Cakewalk "no resale" policy should be changed

Page: < 123 > Showing page 2 of 3
Author
Post
Essentials Only Full Version
C Hudson
Max Output Level: -71 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 990
  • Joined: 2003/11/04 10:02:51
  • Location: Canada
  • Status: offline
RE: Start using a dongle! 2004/05/05 10:57:20 (permalink)
Then your dongle breaks and you have to cancel 2 weeks worth of sessions equalling thousands of dollars while the software company sends you another one.

No Thanks

Best

CH
#31
koolbass
Max Output Level: -73 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 853
  • Joined: 2003/11/13 23:27:43
  • Location: Nashville, TN
  • Status: offline
RE: Start using a dongle! 2004/05/05 11:20:19 (permalink)
A BIG BUMP to daverich!! (... and I just want to say ... I don't want no dang dongles ... hmm ... "no dang dongles" <he sings> ... I may have a HIT song here ... I'll write it and send it to my Cubase buddy ... hehe)
< Message edited by koolbass -- 5/5/2004 12:27:45 PM >
#32
crookedtree
Max Output Level: -89 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 73
  • Joined: 2003/12/11 13:59:21
  • Location: Columbia S.C.
  • Status: offline
RE: Cakewalk "no resale" policy should be changed 2004/05/05 11:25:15 (permalink)
Nothing like some good old common sense. Thats what I like about YEP short sweet and to the point.

Some things sound great however they don't work great. CW could wind up with way to many customers seeking support who have not paid for the licence. Not cost effective. Now that is way out there I know, but it has happened. "We garantee you support for life" Where are they now (customers)? Stuck with proprietary systems that have no support.

The only way any bussiness can survive is by charging for the product and in some cases the support. The big bad company has to pay it's employee's. What is it called again a capitalism.

I see both sides, I am am tempted as well, but like so many have stated if it ain't broke don't fix it.

Now get out there and make some noise, and for goodness sake don't brake your dongle that hurts. ( hey where's the spell check button?)
#33
SteveD
Max Output Level: -47 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 2831
  • Joined: 2003/11/07 13:35:57
  • Location: NJ
  • Status: offline
RE: Cakewalk "no resale" policy should be changed 2004/05/05 11:59:38 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: HammerHead

you just buy a licence to use it. That's why you can't resell it.


THIS is the key. You don't own the software. CW owns it. You're buying the right to use it.


IMHO
if it aint broke , dont fix it.

no dang dongles. no activation schemes.
no phone calls/emails for new serial numbers.

i'd prefer to let them code bug fixes & new featues instead of building a whole new system to support & track SN transfers.

i like the fact that i can format my hard disk & reload Sonar with minimal hassle. makes life easier when my other licensed software starts acting up (Micropuke 2K) & i need to start over. we've all been there or will be there
someday.

I agree with everything HammerHead has said here.

<soapbox>

I would encourage "Dongle Enthusiasts" to stroll over to the Cubase or Nuendo Forums. Granted Cakewalk's customer support smokes Steinberg's, and our bakers would probably get lost or broken dongles out to bonifide customers without too much of a hassle... as long as they're in business, and continuing support of the product in question, but sheesh... what a drag for them and for us.

Do these USB dongle thingies have the ability to cable through them, or do you loose an available USB port altogether? I don't know if having a dongle hangin' off a USB port uses more PCI bandwidth than an unused USB port or not. My hunch is that it does. Fewer is better when it comes to devices on a DAW. Suppose you'd like to disable that USB port to free up a dedicated IRQ for a sound card or powered DSP? "Sorry... I need that IRQ for my dongle!?"

Please... no dongles.

I've got two older versions of Sonar sitting on a shelf. But I still have NO problem with Cakewalk's licensing agreement.

I think Cakewalk is one of the few companies doin' it right. There are other threads on this forum praising them for their honor system approach and I've read magazine and webzine reviews of Cakewalk products where the reviewers make that same observation.

</soapbox>

SteveD
DAWPRO Drum Tracks

... addicted to gear
#34
raisindot
Max Output Level: -89 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 96
  • Joined: 2004/02/19 14:21:13
  • Status: offline
RE: Cakewalk "no resale" policy should be changed 2004/05/05 12:06:35 (permalink)
Putting the "licensing vs. owning" issue aside, couldn't both CW and would-be old-version sellers be placated by offering no transfer of registration capability at all when an older version is sold?

In other words, if I upgrade to 3.1, and sell my copy of 2.2 to someone else, he would NOT receive a license transfer. He would not have an upgrade path. He would not receive technical support. He would be buying an outdated version of the software "as is." However, this might be enough for his uses, and then later he might buy a later version.

Although CW wouldn't profit from the re-sale, this *is* no different than selling a car, a computer or a video game second hand--the manufacturer makes no money from the re-sale. Plus, CW would not be obligated to provide support to the "used" SW buyer.

The seller would benefit because they could sell old software without having to transfer a license.

The buyer would be able to "try out" an outdated version at a substantially reduced cost.

Jeff in Cakewalk Country (Boston)
#35
Dickie
Max Output Level: -69 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 1071
  • Joined: 2003/11/06 06:46:33
  • Location: West Sussex, UK
  • Status: offline
RE: Cakewalk "no resale" policy should be changed 2004/05/05 12:10:36 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: C Hudson

As it is ,they send you a full version when you upgrade that does not check for past versions. They would have to incorporate anti copy techniques on the CD and version checking for upgrades if they allowed licence transfers. Otherwise, one could upgrade to ver 3, sell ver 2 and now you have a registered copy of 3 illegally since you only have a licence, you don't own the software, and you sold the licence allong with the CD when you sold 2. Cakewalk however give you a shiny new serial number with your upgrade so they are oblivious you have done something wrong.

They could always just give you one serial number that you kept for life, this would remove all the upgrade problems, and if you sold your copy, then you sold the serial no, and that person then took it over.
There is always many ways to skin a cat, and as I said before I do not really care either way, I just agree that it seems a bit odd that Sonar has NO value if you decide you don't want it anymore. Unlike pretty much anything else you buy.

All the arguments against changing the way they work (dongles/problems tracking serial numbers etc) can all be overcome very easily, with little or no impact on the current loyal users. It's just whether Cakewalk want to allow it or not, and so far they have decided not to allow it.

Dickie
There are only 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and those who don't.
#36
Guitarmech111
Max Output Level: -24.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 5085
  • Joined: 2003/11/06 10:18:53
  • Location: Bayou City, TX
  • Status: offline
RE: Cakewalk "no resale" policy should be changed 2004/05/05 12:21:31 (permalink)
He would be buying an outdated version of the software "as is."


Actually, they would be getting an illegal copy of the software with no license to use it.

SONAR is not owned by the user and you agree to the EULA before installing it. If you don't like it, don't install it.

I have all of my previous versions of Cakewalk software back to 2.0. I upgraded every single time and thought the upgrade path was VERY reasonable in cost.

I support the NO RESALE 100%!

Peace,
Conley Shepherd
Joyful Noise Productions
PC config: (Win performance base score = 7.7) ASUS Sabertooth 990 FX -amd fx-8150 - core processor am3+ - 32G Corsair 1066 DDR3 - PNY GTX670 2g gddr5 - Corsair Force SSD 120G - Samsung 750G SATA drives - WD 1tb Black (Audio files) - WD 2TB for storage - RME UFX - USB ASIO 2/2016 drivers Win8 

 
Without a mess, there is no message
#37
spinner
Max Output Level: -87 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 191
  • Joined: 2004/01/13 18:01:04
  • Location: Lynnwood, WA
  • Status: offline
RE: Cakewalk "no resale" policy should be changed 2004/05/05 12:31:13 (permalink)
to me that is the point .. once the software has been registered by the original owner, no other user can register the same s/w... therefore any up dates, patches etc.. are no longer available if you bought s/w second hand (at least I believe this would be the case)
#38
Brad
Max Output Level: -78 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 605
  • Joined: 2003/11/08 02:57:14
  • Location: Chandler, AZ
  • Status: offline
RE: Cakewalk "no resale" policy should be changed 2004/05/05 12:38:44 (permalink)
I agree with DAVERICH, and GUITARMECH... to scheme a way to make it transferrable only makes room for so many problems.. NOT for me !! Buy it to keep it, or don't buy it.. It cost too much for cakewalk, to make that scenario work.. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. And it ain't.
< Message edited by Brad -- 5/5/2004 9:40:12 AM >
#39
C Hudson
Max Output Level: -71 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 990
  • Joined: 2003/11/04 10:02:51
  • Location: Canada
  • Status: offline
RE: Cakewalk "no resale" policy should be changed 2004/05/05 16:51:08 (permalink)
If they are selling their licence, they are not so loyal me thinks

Not sure why cakewalk would give a nickel towards the people who want to move off the patform. That includes the few dollars of salaried time of the big wigs just discussing it around a table.

Licencing transfers assumes honesty in people wanting to do that. Limiting to one serial is a way to stop upgrades but does not insure the seller will stop using the product.

Sonar is only a few hundred dollars, not that big an investment for a high quality authoring tool.

Are not the CD's serially made with cd keys? If so then that would mean special "runs" for each user wanting to upgrade. Hardly a cost effective solution . If they are not seriallized, it could be an idea, but again, I doubt Cake care too much about the ones who want to leave the fold.

Best

CH
#40
dvdmike
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 31
  • Joined: 2004/05/03 13:28:46
  • Status: offline
RE: Cakewalk "no resale" policy should be changed 2004/05/05 22:23:54 (permalink)
For those who support the no transference of software, what about if you build up a business and the business purchases software and more software. The rights to use the software are granted to each user or seat. When an employee leaves the company under a user license, are you suggesting that the software goes with the employee and the company has to purchase another license? Are you also suggesting that if the owners of said company want to sell their company to someone else that the per seat or user licenses are of no value to a prospective buyer and that the buyer should have to purchase all new licenses for all employees because the ownership of the company has changed? When company A buys company B and company B has 20,000 employees, are you saying that company A has to purchase 20,000 new licenses for each piece of software on a user's desktop? The fact is that under some circumstances, software licenses do have value and are can be transferred all of the time. I would like to see the outcome of the lawsuit when a software company tried to sue Company A for violating its clause of transference of licenses.

I think that its reasonable to ask that software companies allow license transference and I think that it is reasonable for them to charge an associated administrative fee to do so. Under this proposal, licenses for prior versions could not be transfered for software that has been purchased under an "upgrade". The original owner could only transfer their topmost upgraded version and all other versions would not be authorized to be used by either party.

Without the organization of single users or legislation, it is doubtful that software companies catering to individuals will ever change their licensing agreements. Most agreements require a legal team to properly decipher and single users generally do not read them. Large organizations have their own legal teams to examine these agreements before they agree to them and can more powerfully invoke change with their wallets regarding them. If you want these agreements changed, start a communications movement or lobby your congressperson for legislation to protects single users and small businesses.
#41
ghijkmnop
Max Output Level: -40.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 3456
  • Joined: 2003/11/06 12:28:28
  • Location: Augusta, ME US
  • Status: offline
RE: Cakewalk "no resale" policy should be changed 2004/05/05 23:28:34 (permalink)
The rights to use the software are granted to each user or seat. When an employee leaves the company under a user license, are you suggesting that the software goes with the employee and the company has to purchase another license? Are you also suggesting that if the owners of said company want to sell their company to someone else that the per seat or user licenses are of no value to a prospective buyer and that the buyer should have to purchase all new licenses for all employees because the ownership of the company has changed? When company A buys company B and company B has 20,000 employees, are you saying that company A has to purchase 20,000 new licenses for each piece of software on a user's desktop? The fact is that under some circumstances, software licenses do have value and are can be transferred all of the time. I would like to see the outcome of the lawsuit when a software company tried to sue Company A for violating its clause of transference of licenses.

Most business-based licenses are workstation-based, not per employee. Also, volume licensing is usually backward compatible from the latest version-- for example, if you want to license MS Office for 50 workstations, you would buy Office 2003 licenses, even if all you have is 2K. You are free to upgrade to whatever version you have licensing for as soon as you have media.

Also, volume licenses are dealt with by the legal staff as part of transfer of ownership or merger of corporations.

However, when retiring/recycling assets, corporations wipe the drives of computers, thus retaining the licenses for the replacement workstation.

Clear as mud, I guess.

Come to the Other Place

#42
Augster
Max Output Level: -89 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 61
  • Joined: 2004/01/27 18:34:22
  • Status: offline
RE: Cakewalk "no resale" policy should be changed 2004/05/06 00:40:38 (permalink)
I agree with Dickie, as much as that goes against the grain. What the original poster was stating was he wanted to be able to resell when he was getting rid of CW software altogether. With this in mind, I believe Dickie is right. Why wouldn't Cakewalk want someone using their software and possibly buying an upgrade, plug-ins, or t-shirts rather than someone who has to just throw all his CW software in the garbage? It is the SAME license. The original post was about a guy who was removing Sonar from his Studio and possibly going the hardware route. Cakewalk won't see another dime from his license that is sitting on a shelf or in a garbage can somewhere. But, if he's allowed to transfer that license, Cakewalk has the possibility of gaining some more cash from the new user.

What we are NOT talking about is a guy currently using Sonar3, and putting his Sonar2 up on Ebay, and BOTH of those are usable. Even so. If I bought Sonar 2 with one license. Then I bought Sonar 3 with another different license, how much am I really going to use Sonar 2? Nada. Why can't I sell Sonar 2 to someone with that license? Cakewalk isn't seeing any more money from my current license of Sonar 2. With someone else owning it, they just might. If it really bothers them, then they could just not offer "discount" upgrades nor support on transferred licenses. That way, it would be the EXACT same cost to them as my version of Sonar 2 sitting on a shelf, except that I received some cash to let the other guy use it. AND, they would have another USER of CW software that JUST MIGHT buy an upgrade or plug-in or t-shirt. The whole transfer process could be done via a webpage. Simple really.
#43
dave_music
Max Output Level: -80 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 547
  • Joined: 2004/04/11 00:55:02
  • Status: offline
RE: Cakewalk "no resale" policy should be changed 2004/05/06 03:47:05 (permalink)
This is a big topic about software industry, not just Cakewalk. If you like a product, just suport it and make the product better. As its market share increases, the price will automatically drop. For example, someday SONAR costs $100, and you have enjoyed using it for 5 years, do you still want to resell it.? Many serious software company requires customers to purchase support license every year if they want to use their products. Software is just different. Ony in this way can they survive. My $0.01. Thanks. -D
#44
Dickie
Max Output Level: -69 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 1071
  • Joined: 2003/11/06 06:46:33
  • Location: West Sussex, UK
  • Status: offline
RE: Cakewalk "no resale" policy should be changed 2004/05/06 04:31:13 (permalink)
I agree with Dickie, as much as that goes against the grain

What are you saying Is it bad to agree with me ??

Dickie
There are only 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and those who don't.
#45
C Hudson
Max Output Level: -71 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 990
  • Joined: 2003/11/04 10:02:51
  • Location: Canada
  • Status: offline
RE: Cakewalk "no resale" policy should be changed 2004/05/06 10:30:02 (permalink)
Why can't I sell Sonar 2 to someone with that license?


You are making the point perfectly.
You are only buying 1 licence. When you upgrade to S3, there is not a licence to use 3 and a seperate licence for 2. There is ONE licence for you to use Sonar X.x in what ever flavor you choose. The licence is to you, not the software.

Best

CH
#46
ttoz
Max Output Level: -82 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 417
  • Joined: 2003/11/13 23:57:58
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
  • Status: offline
RE: Cakewalk "no resale" policy should be changed 2004/05/07 11:20:49 (permalink)
Well, regardless of what anyone has said, I am looking at my personal situation. sonar 3 was a last ditched effort for me to find an alternative host to logic so i wouldn't have to move to mac permanently. (ihad tried it before and didn't get along well with the mac). I wasn't fond overall of Sonar 3, now for 4 months i have been mac again(hence my absence in these forums, i was alerted to this thread over at kvr), but this time have even sold my pc laptop and bought a mac one, as well as a desktop. now that i am comfortable with the mac 100% i can confidently say i will NEVER switch back. i am thrilled with logic 6, and thrilled with osx, and thrilled with the whole thing. i have sold about $2500 worth of pc software that I got approval for, and I only asked to sell stuff that there ws no mac version of.fair enough? cakewalk are the ONLY company that have said no to a license transfer. so now i'm stuck with a $1000 AUD waste and i can't even give it to anybody. the license agreement should have loopholes for extenuating circumstances like this.

of course cakewalk wont refund my money, not that they should, but they are being too closed minded about me transferring the license. I could get a couple fo hundred Us for it which would come in really handy since i have put myself in a bit of debt with the switch. but instead, this copy of sonar will forever remain unused and just a total waste of money. To say I'm pissed of is an understatement
#47
Phrauge
Max Output Level: -19.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 5562
  • Joined: 2003/11/06 11:38:29
  • Location: Texas
  • Status: offline
RE: Cakewalk "no resale" policy should be changed 2004/05/07 11:41:19 (permalink)
So Logic dump you, forcing you to look for pc alternatives. You didn't like Sonar and now have had to jump the pc ship. You switch to mac and choose to use Logic, again. And your complaint is with Cakewalk's policies?
#48
SteveJL
Max Output Level: -29 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 4644
  • Joined: 2004/01/23 05:26:38
  • Location: CANADA
  • Status: offline
RE: Cakewalk "no resale" policy should be changed 2004/05/07 11:50:40 (permalink)
Glad things have worked out for you.

The EUA with Cakewalk is still what it is, and you agreed to it in good faith when you clicked OK way back when, so it is binding, legally and morally.

Of course, not everyone will ever be completely satisfied, such is Life in the Big City...

Take Care ttoz, and Good Luck, and please don't release your Cakewalk software

Cakewalk: Please, NO CHANGES to the current Licensing strategy - too many of us are satisfied with the current sybiosis...


Steve

 
#49
noisemaker
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 19
  • Joined: 2003/11/10 19:42:08
  • Status: offline
RE: Cakewalk "no resale" policy should be changed 2004/05/07 12:23:19 (permalink)
I think Cakewalk is nuts not to allow license transfers. They can charge $50 like Steinberg does to cover their costs. If somebody buys a second hand license transfer, they may then buy future Cakewalk upgrades for years -- $$$. If they are not allowed to, they will buy a second-hand license transfer to Cubase and buy those years of upgrades from Steiny instead.

Plus there are plenty of suckers on eBay willing to spend decent money for unlicensable, second-hand software so it's not like this is preventing the sale most of the time anyway.

nm
#50
ttoz
Max Output Level: -82 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 417
  • Joined: 2003/11/13 23:57:58
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
  • Status: offline
RE: Cakewalk "no resale" policy should be changed 2004/05/07 12:54:15 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: Phrauge

So Logic dump you, forcing you to look for pc alternatives. You didn't like Sonar and now have had to jump the pc ship. You switch to mac and choose to use Logic, again. And your complaint is with Cakewalk's policies?


if sonar wasn't such an incredibly unreliable buggy piece of software, then i might have not jumped ship

nothing changes the fact that there's a wasted copy of it sitting there. i don't have any idea that the USERS that are opposed to license transfer, WHY??
#51
SteveJL
Max Output Level: -29 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 4644
  • Joined: 2004/01/23 05:26:38
  • Location: CANADA
  • Status: offline
RE: Cakewalk "no resale" policy should be changed 2004/05/07 14:52:50 (permalink)
A Deal is a Deal, and are we not People of Honor?

 
#52
ttoz
Max Output Level: -82 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 417
  • Joined: 2003/11/13 23:57:58
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
  • Status: offline
RE: Cakewalk "no resale" policy should be changed 2004/05/07 18:48:42 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: SteveJL

A Deal is a Deal, and are we not People of Honor?


oh comeon, who reads the fine print, really. i had no idea. i just presumed cause everyone else allowed me to do license transfers. so does it maybe count that if i knew this for sure i wouldn't have registered to download the 3.11 update? if i hadn't registered i WOULD be able to sell it. anyway, whatever, cakewlk are stubborn about it, it's not going to change, but it's prompted me to invetigate further and see if that licensing agreement means anything in this country.
#53
Akshara
Max Output Level: -68 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 1139
  • Joined: 2003/12/05 18:16:12
  • Location: Colorado, US
  • Status: offline
RE: Cakewalk "no resale" policy should be changed 2004/05/08 01:08:33 (permalink)
but it's prompted me to invetigate further and see if that licensing agreement means anything in this country.

That's cool. But remember that Cakewalk isn't going to recognize another person's registration with that serial number, regardless of what legal loophole you find over there. As long as you bundle a copy of all updates and patches along with it, and are upfront and honest with the buyer that they will never be able to register the product nor get official support, then you can do whatever you want man. But then again, instant karma might get ya...
#54
ttoz
Max Output Level: -82 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 417
  • Joined: 2003/11/13 23:57:58
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
  • Status: offline
RE: Cakewalk "no resale" policy should be changed 2004/05/08 08:20:04 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: Akshara

but it's prompted me to invetigate further and see if that licensing agreement means anything in this country.

That's cool. But remember that Cakewalk isn't going to recognize another person's registration with that serial number, regardless of what legal loophole you find over there. As long as you bundle a copy of all updates and patches along with it, and are upfront and honest with the buyer that they will never be able to register the product nor get official support, then you can do whatever you want man. But then again, instant karma might get ya...


no i've already been told by cakewalk i CAN sell it but the buyer wont be able to get future upgrades to sonar 4 for example 9unless i order it for him lol)..but seriously, i wanted to do it in a way where the license could get completely transferred. and talk about karma? what about the hundreds of hours of pulling my hair out with sonar and all the problems I've had. I should send cakewalk a bill for MY time. i charge 100$ per hour. and what honour do THEY have? if someone hates the product so much as I do and they are such a huge company then they should just refund me my money. no skin off their back.
#55
SteveD
Max Output Level: -47 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 2831
  • Joined: 2003/11/07 13:35:57
  • Location: NJ
  • Status: offline
RE: Cakewalk "no resale" policy should be changed 2004/05/08 12:13:50 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: ttoz
... if someone hates the product so much as I do and they are such a huge company then they should just refund me my money. no skin off their back.

I gotta say I agree here. That's just good business practice... as long as it's a product that's returnable without being copied or pirated. However, Cakewalk's software could be copied before it's returned (that is if the bad karma doesn't concern you ). Hence your point in this thread I guess. Maybe license transfers for a fee is the solution.

What kind of problems have you had? Hundreds of hours? Really? There are more and more converts to Sonar from other applications every day telling stories of how much more buggy the previous app was, and how awful the customer support was. Some of them are Logic users, as you well know, who are disgruntled about being dropped and forgotten, or forced to change platforms by Emagic.

Hey, I've got just a few Sonar gripes myself:

1. Occassional disappearing or sluggish meter activity
2. Looping issue with UAD-1 cards
3. No audio metronome, but I'm fine with Ping DXI

Definitely not show stoppers.

It's SOFTWARE. There will always be small issues with each release of software. Sonar XL 2.2 doesn't have these bugs, except for the metronome, but that's not a bug. The point is that the benefits from 3.1.1 FAR outweigh staying with the final release of the previous version. I'm confident Cakewalk will continue to correct and perfect Sonar, and that it will continue to gain recognition and market share in the industry.

The combination of Cakewalk's responsive techincal support and this forum, which BTW is provided by Cakewalk, is second to none in the industry. And I don't know what it is about Cakewalk users, but I have to say that this is the most civil, respectful, and helpful user groups there is... I visit them all. Take a bow everyone.

Well, it sounds like you're all set now with Logic on a MAC... and that's good. It sounds like you will get some return on your Sonar investment and that's been the basis for this discussion. It's certainly a debatable issue. Thanks for this thought provoking topic.
< Message edited by SteveD -- 5/8/2004 1:18:21 PM >

SteveD
DAWPRO Drum Tracks

... addicted to gear
#56
RickH
Max Output Level: -89 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 75
  • Joined: 2004/03/23 08:36:16
  • Status: offline
RE: Cakewalk "no resale" policy should be changed 2004/05/08 13:03:37 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: ttoz

if sonar wasn't such an incredibly unreliable buggy piece of software, then i might have not jumped ship


Did it take you longer than 30 days to come to that conclusion? Downloadable demos are good for 30 days. You needn't have spent a penny before coming to that conclusion.

A lot of us, however, find the software quite reliable.

R.
==
#57
billruys
Max Output Level: -73 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 852
  • Joined: 2003/11/05 00:18:31
  • Location: Outer Space
  • Status: offline
RE: Start using a dongle! 2004/05/08 20:45:44 (permalink)
I'm not saying I want copy protection. But if we had to have it, a dongle would be my preference out of all the models of copy protection out there.
#58
SteveD
Max Output Level: -47 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 2831
  • Joined: 2003/11/07 13:35:57
  • Location: NJ
  • Status: offline
RE: Start using a dongle! 2004/05/08 21:07:31 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: billruys

I'm not saying I want copy protection. But if we had to have it, a dongle would be my preference out of all the models of copy protection out there.

Okay... fair enough. I have Nuendo 1.6.2 and it uses a parallel port dongle which you can cable through. Since I'm not disabling my parallel port, I guess it's presence doesn't bother me or my DAW. If Sonar required a parallel port dongle as well, would they both work?

Can you answer my questions from my earlier post regarding USB dongles?

ORIGINAL: SteveD

Do these USB dongle thingies have the ability to cable through them, or do you loose an available USB port altogether? I don't know if having a dongle hangin' off a USB port uses more PCI bandwidth than an unused USB port or not. My hunch is that it does. Fewer is better when it comes to devices on a DAW. Suppose you'd like to disable that USB port to free up a dedicated IRQ for a sound card or powered DSP? "Sorry... I need that IRQ for my dongle!?"

I still prefer to be dongle-less. I would still be more in favor of Cakewalk charging a fee to cover the cost of processing license transfers.
< Message edited by SteveD -- 5/8/2004 9:08:58 PM >

SteveD
DAWPRO Drum Tracks

... addicted to gear
#59
C Hudson
Max Output Level: -71 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 990
  • Joined: 2003/11/04 10:02:51
  • Location: Canada
  • Status: offline
RE: Cakewalk "no resale" policy should be changed 2004/05/08 23:38:11 (permalink)
ORIGINAL: ttoz

ORIGINAL: Phrauge

So Logic dump you, forcing you to look for pc alternatives. You didn't like Sonar and now have had to jump the pc ship. You switch to mac and choose to use Logic, again. And your complaint is with Cakewalk's policies?


if sonar wasn't such an incredibly unreliable buggy piece of software, then i might have not jumped ship





He he

I run S3.1.1 10-14 hrs a day every day and it never crashes. Perhaps the problem is not the software...

Best

CH
#60
Page: < 123 > Showing page 2 of 3
Jump to:
© 2024 APG vNext Commercial Version 5.1