Rent-to-own?

Official support for: u-he.com
Locked New Topic
RELATED
PRODUCTS

Post

Urs wrote: Sat Nov 16, 2019 12:31 pm
FarleyCZ wrote: Sat Nov 16, 2019 10:17 amHe kinda has a point, because no matter what he does, it gets cracked anyway, so he just refused to spend manhours on a war he's not winning anyway.
This is a very bad point. His stuff doesn't live in isolation, when stuff is cracked it affects the whole industry. When Waves/iLok got cracked a few years ago, several companies went tits up, some barely survived. If rent-to-own is some kind of pathetic excuse to not protect intellectual property, then... don't let me finish that sentence.
I'm so sorry, I haven't ment it in offensive way. Sh*t, that's last thing I need in my pathetic life ... to argue with a genius who wrote my favorite synth ever. :dog:

Of course intellectual property should be protected. The point I'm trying to make is, that the target of rent-to-own model aren't software pirates. It's the people who despite their wallets are trying to not be pirates. Yes, the software gets more exploitable, but at that point it usually already exists cracked somewhere, so the only real damage here is done to the guy, who would like to slowly but legally pay for the plugin but has no option to do so.
Evovled into noctucat...
http://www.noctucat.com/

Post

Hehehe, I get it. All I'm saying is: It doesn't take much effort to do basic protection. It takes time, years even, but I think it's efficient. Also, it isn't witchcraft - a day or two every two years or three. The basic concepts are available to any plug-in developer who has any other plug-in developer's email address. It's just, I'm opposed to not even trying - it's difficult to compete with people who don't try.

But if they try, ideally they get this:


Screenshot 2019-11-16 at 13.32.53.png
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Post

Urs wrote: Sun Nov 17, 2019 11:24 pm But if they try, ideally they get this:



Screenshot 2019-11-16 at 13.32.53.png
found this about Zebra 2.8 he he
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Image

Post

Urs wrote: Sun Nov 17, 2019 11:24 pm Hehehe, I get it. All I'm saying is: It doesn't take much effort to do basic protection. It takes time, years even, but I think it's efficient. Also, it isn't witchcraft - a day or two every two years or three. The basic concepts are available to any plug-in developer who has any other plug-in developer's email address. It's just, I'm opposed to not even trying - it's difficult to compete with people who don't try.

But if they try, ideally they get this:
Screenshot 2019-11-16 at 13.32.53.png
Oh yeah, definitelly. I didn't mean it in the "don't protect your stuff at all" kind of way. Even Steve himself has a little serial number protection thing in place. It was just a lame reaction to your inital post about spending manhours on ren-to-own protection. Yeah, the plugin would probably need a little subrutine that would call home and check users payment behaviour against a database. Plus a server watchdog that'd keep the data relevant. 🤔 ...but based on how many pages this trhead has, it still might pay off at the end.
Evovled into noctucat...
http://www.noctucat.com/

Post

I have just registered here, was thinking about it already since months, but this thread just motivated to do it and I just wanted to ask, is this never going to happen? The question is already a couple of years old and there is still no rent-to-own option for u-he products...

I am a guy that cannot save money because if I save 200 bucks on my account I'm not going to give them out one shot into a VST synth. Paying that same amount in 10 dollars rates but having access to the vst from the very first day is already a very attractive feature and makes it feel less hurtful to the wallet even when it's the same amount.

But rent to own also has some interesting advantages for users apart from not having to give that much money in one single payment, normally a payment pause function is included, so you can test the software for a longer time and see if it's worth the money for your personal purposes or make pauses if your financial situation isn't that good for a couple of months.

I would really like to buy u-he diva but things like this are often what puts the weight in the balance for me to decide to go a different way and end up buying from other companies and finally not spending a single cent on companies that don't do rent to own. I guess I am not the only one and this also has financial consequences for a company that doesn't want or cannot adapt to the change of times.

I know it's just saying, but I already own Serum and Sylenth1 because they offer this and I ended up refusing to get plugins like Spire because I could find very good alternatives in the market that offered a rent to own plan.

Post

I love the subtle threats, but they entertain more than they scare :clown:

Time to put this thread to rest for good?

Post

I may be wrong, but I don't think Urs will budge. No "Rent-to-Own" on the horizon.

Post

fwiw i rented-to-own Serum, but immediately sold it and bought Hive1.2 not-rent-to-own when it inherited wavetables :P

you win some you lose some.
Image

Post

Urs wrote: Sun Dec 15, 2019 11:24 pm I love the subtle threats, but they entertain more than they scare :clown:

Time to put this thread to rest for good?
Yes, please...

I gave up 11 months ago to the day.

Post

:x :x :x :x AGGGGGGH WHY DOES URS WANT TO MAKE US PAY 200$ FOR PROGRAMS THAT TOOK YEARS TO MAKE, THE GREED, HE NEEDS TO GET WITH THE TIMES AND LET ME PAY ON MY TERMS!! :x :x :x :x
The post above this is likely bait, viewer discretion is advised.

Post

Also Yes, My Sarcastic Addition aside +1 to Putting This Thread to Bed...Hey that Rhymes.
The post above this is likely bait, viewer discretion is advised.

Post

Urs wrote: Sun Dec 15, 2019 11:24 pm I love the subtle threats, but they entertain more than they scare :clown:

Time to put this thread to rest for good?
It's not a subtle threat, I’m not dying to buy your software, actually I am not very interested in it because further than the purchase model I do prefer other synths over diva for my music.

Either way I wanted to tell this because I think it is something that really happens and also has an effect on sales, of course it’s totally up to you if you want to offer a rent to own option or not the same way it is up to the buyers to take your offer or not.
Last edited by oonabe on Mon Dec 16, 2019 5:30 am, edited 1 time in total.

Post

Spencer Maddox wrote: Sun Dec 15, 2019 11:57 pm :x :x :x :x AGGGGGGH WHY DOES URS WANT TO MAKE US PAY 200$ FOR PROGRAMS THAT TOOK YEARS TO MAKE, THE GREED, HE NEEDS TO GET WITH THE TIMES AND LET ME PAY ON MY TERMS!! :x :x :x :x
No one talked about greed but just exposed real situations that might be of interest for someone who is trying to sell a product. The dev is free to offer his product the way he wants, as free as the buyer is to decide if he takes those conditions or not, it’s so easy as that, no one talked about greed but about real situations, real ways to think from the side of a potential buyer and real advantages of a rent to own selling plan.

At the end both parts are free to take the deal or not, so easy as that

Post

oonabe wrote: Mon Dec 16, 2019 1:56 am It's not a subtle threat, I’m not dying to buy your software, actually I am not very interested in it because further than the purchase model I do prefer other synths over diva for my music.
First off, no worries. I'm not here to ruin your first posts on KVR.

You might not realise this, but you just confirmed all the worst suspicions we have on the issue. We believe that rental schemes (like aggressive sales) attract customers who are not very committed. We furthermore believe that those will become unhappy customers who commonly drain more resources for support than happy ones. Ultimately, unhappy customers equal worse reputation.

In regards to "subtle threats", this thread and others are full of "companies need to see the sign of times (rent to own) or else they will die" in various forms, often paired with "it's not just me". Again, you might not realise, but those are arguments designed to scare (or bully, if you will) us into submitting to *your* desires, they are not arguments based on actual business insight. You also use the argument of "this has been asked so long ago, why hasn't it happened yet" as if the whole thing was inevitable. It is not ;-)

Lastly, if we talk business scale and stuff, a company our size would not go "rent to own". A company our size would go "rent". Because "rent" multiplies shareholder value by a large factor.

On a side note, a very large company has recently failed in an epic move to concentrate on a rental scheme for their content. It may very well just be a short lived fashion, not a paradigm shift.

Post

Urs wrote: Mon Dec 16, 2019 9:02 am First
Okay one last try before I believe that you don't want my money :lol:

How about a possibility for those who use PayPal, to use partial payments? You sell a synth, customer receives a synth and if he/she doesn't pay the plan, it's PayPals issue?

Locked

Return to “u-he”