No. It's not a false equivalency, but rather a reflection of the sorry state of digital age rights in general. All of this "you don't own the software, only the license" legalese vomit has been nothing more than another tool used to ensure that people become accustomed to being monetized & oppressed.
Sorry you got oppressed. Thoughts and prayers being sent. Offline.
Oh and years ago after that whole IoT thing I did in 1995 went sour
Just commenting on the term, I'm a huge IoT nerd when time permits, spend a lot of time with microprocessors and building my own stuff from the ground up. Since I refuse to buy into service-based IoT solutions, I roll all my own stuff. Big fan of Espressif ESP8266s/Arduinos and so on. That and I design build stomp boxes et al - aka the reason the 1054/1104z in your photo caught my eye a couple weeks ago.
__________________ Music is what feelings sound like.
Just commenting on the term, I'm a huge IoT nerd when time permits, spend a lot of time with microprocessors and building my own stuff from the ground up. Since I refuse to buy into service-based IoT solutions, I roll all my own stuff. Big fan of Espressif ESP8266s/Arduinos and so on. That and I design build stomp boxes et al - aka the reason the 1054/1104z in your photo caught my eye a couple weeks ago.
Yea - sucks I never made any money on it. In fact, I lost all my gear I had at the time. When I left that and moved here to DC to work with some of the coders (ex-hackers) that worked for me, The ex-NSA guys and crew had a great sense of humor.
One April 1st they threw a buncha gear in the lobby, padlocked the door and put a fake eviction notice on the office and put a camera on the reception desk pointed at the front glass door that was run to the big screens in the NSOC to laugh at employee reactions. They'd then let them in on the joke and tell them to pull their car around back.
By that time I had rebuilt my lab. So Jason Wright (OpenBSD developer we hired) and I show up. They're all in the NSOC laughing until Larry (one of my IoT coders) stated - "Hey wait - this really happened to him - lost all this equipment..."
Jason and I walk up - see the notice - I shrug and say "Hey let's go to my place and finish dev of this crypto accelerator..." It's where I was doing most of the work anyway.
IIRC they are generally fine, I think one of the guys that runs that site posts over on diystompboxes and he's making it easy for those with basic soldering skills so they don't have do the R&D legwork. I think I've used their schematics on some pedals I've built in the past - I just used the schemo and created my own layout/PCB since I already have all the parts and hardware "in stock".
If you have questions about one of the projects, happy to chime in on questions if it is one of the circuits I'm familiar with. There aren't 'that many' different stomp ox circuits (in general) as the majority of them were designed in the 60/70s and much of what's used today (boutique wise) are just redesigns of those basic designs. Either way, if it's a circuit I'm familiar with happy to help.
__________________ Music is what feelings sound like.
That is a false equivalency. When you buy goods, such as the groceries you mentioned, you own them outright. When you buy a software license, you don't own the software; you are only buying a right to use the software according to the terms the seller either dictates to you or negotiates with you. As such, you have no fundamental right to use the software; you have only the rights granted in the license.
While I agree with you in that I prefer offline activation, this is nowhere near as big an issue as you are trying to make it into.
Originally Posted by drtedtan View Post
That is a false equivalency. When you buy goods, such as the groceries you mentioned, you own them outright. When you buy a software license, you don't own the software; you are only buying a right to use the software according to the terms the seller either dictates to you or negotiates with you. As such, you have no fundamental right to use the software; you have only the rights granted in the license. spot on logic.
Uh - again from the guys at the law firm that wrote the first click thru EULA for computer software
“Quiet Enjoyment”
Licensees, having paid for the right to use licensed technology, generally seek to ensure that
nothing interferes with the benefits they have received. For example, licensees are concerned
with their ability to obtain assistance from the licensor in fixing defects that are discovered in
the technology, to have the right to fix the defects themselves if the licensor is unable to do
so, to obtain periodic upgrades and other maintenance services from the licensor, to transfer
their rights if they sell their business and to continue enjoying the technology even if the
licensor becomes bankrupt.
The only software EULA that I know that has a statement of no Quiet Enjoyment is Microsoft.
And this is interesting if true: https://www.myce.com/news/even-supre...d-eulas-35725/
"At a speaking engagement at Canisius College in Buffalo, N.Y., Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. responded to a student’s question by admitting that he’s frustrated by fine print as much as anybody and usually doesn’t read the agreements himself.
Roberts says that the legal system is to blame for the onslaught of fine print associated with everything including software and medications. “Providing too much information defeats the purpose of disclosure, since no one reads it,” he said. “What the answer is, I don’t know.”
The EULA is, of course, an important thing since it contains all of the rules that a company sets forth and users must comply in order to legally use the product.
Blizzard recently invoked the terms included in their EULA for Starcraft II as justification for banning thousands of players accused of using cheat codes and filing suit against three people who allegedly created the codes.
Mike Masnik at Tech Dirt points out that a ruling in Blizzard’s favor in this case could lead to several other companies citing EULA violations for copyright infringement claims. “If Blizzard is allowed to make these claims, then any software/content company that offers you a long license, where you don’t obey each and every claim, can say you’ve infringed on their copyright and owe huge statutory damages,” Masnik wrote in his post about the case.
Like Roberts, I don’t know what a fair solution would be to the problem. In this increasingly litigious society, corporations need a way to protect themselves and their products and pages of fine print seems like the most logical way of accomplishing that. Maybe someday there will be a better way."
I would far prefer offline to be available. OTOH if it is between a company going under (due to piracy) or them only using online registration then of course needs must.
I remember Liquidsonics going to hardware iLok on their latest products (far more hassle and expense than a little bit of online registration!!!) they lost me as a customer for those products but I can understand the reasoning when losing business through piracy.
Updates are pretty much hassle free with NI Native Access now. It actually makes it easier for the customer.
I wish they offered offline registration but no biggie. Even tiny islands in the middle of nowhere could use satellite broadband to register.
“Quiet Enjoyment”
Licensees, having paid for the right to use licensed technology, generally seek to ensure that
nothing interferes with the benefits they have received. For example, licensees are concerned
with their ability to obtain assistance from the licensor in fixing defects that are discovered in
the technology, to have the right to fix the defects themselves if the licensor is unable to do
so, to obtain periodic upgrades and other maintenance services from the licensor, to transfer
their rights if they sell their business and to continue enjoying the technology even if the
licensor becomes bankrupt.
The only software EULA that I know that has a statement of no Quiet Enjoyment is Microsoft.
Are you suggesting that online activation prevents quiet enjoyment of the software?
Are you suggesting that online activation prevents quiet enjoyment of the software?
Yes the sentence :
"and to continue enjoying the technology even if the licensor becomes bankrupt."
Again this has happened to me - I have designs I can't access anymore due to this happening.
In fact - look at Gibson Sonar... Yea, thank god for azslow3 but you still lose a lot of the advantage of having bought that licensed software - all the settings and plugins, etc...that you lose.
Some of these schemes - like FlexLM's cookie jar thing - write to track 0 of the HD. Uh, that's what rootkits do.
So disaster restoration for continuity of your business is limited to them still being able to interact.
And some like that will actually bag out of you change enough of your hardware.
If I decide to go to a nicer vid card to watch porn with, that's none of the CAD or DAW companies business.
And then we get into the fact that who's IP is it that I create with their software? It's in their format, but it's my design.
Is this construed as a partbership? I have to ask permission to make hardware changes and continue developing my product, My IP?
OK... cool. I use a mech CAD tool and design a faulty breaking system for a tram. OK.. Now I know their EULA discounts any liability, But since they have restricted my ability to make my own decisions for what to do with my system and recall the other paragraph ("... antitrust laws prevent licensors from requiring licensees to purchase staple articles of commerce ..." )in Fenwick, does that mean that they are also culpable?
Hasn't really been tested...
But the thing that gets me is Adobe and Autodesk have made it clear that they no longer offer licenses - only SaaS (software as a service).
My guess is that if they thought licenses were iron clad, they'd still offer them.
And yea they say this and that - it's all really about recurrent revenue.
For years all those motherboards you use for your DAW are made in CN with cracked copies of the old Protel99se.
For a lot of software companies they "blew their wad" back in the day trying to leap frog the competition and gave 99% of users all if not more capability than they'll ever need.
Look at it this way - ask any old timer about getting a mix back in an analog studio,
You can't - even with an SSL and Total Recall. Newcomers have no idea how nice they have it. Went off on this to chagrin of a bunch of people on another forum post here. We'd have killed for this tech back then.
Even Cakewalk 3 or old SAW is a step up from what we had. Recall Mike Oldfield actually wore out his 2" ( no jokes) doing an album. And with sticky shed, well, DAWs look really nice.
As far as the thread subject, I agree that offline should be available - period; not doing so displays a lack of customer focus. I do not agree about any of the fundamental rights/obscene violation stuff due to being a bit of an emotional false dilemma.
Ad hominem. You either agree with a right or a principle or you do not, regardless of any subjective attitude you may have regarding the perceived over-emotionalism of someone else's response to it.
NI's betrayal has made me very, very angry. No doubt this anger is reflected in what could arguably be characterized as florid, overblown rhetoric on my part. I am also well-aware that I live in a world in which the capitalists write all of the laws and set all of the cultural standards for what we define as "normal" or "appropriate". This dismays me, so I tend to prefer hyperbole that flows in the opposite direction. Most human rights abuses that are committed from positions of corporate authority - if they are acknowledged at all - are euphemized rather than condemned in an overtly inflammatory way. It's a double standard that every power structure entrenched in a self-created status quo enjoys.
None of this, however, in any way effects the legitimacy of the POV. The right to keep a creative workstation space private is fundamental.
Ad hominem. You either agree with a right or a principle or you do not, regardless of any subjective attitude you may have regarding the perceived over-emotionalism of someone else's response to it.
I agree that offline activation should be available but I don't agree with all the additional spin for emotional effect. It's as simple as that. That isn't an ad hominem since A) I agreed with the basic premise already and B) I'm not using it to discredit the original ask, it's simply noting I don't buy the emotional flag waving, and I don't.
Quote:
NI's betrayal has made me very, very angry.
You didn't have to post ^that for us to figure that one out LOL.
__________________ Music is what feelings sound like.
Last edited by karbomusic; 08-08-2018 at 09:17 AM.
I agree that offline activation should be available but I don't agree with all the additional spin for emotional effect. It's as simple as that. That isn't an ad hominem since A) I agreed with the basic premise already and B) I'm not using it to discredit the original ask, it's simply noting I don't buy the emotional flag waving, and I don't.
Fair enough.
Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic
You didn't have to post ^that for us to figure that one out LOL.
Where:
"Licensor further warrants that it shall not install or insert any virus or disabling code or take any action which would permit Licensor or any third party to interfere with Customer’s quiet enjoyment of the Software."
I'm just curious where you find this right enumerated.
Fuck all that. It doesn't have to be formally enumerated. This right to privacy is most emphatically in the "We hold these truths to be self-evident" category. It's a priori, bestowed upon us by nature, or God, or whatever metaphysical construct floats your boat.
Where:
"Licensor further warrants that it shall not install or insert any virus or disabling code or take any action which would permit Licensor or any third party to interfere with Customer’s quiet enjoyment of the Software."
Interesting article (at least the first one which I got through). Thanks.
Just to be clear, I'm with you. I think offline should be available for the foreseeable future. I actually own the entire Komplete 11 suite + Machine MK3, not to mention 1000s of $$ in other plugins and software that force me to keep a current clone/image of my entire system just in case (regardless of what goes wrong).
I'm on the fence as to how long it will last (offline), not from opinion per se, but rather the fact we are crossing into a new world technologically that simply won't be the same as the old one. At some point internet access will be the same as access to water, a phone line and electricity, where there are some basic expectations to be had to let's say authorize a product using the current technologies.
__________________ Music is what feelings sound like.
"and to continue enjoying the technology even if the licensor becomes bankrupt."
I see where you're coming from; thanks for clarifying.
In the specific case of Native Instruments, purchasers of previous versions of the software still have the ability to use those versions without activating them online. And people have been made aware of the online activation requirement for current and future versions of the software, so I think this would pass the "reasonable person test".
But I do see how other situations, such as Adobe's periodic requirement to "phone home", can potentially prevent quiet enjoyment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajawamnet
But the thing that gets me is Adobe and Autodesk have made it clear that they no longer offer licenses - only SaaS (software as a service).
My guess is that if they thought licenses were iron clad, they'd still offer them.
And yea they say this and that - it's all really about recurrent revenue.
Unfortunately, it looks like this is the way much of the software industry is going and, just as you state, it is about the recurring stream of revenue.
But I do see how other situations, such as Adobe's periodic requirement to "phone home", can potentially prevent quiet enjoyment.
Is this for the legacy model or subscription model? For the latter, quiet enjoyment seems potentially irrelevant. On a side note "recurring income" has always been around, companies can't project/plan based on unknowns when compared to recurring - no real opinion on it other than when I ran a corporation, my ability to stay open had a lot to do with being able to keep money coming in in some predictable fashion - shock.
__________________ Music is what feelings sound like.
Ad hominem. You either agree with a right or a principle or you do not, regardless of any subjective attitude you may have regarding the perceived over-emotionalism of someone else's response to it.
NI's betrayal has made me very, very angry. No doubt this anger is reflected in what could arguably be characterized as florid, overblown rhetoric on my part. I am also well-aware that I live in a world in which the capitalists write all of the laws and set all of the cultural standards for what we define as "normal" or "appropriate". This dismays me, so I tend to prefer hyperbole that flows in the opposite direction. Most human rights abuses that are committed from positions of corporate authority - if they are acknowledged at all - are euphemized rather than condemned in an overtly inflammatory way. It's a double standard that every power structure entrenched in a self-created status quo enjoys.
None of this, however, in any way effects the legitimacy of the POV. The right to keep a creative workstation space private is fundamental.
Betrayal - sheesh!, I suggest saving an emotive word like that for someone that takes your money and runs. I shouldn't expect much in this world where people are labelled "literally Hitler" or what have you.
Heh heh, capitalism was the driving force behind any of that software being made in the first place!
Economies of scale in capitalism made it possible to make that much software available to you at modest cost to you. Same deal with the silicon chips in the processors and the millions of circuits in the display panels. These things would cost hundreds of millions or billions without this process.
Even if you look at not for profit software (often designed to get the developer noticed) it is mostly or completely rehashed copies of commercial software which was designed to make a profit. The profit motive makes the world go round.
Just to be clear, I'm with you. I think offline should be available for the foreseeable future. I actually own the entire Komplete 11 suite + Machine MK3, not to mention 1000s of $$ in other plugins and software that force me to keep a current clone/image of my entire system just in case (regardless of what goes wrong).
I'm on the fence as to how long it will last (offline), not from opinion per se, but rather the fact we are crossing into a new world technologically that simply won't be the same as the old one. At some point internet access will be the same as access to water, a phone line and electricity, where there are some basic expectations to be had to let's say authorize a product would use the current technologies.
Yup. For millions of people (including me) internet access is already a basic utility along with running water, telephone & electricity. Increasingly, a teenage kid cannot even apply for a part time job in a fast food joint without one. (OT, but though I think computers are way cool in lots of ways, I tend to see the Postindustrial Age grid and its Achilles heel of complex interconnective dependence as frightening, dangerous and potentially dystopic.)
Just a few short years ago, your software came in a little license key in a CD-ROM box because that's all it was technologically feasible to do. And because it is NOW that universal connectivity and large data transmission is becoming standard, NOW is the time IMHO to proactively proclaim end-user consumer rights in as strong of a way as possible. We need a digital era Ralph Nader or something. We need to actively organize and boycott draconian CP. The templates for software rights & responsibilities being created today will quite likely set the standards for generations to come.
I think both what Native Instruments has done and the mass amount of end-user apathy regarding it are terribly big deals...
Betrayal - sheesh!, I suggest saving an emotive word like that for someone that takes your money and runs. I shouldn't expect much in this world where people are labelled "literally Hitler" or what have you.
Heh heh, capitalism was the driving force behind any of that software being made in the first place!
Economies of scale in capitalism made it possible to make that much software available to you at modest cost to you. Same deal with the silicon chips in the processors and the millions of circuits in the display panels. These things would cost hundreds of millions or billions without this process.
If you look at not for profit software it is mostly or completely rehashed copies of commercial software which was designed to make a profit.
LMFAO! I was born, raised and still live in the USA, so suffice to say I've heard the entire hymnal of songs praising the wondrous qualities of capitalism before, many times over...
I think both what Native Instruments has done and the mass amount of end-user apathy regarding it are terribly big deals...
You can shop elsewhere though. If it is the software synthesizers or FX plugins you can buy products from companies that don't have any of these systems in place.
Also you can get plenty of pretty decent freebies.
So it isn't a monopolistic provider for those types of software. Arguably Kontakt is close to that, but alternatives exist there too. Although you will have to contend with iLok etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quasar
LMFAO! I was born, raised and still live in the USA, so suffice to say I've heard the entire hymnal of songs praising the wondrous qualities of capitalism before, many times over...
Oh, it isn't all beer and skittles. I wouldn't whinge about the relative little stuff though.
I see where you're coming from; thanks for clarifying.
But I do see how other situations, such as Adobe's periodic requirement to "phone home", can potentially prevent quiet enjoyment.
Unfortunately, it looks like this is the way much of the software industry is going and, just as you state, it is about the recurring stream of revenue.
Oh... you should go to EEVBLOG's forum RE: Eagle EDA software. They recently got purchased by Autodesk. Told all the former Eagle users that they would not go to a subscription model. Well, they did. That didn't go over well: https://www.eevblog.com/forum/eagle/...eagle-edition/
Believing what software companies now say is kinda like believing what a used car salesman states.
And not a big fan Clown Computing...
As to recurring revenue - maybe they should do what I and the rest of you have to do. Actually listen to the customer, be there for them and add value. Just as I mentioned about computer security not really being a computer problem - more a people problem, maybe if they would actually give value with real support, they wouldn't have to pull a Milli Vanilli on us.
He mentioned how he had to explain to Clive about that whole Milli Vanilli thing when he was at arista. He also mentioned signing the contract with Gene Simmons when he was at Casablanca.
On a side note - recall all those old disco hits - Everybody Everybody, Everybody Dance Now? Stuff like that? Recall the hot babe in the vids?
Yea - well the girl that actually sang that was in Two Tons of Fun - yep.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Weather_Girls
"Martha Wash successfully sued the record labels behind Black Box and C+C Music Factory for the unlawful use of her voice, which was mimed in videos and "live" appearances by model Katrin Quinol and singer Zelma Davis respectively. Her legal action led to new legislation that requires all vocals contributions to be credited, "
From what I'm told, when listening to a bar band it's no longer apt to ask for Freebird - now it's "...play It's Raining Men..."
So maybe we can change all this.
And maybe as Mr Krabs states '...scallops will fly out me pants..."
As to recurring revenue - maybe they should do what I and the rest of you have to do. Actually listen to the customer, be there for them and add value. Just as I mentioned about computer security not really being a computer problem - more a people problem, maybe if they would actually give value with real support, they wouldn't have to pull a Milli Vanilli on us.
What if the customers continuously whinged that they preferred the days when your company offered open air markets, but those days your products were being stolen at an unsustainable rate and you had to go indoors or close up entirely.
What if the customers continuously whinged that they preferred the days when your company offered open air markets, but those days your products were being stolen at an unsustainable rate and you had to go indoors or close up entirely.
Is the customer always right?
It's not that the customer is always right - it's more of the company having integrity.
They're still being ripped - just go on the wares sites... you can just ask for this and they'll crack it for ya.
I mean look a Justin and crew - what this forum's about (which I'm sorry to have a penchant for derailing I guess...).
Here's a guy - writes a DAW that is just amazing - only 11 MBytes of installer - lets you use it ad-infinium without paying for it and is one of the best operating pieces of software out there. Look at the hell Justin went thru at AOL - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justin_Frankel
"AOL watched Frankel very closely after that, taking down other projects that he tried to release to the public, such as an MP3 search engine and a patch for AOL Instant Messenger to block advertisements in the application. Frankel threatened to resign on June 2, 2003, after AOL removed his program WASTE, a private peer-to-peer file-sharing program, from the Nullsoft website."
So maybe ask Justin about it. Hang out at one of the Super 8 shows if your in his neck of the woods.
I know I would...
as to managing customers - well out of 10 I get I might work with one of them. Vetting customers and their expectations is key to running a biz. Look at the Pareto rule: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_principle
There's an extension to that where "...20% of your customers will eat 80% of your resources..."
Experience is not so much knowing what to do; instead it's knowing what not to do. Being able to see that in potential business dealings is paramount. We get all kindsa guys that want perpetual motion machines. Most have and offer silly sums of money. It's up to us to look at that and make a decision.
As to recurring revenue - maybe they should do what I and the rest of you have to do. Actually listen to the customer, be there for them and add value.
Because that sounds great, feels great but isn't really the problem being solved. IOW, you could have the best company as far as customer focus and the most loyal customers ever and still need to be able to secure some type of proof that can show some type of promised income for beyond "today" in order to keep the company profitable (even in the most honest way).
__________________ Music is what feelings sound like.
Because that sounds great, feels great but isn't really the problem being solved. IOW, you could have the best company and the most loyal customers ever and still need to be able to secure some type of proof that can show some type of promised income for beyond "today".
Again I will refer to Justin on this:
Go to 3:08 or so
"Mitchell: There's a wonderful story about that in The Second Book of the Tao.
It goes like this:
Ch'ing the master woodworker carved a bell stand so intricately graceful that all who saw it were astonished. They thought that a god must have made it.
The Marquis of Lu asked, "How did your art achieve something of such unearthly beauty?"
"My Lord," Ch'ing said, "I'm just a simple woodworker — I don’t know anything about art. But here’s what I can tell you. Whenever I begin to carve a bell
stand, I concentrate my mind.
After three days of meditating, I no longer have any thoughts of praise or blame. After five days, I no longer have any thoughts of success or failure.
After seven days, I'm not identified with a body.
All my power is focused on my task; there are no distractions. At that point, I enter the mountain forest. I examine the trees until exactly the right one
appears. If I can see a bell stand inside it, the real work is done, and all I have to do is get started. Thus I harmonize inner and outer. That's why people
think that my work must be superhuman."
So I guess it depends on how you look at it. I look at Musk, I look at zuckerberg, I look at Jobs. Worth (or were ) lots of $$$
Then I see this guy - an ophthalmologist - that goes into N Korea - does 1,000 cataract surgeries in 10 days (cataracts are a real problem, even for young people over there due to poor nutrition). He gives sight back to all those people. Had to sneak equipment in.
So afterwards, all 1,000 are in a room with pics of the dad and Kim Jong-un at the head of the room.
As the bandages of the protective eyepiece are being pulled off, all the participants run to the front of the room - right by the guy that gave them back their sight - and bow down to the pics; one stating "I will work for you in the salt mines!!!"
I'm thinking who's really worth all this adulation and respect?
Look at Jobs - how he ripped off Woz after he came back from hanging in India and shaving his head?
"Jobs then returned to Atari and was assigned to create a circuit board for the arcade video game Breakout. According to Bushnell, Atari offered US$100 for each TTL chip that was eliminated in the machine. Jobs had little specialized knowledge of circuit board design and made a deal with Wozniak to split the fee evenly between them if Wozniak could minimize the number of chips. Much to the amazement of Atari engineers, Wozniak reduced the TTL count to 46, a design so tight that it was impossible to reproduce on an assembly line.[29] According to Wozniak, Jobs told him that Atari gave them only $700 (instead of the $5,000 paid out), and that Wozniak's share was thus $350.[30] Wozniak did not learn about the actual bonus until ten years later, but said that if Jobs had told him about it and explained that he needed the money, Wozniak would have given it to him.[4]:104–107"
Yea - I'll go with Justin,- do stuff for the right reasons.
Again I will refer to Justin on this:
Go to 3:08 or so
I'm stating it being not wrong at all for a company, any company to desire a recurring source of income as part of their revenue (regardless if some other company abuses it). I had a longer explanation typed up but it really is business 101 so I omitted it.
__________________ Music is what feelings sound like.
Last edited by karbomusic; 08-08-2018 at 11:17 AM.
I'm stating it being not wrong at all for a company, any company to desire a recurring source of income as part of their revenue (regardless is some other company abuses it). I had a longer explanation typed up but it really is business 101 so I omitted it.
Then I say they innovate. I recall Quincy Jones in George Marin's book Making Music stating something to the effect
"No matter how successful or unsuccessful something is, never look back..."
Too many ride on the innovation of too few. That really sucks.
And if they want to offer SaaS then be upfront about it. Let the market decide...
Is this for the legacy model or subscription model? For the latter, quiet enjoyment seems potentially irrelevant.
Adobe's subscription model requires periodic re-authorizations (monthly, if memory serves).
Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic
On a side note "recurring income" has always been around, companies can't project/plan based on unknowns when compared to recurring - no real opinion on it other than when I ran a corporation, my ability to stay open had a lot to do with being able to keep money coming in in some predictable fashion - shock.
I don't have a problem with companies generating recurring revenue streams; my issue is with how they go about generating them.
With the traditional perpetual software license model, consumers are free to skip updates that don't add value to them personally while continuing to use the version of the software that they already have installed. This puts the onus on the developer to provide fixes and updates that are beneficial to its user base in order to keep that revenue stream coming in.
Software as a service, on the other hand, requires a continuing subscription in order to access the software; it is essentially renting a license to use the software temporarily rather than buying a perpetual license. This isn't bad in and of itself, but it does not encourage the developer to focus on their users' needs in order to maintain their revenue stream in the same way that the traditional licensing model does. And without those market forces pushing the developer to focus on the user base's needs, I can foresee a number of developers (particularly the larger ones) sitting back collecting "rent" and cutting costs, including development costs, rather than providing useful fixes and updates to their user base.
Adobe's subscription model requires periodic re-authorizations (monthly, if memory serves).
Thanks, that's sort of why I asked.. if it is a subscription, I assume there needs to be some type periodic check for a valid subscription - I actually have one of their subscriptions and I've noticed the once a month check but only if I dropped a cookie and had to sign back in to creative cloud.
That said, as much as I hate the "idea" of a subscription model, my Adobe subscription (in practice for 5+ years now) has been the most trouble free and enjoyable experience I never imagined could exist - it always works, it's always up to date, and... more seamless than when I used the legacy model. Don't blame the messenger I'm just reporting observations of something I never thought would work.
Quote:
I don't have a problem with companies generating recurring revenue streams; my issue is with how they go about generating them.
With the traditional perpetual software license model, consumers are free to skip updates that don't add value to them personally while continuing to use the version of the software that they already have installed. This puts the onus on the developer to provide fixes and updates that are beneficial to its user base in order to keep that revenue stream coming in.
Software as a service, on the other hand, requires a continuing subscription in order to access the software; it is essentially renting a license to use the software temporarily rather than buying a perpetual license. This isn't bad in and of itself, but it does not encourage the developer to focus on their users' needs in order to maintain their revenue stream in the same way that the traditional licensing model does. And without those market forces pushing the developer to focus on the user base's needs, I can foresee a number of developers (particularly the larger ones) sitting back collecting "rent" and cutting costs, including development costs, rather than providing useful fixes and updates to their user base.
I agree but doesn't that really sound more like a rental where subscription is the same meaning, stop paying, stop using? And we are sort of trying to "glue on" the old model as if they should align when they don't? Just asking, not debating. If we look back at my own Adobe experience (again something I tried but was certain I would drop after one year due to the horror stories)… If the majority end up with a similar experience as mine I'm not sure how much anything else matters that much.
To simplify, I'm in full agreement but my own "test experience" ended up in a far better real-world experience - even against my expectations of failure.
__________________ Music is what feelings sound like.
Software as a service, on the other hand, requires a continuing subscription in order to access the software; it is essentially renting a license to use the software temporarily rather than buying a perpetual license.
Depends on how SAAS is done. Roland Cloud, for example, offers you to own outright one of their products after you accumulate 12 months of subscription (that's 12 months at $20/mo). That's neat, if a bit pricey (but it's not as if plugins that cost more than that don't exist). But, I would say that what if I am rich enough to be able to purchase outright any number of their currently available cloud products, I should be able to do so without waiting 12 months for each one...
Thanks, that's sort of why I asked.. if it is a subscription, I assume there needs to be some type periodic check for a valid subscription - I actually have one of their subscriptions and I've noticed the once a month check but only if I dropped a cookie and had to sign back in to creative cloud.
That said, as much as I hate the "idea" of a subscription model, my Adobe subscription (in practice for 5+ years now) has been the most trouble free and enjoyable experience I never imagined could exist - it always works, it's always up to date, and... more seamless than when I used the legacy model. Don't blame the messenger I'm just reporting observations of something I never thought would work.
Glad to hear that its working out for you.
My concern has always been that I won't be able to access the software if I am traveling and don't have access to WiFi when it decides to re-authorize. Have you experienced anything like this?
Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic
I agree but doesn't that really sound more like a rental where subscription is the same meaning, stop paying, stop using? And we are sort of trying to "glue on" the old model as if they should align when they don't? Just asking, not debating. If we look back at my own Adobe experience (again something I tried but was certain I would drop after one year due to the horror stories)… If the majority end up with a similar experience as mine I'm not sure how much anything else matters that much.
To simplify, I'm in full agreement but my own "test experience" ended up in a far better real-world experience - even against my expectations of failure.
Like I said, software as a service isn't an inherently bad model, its what the developers do from there that determines whether or not it works out for the user base. If the company continues to focus on its user base and the user base is happy with the SaaS model, then this is a perfectly viable option. But my experience with business makes me cautious, as I've found that most businesses, without a financial incentive to improve, will opt for complacency rather than improvement. Not all, but certainly a large portion.
My concern has always been that I won't be able to access the software if I am traveling and don't have access to WiFi when it decides to re-authorize. Have you experienced anything like this?
I haven't thus far but don't travel with it that much. I originally got it because I was going out of town, was going to be doing a lot of photography while I was gone and wanted a license/install for Photoshop and Lightroom that I could use on my laptop while gone but also have it on my main machine back home. The subscription offers licenses for 5 machines so I figured I'd try it to get me through that trip, then I just kept renewing.
Granted if I lost actual access when I needed it, I would be pretty annoyed.
__________________ Music is what feelings sound like.
For me, this is an issue because I take my work home with me and open projects on my laptop. I don't have any NI products but I do have Waves and Slate. With Slate I understood at the time that I needed iLok to use the plugs, so i'm not mad at them for doing so. I therefore have the iLok in the front usb port on a key chain...still not ideal but not the end of the world and no additional signing in blah blah blah.
Waves, however, I didn't realize until yesterday actually that I can only use products on 1 computer "at a time". But, while there is no iLok requirement, I either have to deactivate from comp 1, then reactivate on comp 2 (and vice versa) every single time i switch, or I have to have yet another usb stick to carry around...in which I literally have no additional usb ports anywhere. I don't know how Izotope does it, their plugs are more expensive than slate and waves, but I can have both of my setups working without doing anything extra.
While I get companies need to protect their products, it really is a frustrating scenario I am having to deal with with now and likely on a regular basis. If companies would just adopt some standards so that consumers can benefit instead of being stripped of more and more "rights" or whatever it's being called now, it would certainly make everyone's lives easier.
Linear Mode
