* Unity Technologies ApS
* Universal Audio, Inc.
* Verance
* Virtual Katy
* Waves, Inc.
* Wholegrain Digital Systems
* Write Brothers, Inc.
* zplane.development



So if I understand you correctly, you are saying that running one copy of an orchestral library (one license) with many sample streams running may overtax a single computer, and that the developer is requiring you to purchase a second license just so that you can successfully run all your streams (on multiple computers)? If that's the case, then I agree that requiring you to purchase a second license is unreasonable. In that case, your multiple machines are still functioning as one "system", and should only require one license. Perhaps there is a way (as you mentioned) for your other machines to see the iLok and license on your primary machine, etc. How are other iLok based orchestral library developers handling this?

Theft prevention measures are hardly "barbed wire". And I don't see how any amount of "education" is going to keep someone from pirating software. It seems your ambitions are more aligned with changing the world (which is benevolent and admirable), but mine are simply to have plugins that are easy to install, authorize, and manage.

I'm not sure why you had so much trouble with the Waves/iLok registration. As I mentioned, iLok authorization during this last install was the least of my worries. Can you provide specifics as to exactly what went wrong?

As to your complaint about relying on a breakable piece of hardware, I do understand that it's one more thing to think about and worry about, but here's how I look at it: The value of the plugin licenses on my iLok well exceeds that of most diamond engagement rings, or any other small valuable piece of jewelry. I treat it with the care and respect that I would anything else that is small, fragile, and worth thousands. For another analogy, think of many of the expensive vintage tube or ribbon microphones that we're so fond of. Would you stuff a C12 into your laptop bag with no case or protection? Of course not. If you treat your iLok the same way, you won't have any problems with breakage.

The hardware component requirement is a small price to pay for easy, portable, pirate-proof license management. And less piracy means developers can protect their investment/development expense and keep prices competitive while developing better and better plugins.

I just spent 10hrs doing 2 installations (one PT8 and one PT9) on one of our TDM rigs.

Thank f**k most of the plugins were iLoked (only massey weren't). If I'd had to do challenge/response for all that, I'd probably still be at it.

just 6 hours? took me about a week (that's including some sample libraries)

Yeah 3-5 days (while doing other things) any time I swap out a new computer in my studio! lol In fact just finished one today I started on Sunday. Wish I could push one button for all the installs.

OK: one last time into the breach!

It was YOU who previously said:

Which is why I bothered to enumerate a few that did. Thanks for the iLok software enumeration; clearly you can p*ss farther than me! BTW, some of those companies offer either challenge/response OR iLok (iZotope and Celemony stand out).

That's the case and you must to buy an iLok and a separate license for every computer you want to run the software on.

It was always during Waves upgrades. Either all or some plugins simply didn't show up. In all cases it turned out the be problems with the iLok installer and I had to wait a few days for updates. One time the iLok install process just stalled indefinitely because of a network problem at iLok and I ended up having to completely remove all of the Waves/iLok software, scrub the registry and re-install them.

Music software is already a very complex process if you're using lots of virtual instruments, processing and sound libraries. Introducing an additional layer of complexity in all this in the form of the iLok and its software is adding to this complexity and in principle the more complex a system is the more things can go wrong. This is another reason I'm not an iLok fan. Everytime I start Nuendo, I have to wait an extra minute and a half while it enumerates every single Waves plugin (and only the Waves plugins, unless something's be added or removed). When I instantiate any iLok protected plugin, it takes 5 to 10 seconds for that plugin to show up. It's so annoying that I've noticed that unconsciously, I've actually grown to prefer using my non-iLok'ed plugins.

What exactly does the iLok itself contribute to the sound of your music? Do you record drums with it?

Yep. That's the company line. I'd still really like to know the facts on how effective it is and whether it's actually helping the situation, and by how much.
OK, I'm done!

hey. i started working on an app called auto-install which attempts to automate this on windows. it should also work for things like focusrite audio-drivers. the code is open for anyone to read, so you can verify that it is safe - feedback is appreciated! you basically just toss all your installers in a folder and it should do it for you (start small, as this is a work in progress).