iLok Pace

What the consensus nowadays?
Many were anti it a while back, and I've seen posts in the pst with iLok woes after updates. I once installed something with it, and though Ican't remember, something didn't feel right and I uninstalled immediately.
 
I just went to Demo a free VST and iLok PACE jumped up during the install, so I aborted. Not sure why a free program needs and iLok accound and was expecting that to apply to it's ad ons.
 
Is it now more accepted than before? Can you unistall it and clear it from your system 100%? (I believe you couldn't in the past).
 
 

>What the consensus nowadays?
>Is it now more accepted than before?
That's like asking which political party is better. Strong opinions abound.
Some people hate'm, some people love'm, a lot of people use it regardless.
 
>Can you uninstall it and clear it from your system 100%? (I believe you couldn't in the past).
100% - don't know.  A lot of stuff leaves pieces behind when uninstalled - ini files, registry settings, sometimes drivers. a better question is whether or not if you have an issue whether uninstalling will remove the problem.
Years back it didn't. I had a problem on my XP machine, when XP was still fairly new and shiney, where I had an issue with Pace and it was a major pain to clean up things afterwards and fix the issues it caused.

Nowadays they don't have to hide things the way they use to because Pace uses the Internet to track your activations.  Your iLok account (using the iLok License Manager) keeps track of your activations and where you activate it to (i.e. the iLok dongle or to your hard drive).
 
So if you install something to your HD and don't want it to count against your installation count when you remove it then you will need to uninstall it using iLok License Manager 1st before you uninstall the software.  Otherwise you have to go to the vendor and request that they free up an activation.  Eventide is pretty good about this - I lost activations to 2 different plugins when my hard disk went down and they promptly restored them; but according to Pace it's up to the vendor as to how they respond.
 
 

>I just went to Demo a free VST and iLok PACE jumped up during the install, so I aborted. Not sure why a free program needs and iLok account
 
Because PACE lets the plugin creator/vendor
* create a demo version and time limit it without throwing a lot of extra code into the plugin.
* extend the demo time period or reactivate the demo if they wish
* prevent you the evil dishonest end user from uninstalling the plugin and then reinstalling it to get the plugin to run in demo mode again for another 30 days (or what ever the demo period is set for).
 
So for the plugin creator lots of good reasons to use Pace/iLok for their demos.

TheSteven
Of course YMMV but I haven't had a Pace issue in years (over 5 maybe 10?) and never with Win7 or Win10.
In regards to iLok - I use to be a hater but my perspective changed after a run of hardware issues a couple of years ago where I had to reinstall Windows 7 4 or more times within 6 months.  My iLok plugins were no issue easy peasy but with the others I had to pray that I could get the old system up one more time to run an uninstall on something I missed the previous 'final run', look up serials numbers, do challenge & response, contact vendors explaining why I needed yet another unlock, etc. I literally would have saved days of time if ALL my plugins were iLok.

+1
Same experience here (had been also a hater)! The only products that are as easy to handle as iLok plugins are free plugins or those ones with an autorisation text file.

Last time I installed a new DAW - to replace my stolen computer - I had to re-authorize a lot of stuff. As I was going through that I was thinking that iLok might have simplified the process.
 
However, it then occurred to me that the thieves would have also taken my iLok dongle, along with my backup drive. I would have had to not only re-authorize everything but also buy a new dongle.
 
As a software engineer, I am philosophically opposed to any scheme that breaks software by default, allowing it to work only after a very specific set of criteria are met. Such a design is doomed to be fundamentally unreliable, as Pace's colorful history has proven. 

bitflipper
As a software engineer, I am philosophically opposed to any scheme that breaks software by default, allowing it to work only after a very specific set of criteria are met. Such a design is doomed to be fundamentally unreliable, as Pace's colorful history has proven. 

Also software engineer here and I totally agree to your first sentence!
But if I compare iLok with all kind of online autorisations and cloud solutions, then I am convinced that iLok is ahead! They are much more unreliable, because they have even more triping hazards.
 
Marc

Thanks for the input. It's the per machine iLok that affects me My laptops don't have the spare USB ports, and I don't see the point in a hub when I can do the per machine option.
 
I guess this is really no different than my XLN installer/waves/NI intallers checking for authorisation, except that's all it does

TheSteven
Of course YMMV but I haven't had a Pace issue in years (over 5 maybe 10?) and never with Win7 or Win10.
In regards to iLok - I use to be a hater but my perspective changed after a run of hardware issues a couple of years ago where I had to reinstall Windows 7 4 or more times within 6 months.  My iLok plugins were no issue easy peasy but with the others I had to pray that I could get the old system up one more time to run an uninstall on something I missed the previous 'final run', look up serials numbers, do challenge & response, contact vendors explaining why I needed yet another unlock, etc. I literally would have saved days of time if ALL my plugins were iLok.

This is my experience too. I much prefer physical iLok plugins nowadays. Maybe one downside is the companies have to pay to be on the ilok system so the cost of their vsts might go up a bit.


ilok 1 got hacked and at one point so did ilok2 if I recall correctly. I think the negative connotations about ilok come from a small number of gearslutz malcontents who for whatever reason are quite zealous about their disdain for PACE. But reading through the boards there and here you can see probably 19/20 have only had good ilok experience.
 
One thing I do hate: there are three different dongle brands-- you've got iLok, overloud, waves hofa et al use a usb stick system, and codemeter make a dongle that MAAT and propellerheads use! Annoying :)

marled

bitflipper
As a software engineer, I am philosophically opposed to any scheme that breaks software by default, allowing it to work only after a very specific set of criteria are met. Such a design is doomed to be fundamentally unreliable, as Pace's colorful history has proven. 

Also software engineer here and I totally agree to your first sentence!
But if I compare iLok with all kind of online autorisations and cloud solutions, then I am convinced that iLok is ahead! They are much more unreliable, because they have even more triping hazards.
 
Marc

Yet another software engineer here... and I tend to agree with Marc here. 
 
I've never had any reliability problems with iLok. Doing a system re-install is a breeze for my iLok enabled plugins, none of this searching around for serial numbers, or fighting with online authorisation. You also avoid the nonsense of having to re-authorise after doing a Windows update, or changing your hardware configuration. 
 
I've only two complaints about the iLok:
 
1. The iLok dongle is too big for constant use with a laptop. This limits me to plugins that don't require a hardware iLok, or have cloud support. My 2 desktop PC's are unaffected by this.
 
2. The number of authorisations available. Some vendors allow 3, most allow 2, and some only 1 (McDSP / Antares !!!). I really object to having to buy something twice (or 3 times in the case of McDSP) when everything is already locked to the same user account. I'm assuming developers have to pay PACE for the various options (i.e. hardware iLok required or not, number of authorisations, cloud support etc), but limiting licenses to 1 machine per purchase is pretty bad, considering the price of the plugins.
 
In saying that, the Waves authorisation is just as good/bad for the same reasons. Waves has one advantage at least, in that you can at least unauthorise without that PC being switched on.
 

I that the dongle or the per machine PACE Zargg?

You can move the dongle to any machine you want. Since the dongle must be present, you can install the plugins on as many different machines as you want, and just move the dongle.
 
That said...
 
If the dongle doesn't work reliably (like it doesn't on my early 2012 Dell XPS 8500), you're SOL. No help. No fixes. Nada.
 
My first plugin purchases were Slate's. Dongle only. NEVER worked reliably. Not on Win10. Not even on the Win7 my Dell shipped with. I had real difficulty even getting the licenses off of it and back into the Waves cloud. Jeez, I hate Slate.
 
However, the PACE software (authorize to PC) works great for me. If a plugin requires the dongle, I pass.
 
FWIW, I go ALL the way back with PACE. I had two different PC-DOS apps that had dedicated Centronics (printer) port dongles. Bigger than a Zippo lighter. Each wanted to be first in line. I was always unplugging my printer and swapping dongles.
 
Even though the PACE software licensing works for me, I still hate them.

 You have to have the iLok dongle plugged when using the related plugins and that includes when you run Cakewalk's VST scanner.
 

I think the problem is basically that there are so many different autorisation systems and if you use a laptop with limited USB ports (e.g. 3), then you exceed very easily the possibilities (mouse, audio interface, iLok, USB stick, ...). Cloud or another autorisation based on permanent online connection is also not a good solution for all (some living rurally do not have reliable internet connections and some do not like the risk to be always online).
So somehow I feel sentimental about the good old days when you purchased a software with an offline key and had no such troubles  (by the way that was not the only thing that was better then ).
 
Marc

tlw

The development of the USB system over the last few years has thrown up instances of hardware that would work with a USB 2 port but not USB 3 and now there are issues with some hardware and USB C ports. Which also use a different socket so at the minimum a convertor cable is required.

My latest small work laptop has 3 USBs including a Type C. Was wuite tricky here getting 3 ports on  small laptop, nd somany times in class I'm using all three, with a Type C to a Type A (female) converter. I had to go from shop to shop toget that converter. Lots of Type C to a Type A (male), which Idon't have anything with a female Type A apart from laptops themselves.
 
For music I have my soundcard on one, and NanoPadon another (trigger finger before, but maybe Launchpad Pro next), so these both draw power. Having just a mouse on the third seems to make sence, anythng else would required a self powered hub I guess.