SurferEQ 2

[ObsoleteAcc99]

more dongle shlongle talk.

For those who had version 1, you have a stable, working plugin, that can run on your serial for eternity. There were never promises made that "in buying version 1, we at soundradix, guarantee that a paid version 2 upgrade will run on a copy protection you like".

All the whiners have literally just damaged soundradix, as they went to the weak ilok computer HDD based system, which will be broken in a matter of days.

I'm going to email them and ask them to change their stance on this and have it dongle only.

Hopefully i can get a few others involved and they can see that it's worth losing the sales to those who refuse the dongle.

[Aleksey Vaneev]

Is there any actual real data on how much of a problem, if any, it is. I am not talking about anecdotal evidence or opinions but real data and a good study on the effects (or not) of "piracy". would a person who uses cracked software buy it if the crack wasnt available and to what degree.

Piracy has nearly zero correlation to income, at least on audio DSP plugins market. The level of piracy can tell something about a country (hello Finland with the lowest piracy level in the world, hello Russia and Israel with the highest level, USA is in-between), but one thing it does not tell is how much money you are losing due to it.

[Numanoid]

Login into the Focusrite account provides pleasures every time

Now the message is:

"Throughout October we have teamed up with Sound Radix to offer you a free SurferEQ 2 Boogie plug-in."

[dayjob]

Guys, 2.0.1 is out and it has disk-based authorization now.

that's nice. i might've bought it for the discounted intro price had they supported disc authorization at the start.

the freebie via focusrite plug in collective is nice. lite version of surferEQ2 but quite limited compared to the full version.

i'll have to wait for the next sale from sound raddix. surfer EQ2 has so many uses.

[robotmonkey]

If you want to moan about ilok, moan about the crackers, and the people that would rather download dodgy versions than buy a licence, and blame those people rather than the clever chaps that make the plugs.

Yet there's plenty of developers who do not use the Pace cr@p and are doing just fine. With the exception of some c/r ilok is the single standout in a bad way with long history of regular f$ckups. And lately they have not been even that good at protecting what they are supposed to protect. So all the moaning is fully justified and developers using this scheme deserve all the flack they get.

And funnily enough the couple plugs I have on my account are free, or in couple cases super cheap - 10 to 15$ range as I would never pay any serious money for software that leaves me at the mercy of some external third parties like Pace. The value I see in such software is just so much lower compared to software that does not punish me for being a paying customer.

And to demand that paying customers should shell out some extra money for an overpriced usb stick to protect someone elses rights is beyond unbelievable.

[IIRs]

Yawn.

If you don't like ilok don't buy the plug. There you go, problem solved.

[Zookes]

Sharing a concern for using iLok licensing should maybe not be dismissed so lightly like this. Such feedback as this is good for developers.

I say money for me is not so much a problem for buying new software, but I do not like iLok and will never give more to it. I am moving to abandon or sell my licenses living there and I have already eLicenser besides.
I say to them I desire this plug-in, but iLok prevents my purchase. What will happen? I can be hopeful.

This developer likes my business? They will offer more options. They do not like my business? They will not. Very simple.

[IIRs]

There's another type of feedback that the devs probably find more useful: sales figures. If they get more sales with ilok than without, that's probably going to override any forum moaning.

[Zookes]

How to test this theory?
Launch same similar product from two companies of different names in equal but isolated markets, one with iLok and one with eLicenser??
Such conditions cannot exist.

I say iLok assures no boost of sales, it assures only those without iLok do not buy it.
This is true. Yours is untrue and cannot be tested.

[IIRs]

iLok ... assures only those without iLok do not steal it.

Fixed that for you.

[MogwaiBoy]

I applaud Sound Radix for opening this up to non-dongle owners. I know for me personally it is now firmly on the radar because of this change.

Good move - wish them every success with this product.

[mladi]

I applaud Sound Radix for opening this up to non-dongle owners. I know for me personally it is now firmly on the radar because of this change.

Good move - wish them every success with this product.

Wasn't it the other way around? Since the 2nd version it's iLok protected.

[dayjob]

I applaud Sound Radix for opening this up to non-dongle owners. I know for me personally it is now firmly on the radar because of this change.

Good move - wish them every success with this product.

Wasn't it the other way around? Since the 2nd version it's iLok protected.

it was dongle only upon release but they added ability to have HD auth w/the ilok licenser after a short period.

[Numanoid]

Yawn.

If you don't like ilok don't buy the plug. There you go, problem solved.

+1

[koolkeys]

It never fails that when a developer uses iLok, somebody will whine about it. Yet, you have no idea what the dev's numbers are and how much they were losing to piracy (they may not be losing anything, but you don't know that, and can't claim to know).

Adding Pace protection COSTS MONEY to the developer. They wouldn't just add it if they didn't legitimately feel like it would help them salvage some sales. And anyone who claims otherwise is clueless.

Developers don't owe you anything. The first version of the plugin works still, and nothing has changed there. They haven't "locked out" current customers. You haven't been screwed because a plugin you DON'T OWN YET has iLok protection you don't want. And yes, I know one person in this thread made assumptions (fair or not) about the protection and bought version 2, but he has now been refunded, and the devs don't owe him anything. They didn't lock anyone out. They didn't tell people they couldn't get updates to their current plugins unless they bought an iLok.

I know developers personally who have suffered from piracy, and can point to a dramatic drop in sales as soon as a cracked version came out. It may not happen to all developers, but it has for some. This is a fact. I also know that virtually all developers would prefer not to use a dongle or any copy protection at all if they didn't have to. It takes time and money to implement and support. But if a developer feels it is necessary to switch, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. And if you think you know what is better for them than they do, you are only speculating and are likely wrong.

I've owned software that uses dongles for 15 years. I personally have 3 iLoks and 3 Steinberg eLicensors and a couple of others from individual developers. I have never had one become unusable. I've never even lost one, and I lose everything, lol. Can it happen? Sure. But if you take precautions, you will be fine.

Don't want to use an iLok or other dongle? Don't buy the software that uses it. But you aren't owed anything. It's just the nature of the business, as unfortunate as that may be.

Brent