OT: Subscription strikes again

1246

Comments

  • @MonzoPro said:

    @brambos said:

    @Zen210507 said:

    @MonzoPro said:
    Compared to £50 per month for Adobe, it's a no-brainier for those of us on a tight budget.

    And those who just object to big business squeezing blood from stones. ;)

    I'm a big fan of Affinity Photo and Designer but let's give credit where it's due. Neither would exist without Adobe pumping years of R&D into their products. Affinity effectively only copied Adobe's products without innovating or improving much. In that sense they're not that different from those Chinese goods on Alibaba.

    Harsh, and inaccurate.

    Photoshop benefitted from Quantel Paintbox development, Illustrator from advances with Freehand, and technology advances provided by Microsoft and Apple blah blah.

    Not so sure about that. Photoshop has essentially been a one man army since version 2.0 . There are some differences between Photoshop and Affinity, but they are quite superficial.

    The entire fundamental paradigm with layer manipulations, folders, layer-based effects and adjustment layers, masking, actions, etc. are 100% identical. There's a reason it's so easy to make the jump from Photoshop to Serif.

    That said; I'm a happy user of Serif's applications. But I only made the jump because they offered a feature set and workflow that was virtually identical to what I was used to.

  • @brambos said:

    @MonzoPro said:

    @brambos said:

    @Zen210507 said:

    @MonzoPro said:
    Compared to £50 per month for Adobe, it's a no-brainier for those of us on a tight budget.

    And those who just object to big business squeezing blood from stones. ;)

    I'm a big fan of Affinity Photo and Designer but let's give credit where it's due. Neither would exist without Adobe pumping years of R&D into their products. Affinity effectively only copied Adobe's products without innovating or improving much. In that sense they're not that different from those Chinese goods on Alibaba.

    Harsh, and inaccurate.

    Photoshop benefitted from Quantel Paintbox development, Illustrator from advances with Freehand, and technology advances provided by Microsoft and Apple blah blah.

    Not so sure about that. Photoshop has essentially been a one man army since version 2.0 . There are some differences between Photoshop and Affinity, but they are quite superficial.

    The entire fundamental paradigm with layer manipulations, folders, layer-based effects and adjustment layers, masking, actions, etc. are 100% identical.

    Photoshop wasn't the first image editing software to use layers.

    Don't want to get into a big argument, just pointing out even Photoshop has borrowed elements and functionality from existing vendors, and Illustrator very definitely has, so I don't think it's fair to single out Affinity for criticism.

    After all, if anything underhand was going on, they'd find themselves in a courtroom quicker than you can say 'intellectual property rights'.

  • What bemuses me is that the rest of the world is going PAYG, while the software industry is just twigging on to season tickets.

  • @skiphunt said:

    @jwmmakerofmusic said:

    @rickwaugh said:
    In the big world, it's becoming the norm. Most of the software we use in our development shop, such as Unity, Maya, Adobe Creative Suite, MS Office, all subscription now.

    But this is the major problem mate. The first argument I propose here is that not all of us have our own development shop/aren't as rich as Max Martin. A majority of people here are either hobbyists or are professionals still trying to reach a good level of success. In other words, unless you own a development shop/company/are Max Martin, there is no benefit to the end user on a tight budget, just the developer(s) and those with enough money to afford multiple subscriptions at once.

    The second argument I propose is "where's the new content". I could see how something like a DAW would benefit from a subscription model given they keep it up to date/add more internal effects plugins/free sample content (instead of having samples as separate IAPs). However, having a word processor on a subscription payment is ridiculous. Having an EQ on a subscription payment plan is ridiculous. These two examples are one-trick ponies with no space for new content/features. I liken it to subscribing to a magazine which only prints the same five articles over and over. It's rather silly.

    Besides, I can use something as simple as Wordpad on my PC to write words, a simple pen and paper, or even an art app like ProCreate with Apple Pencil and a jpeg of notebook paper lines on the bottom layer. I can use zMors EQ and DDMF's 6144 instead of a certain albatross. ;)

    The third argument I propose is, subscriptions for services like Spotify, Splice, Dropbox, etc are worth it if you can afford it. This assumes you aren't strapped for cash like in argument number one. Spotify Premium is $9.99/month, which is less than the cost of an album. I spent more than that monthly on music albums before I switched to that. Splice has multiple pricing options, and you can always put the monthly payment schedule on hold for a month or two in case you can't pay the monthly charge for a given month. Not bad. Dropbox has a LOT of storage space, and since you're using it to store your junk on there, a monthly subscription fee is very much justifiable. It's the virtual version of storage units. (Side note: I really wish those idiots at Dropbox would add some higher storage tiers for singular users instead of hiding the good stuff behind Dropbox Business, which requires four other chaps to sign up with you, i.e. a development shop. ;) )

    The fourth argument I shall put forth is, what happens if you can't afford the subscription price for an app for a particular month because, say, your shitty car broke down and needed a new alternator, and you already subscribed to Dropbox and Splice and other services and just can't fit anything else in? Would you then be expected to go without the use of a DAW or have broken projects due to AU apps being subscription-based, all because you couldn't pay the piper?

    The fifth argument I put forth is, if I was to pay a subscription for any one-trick pony apps, they'd have to be in a bundle. For instance, I may not be able to afford it right now (because eventually I'll need a new Windows PC that can handle a heavy load), but EastWest Composer's Cloud is a great way to access a load of great instruments I wouldn't be able to afford otherwise. If Waves would offer their Mercury bundle under a $29.99/month subscription, that too would be worth it. Both things have the ability for new content to be added, and both have extremely unobtainable-as-f3ck one-time fee prices. Things like these, when bundled, are what I'd consider justifiable subscriptions.

    Lastly, if an app started out as subscription based, there's only the threat of that kind of pricing scheme becoming a trend amongst new apps. If an app went from a single fee into a subscription base, well look at how pissed off half of Ulysses' customer base became, their singular blog post sparking so much hatred that the amount of net traffic from negative comments pouring in literally shut down their servers. Sure you can justify that "developers need a sustainable income", but unless you're J.K. Rowling or Stephen King, there's no way to justify paying a subscription for a word processor. :D Just no way, no how.

    Summary: Subscriptions are good when they are for services, bundles, and possibly for apps with the possibility of new content. Subscriptions are bullshit for one-trick-pony apps such as EQs, such as word processors, such as art apps. The solution for the latter apps? CHARGE MORE MONEY!!!!! We users are smart enough to know these tools we need aren't stupid games like Candy Crud, Witch Booger Saga, and Angry Turds. ;) So, CHARGE MORE MONEY! You can still charge cheaper prices for the iOS versions of PC apps so iOS musicians feel like they're getting a bargain, but charging a simple $2.99 for an app that by rights should be at least $4.99 if not $9.99 is close to being robbed of a sustainable income. These are my opinions at any rate. ;) Cheers.

    Tell that to the excellent KRFT devs who tried to charge $10 for an app that's easily worth $20, and people here balked and had hissy fits. They stopped buying and they had to drop down to $4.99.

    They can raise prices all they want, but if the market's volume of users is unwilling to cough more dough, guess what? They have NO sales.

    And it really is pointless getting angry. It's a free market. Either people want it, and will pay the price, or not. And there is way too much music making software, and not enough people who want it, to make the low prices we pay worth the effort for most of them. Apple's mobile model is not conducive to expensive, complicated software, because it's too damned expensive to make it; it's predicated on huge sales. You either need a big company behind you, like ik multimedia, with deep pockets, or you're Rim Buntinas, doing it all yourself. God knows how he does it.

  • edited August 2017

    Happily, I was eventually able to grab my pre-subscription version. However, my initial complaint to Apple, asking about a refund if download was not possible, provoked this rather unsatisfactory reply.


    **_"I checked your account and it appears that the the app "Ulysses - The Ultimate Writing App" has been modified or removed from the store since you purchased it. The application moved from an initial paid download to a subscription-based model. This is the reason you are unable to redownload it.

    When an item is modified in the iTunes Store, or removed entirely, we no longer have access to the original one that you ordered.

    Apps can be removed from the App Store by Apple or the developer for many reasons. You can check with the developer to get more information as well as how they will assist you through this transition:

    https://www.ulyssesapp.com/help/

    Note: Although we mentioned third-party products in this email, Apple doesn’t recommend or endorse these products.'_**


    So, it would appear that in cases like this, if a developer withdraws an earlier version, Apple don't have access to it any more, and feel no responsibility.

    As no mention was made concerning a refund in the event of the version remaining unavailable, I take it that if something paid for is removed from the App Store by the developer, then punters can whistle for their money. Nice, eh?

  • @rickwaugh said:
    You either need a big company behind you, like ik multimedia, with deep pockets, or you're Rim Buntinas, doing it all yourself. God knows how he does it.

    A titan, among pygmies, towering over the IOS world. We should all contribute a fistful of tenners to assist him in his noble endeavours....oh, wait a minute, everyone who buys Auria Pro does that already. ;)

  • I generally prefer small teams and even one man shows as developers.
    Of course it depends on individual talent, but according to my experience they usually deliver more focussed and more consistent results than the big ones.
    Audiobus should have been done by Apple, but it was Michael who opened the door ;)
    (numerous examples snipped)

  • edited August 2017

    @Zen210507 said:
    Happily, I was eventually able to grab my pre-subscription version. However, my initial complaint to Apple, asking about a refund if download was not possible, provoked this rather unsatisfactory reply.


    **_"I checked your account and it appears that the the app "Ulysses - The Ultimate Writing App" has been modified or removed from the store since you purchased it. The application moved from an initial paid download to a subscription-based model. This is the reason you are unable to redownload it.

    When an item is modified in the iTunes Store, or removed entirely, we no longer have access to the original one that you ordered.

    Apps can be removed from the App Store by Apple or the developer for many reasons. You can check with the developer to get more information as well as how they will assist you through this transition:

    https://www.ulyssesapp.com/help/

    Note: Although we mentioned third-party products in this email, Apple doesn’t recommend or endorse these products.'_**


    So, it would appear that in cases like this, if a developer withdraws an earlier version, Apple don't have access to it any more, and feel no responsibility.

    As no mention was made concerning a refund in the event of the version remaining unavailable, I take it that if something paid for is removed from the App Store by the developer, then punters can whistle for their money. Nice, eh?

    Bit disturbing when you consider most of us on here have hundreds of pounds worth of cash invested in apps. If subscription became a thing, and we didn't want to shell out for them all over again, we wouldn't be able to upgrade our hardware without losing access to them.

    Let's hope it doesn't catch on.

  • @MonzoPro said:
    Bit disturbing when you consider most of us on here have hundreds of pounds worth of cash invested in apps. If subscription became a thing, and we didn't want to shell out for them all over again, we wouldn't be able to upgrade our hardware without losing access to them.

    Let's hope it doesn't catch on.

    Yes. If I'm reading it right, Apple have a way they believe is legitimate that allows for any amount of money to be spent on apps, which can then be rendered unavailable by developers and no one is accountable. Retrieval is at the whim of a developer chosing to let a previous customer have access to what they bought.

    So Apple and developers could, under sych circumstances, collude so that they both get paid, but the customer has no means or right of access to their previous purchases. Is this even legal?

    I suppose even if it does contravene British law, nobody can afford to take Apple to court.

  • That cannot be legal.
    And if I run into this, I will try to get Apple to court.
    Not the first time, Apples tries to do things in Europe and gets bashed - rightfully.

  • edited August 2017

    @Zen210507 said:

    @MonzoPro said:
    Bit disturbing when you consider most of us on here have hundreds of pounds worth of cash invested in apps. If subscription became a thing, and we didn't want to shell out for them all over again, we wouldn't be able to upgrade our hardware without losing access to them.

    Let's hope it doesn't catch on.

    Yes. If I'm reading it right, Apple have a way they believe is legitimate that allows for any amount of money to be spent on apps, which can then be rendered unavailable by developers and no one is accountable. Retrieval is at the whim of a developer chosing to let a previous customer have access to what they bought.

    So Apple and developers could, under sych circumstances, collude so that they both get paid, but the customer has no means or right of access to their previous purchases. Is this even legal?

    I suppose even if it does contravene British law, nobody can afford to take Apple to court.

    It's the old 'multi-vendor marketplace' cop out again. I've had a few issues with web theme/plugin market places in the past when 'authors' have pulled their products or left them broken, usually so they can sell new ones. 'Nothing to do with us, contact the developers directly' say the people who took my money, taking commission on the sales but offering no customer support.

    I looked into this when a client wanted to do something similar, and it turns out in the UK the marketplace owner is liable, as they're stocking a product like any other. Customers shouldn't have to liaise directly with a supplier, issues should be dealt with by the store. If I buy a dodgy tin of beans from Tescos they don't shake their heads and tell me to ring Heinz.

    Saying all that I'm sure there's a get-out clause for digital stuff, there usually is.

    Shouldn't be this way though - the company that takes payment from the customer should be the ones liable for any issues. If devs took payment, and then payed Apple 'rent' or commission after they'd been paid, it'd be different.

  • @MonzoPro said:
    Saying all that I'm sure there's a get-out clause for digital stuff, there usually is.

    The best one of all being 'we are a multi billion dollar corporation, which even governments have failed to best. What chance have you got?'

  • @Zen210507 said:

    @MonzoPro said:
    Saying all that I'm sure there's a get-out clause for digital stuff, there usually is.

    The best one of all being 'we are a multi billion dollar corporation, which even governments have failed to best. What chance have you got?'

    If it gets worse, coupled with software and hardware prices rising, customers will lose confidence in the platform and stop buying. I already have, and recently re-invested in desktop software. I haven't abandoned it completely - still some amazing apps coming out - but the love affair is definitely going through a rocky patch.

  • edited August 2017

    I'm shure it's covered by the store conditions (to which you have agreed at some point in time) that they don't have to provide eternal access to all apps ever purchased.
    Digital products are known to be volatile by nature and it's up the customer to care for backups, not the seller.
    I have a lot of expensive desktop apps that aren't supported anymore...
    (hoping my old iPad images together with an outdated PC version of iTunes will work in case one of them needs to be restored - but I wouldn't hold my breath on it either)

  • @Telefunky said:
    I'm shure it's covered by the store conditions (to which you have agreed at some point in time) that they don't have to provide eternal access to all apps ever purchased.

    What they legally have to do, and what makes good business sense are two different things.

    The App Store alone is a billion dollar business, and yet like any other commercial concern, if customers begin to lose faith, then those profits will decrease. Ultimately, if the public perception is that Apple cannot be trusted, then the whole platform begins to wobble.

    So it is very much in everyone's interest to keep the customer satisfied.

  • @Zen210507 said:

    @Telefunky said:
    I'm shure it's covered by the store conditions (to which you have agreed at some point in time) that they don't have to provide eternal access to all apps ever purchased.

    What they legally have to do, and what makes good business sense are two different things.

    The App Store alone is a billion dollar business, and yet like any other commercial concern, if customers begin to lose faith, then those profits will decrease. Ultimately, if the public perception is that Apple cannot be trusted, then the whole platform begins to wobble.

    So it is very much in everyone's interest to keep the customer satisfied.

    While everything you've said is correct, I think there is a point of diminishing returns in terms of how much a seller is willing to do to keep customers satisfied which can be very different from the buyer's perspective. Sellers and buyers can vary widely in their expectations and practices.

    I think buyer beware or be aware is always something to keep in mind as we can't count on sellers to look out for our interests. It is much easier to buy products from sellers who do understand and support our needs versus those who don't.

  • @InfoCheck said:
    It is much easier to buy products from sellers who do understand and support our needs versus those who don't.

    Agreed. Many times I've bought an app I don't really need, because the developer has, in the past, produced something I do use. Just doing my bit. :)

  • In many ways, I'm losing interest in buying apps, mainly because of the App Store. I think what it really is is that I've lost interest in the App Store. I can see the point in the way that Korg sells their macOS products not through the App Store and I think overall I'd come to prefer that, if I were to buy a Korg macOS app, like Gadget.

  • @InfoCheck said:

    @Zen210507 said:

    @Telefunky said:
    I'm shure it's covered by the store conditions (to which you have agreed at some point in time) that they don't have to provide eternal access to all apps ever purchased.

    What they legally have to do, and what makes good business sense are two different things.

    The App Store alone is a billion dollar business, and yet like any other commercial concern, if customers begin to lose faith, then those profits will decrease. Ultimately, if the public perception is that Apple cannot be trusted, then the whole platform begins to wobble.

    So it is very much in everyone's interest to keep the customer satisfied.

    While everything you've said is correct, I think there is a point of diminishing returns in terms of how much a seller is willing to do to keep customers satisfied which can be very different from the buyer's perspective. Sellers and buyers can vary widely in their expectations and practices.

    I think buyer beware or be aware is always something to keep in mind as we can't count on sellers to look out for our interests. It is much easier to buy products from sellers who do understand and support our needs versus those who don't.

    It wouldn't make the slightest dent in Apple's profits, to keep a server or two as a repository for old apps. They can have disclaimers that they're no longer supported and only available for existing purchasers to download.

    The fact stuff like this doesn't happen, shows a complete disregard for customers.

  • Well, not to derail the conversation too much, but I stumbled upon an app called Magic Poser about 5-6 days ago when looking for an artist's reference tool. Anyways, I didn't know if the $4.99 for the pro version was a subscription or not. I decided to peek at their Facebook, and I found this (and replied).

    https://www.facebook.com/magicposerapp/posts/339000676530202

    In other words, they used to be subscription based, and they decided not to use that pricing model anymore. :open_mouth: And, as I said on FB, I purchased the Pro version even though I really didn't need it just to support the devs who decided subscription was no good. ;)

  • @MonzoPro said:
    It wouldn't make the slightest dent in Apple's profits, to keep a server or two as a repository for old apps. They can have disclaimers that they're no longer supported and only available for existing purchasers to download.

    The fact stuff like this doesn't happen, shows a complete disregard for customers.

    Indeed. Our purpose is to funnel cash into the great machine. Nothing else. As my recent experience with hardware shows only too well.

    I am having to return this very iPad, as it periodically turns itself off, requiring a hard reset. So, I asked Apple for a replacement, and found the almighty policy is to send out prepaid returns packaging within 2-4 days, then aim to return or replace iPad within 3 more working days. The on-line American wonk I was dealing with ended the 'chat' inviting me to sign off if he'd 'provided excellent service.'

    Excellent service would have been sending a replacement with return packaging. But no, as it's past 14 days from new, hoops must be jumped through. No consideration for the sheer hassle of having to back the faulty unit up, be without a device, restore from back up and spend a day getting everything to where it was originally. Even when I said personal circumstances are difficult, due to health issues, it cut no ice. An exception would not be made.

    The thing is, Apple have instant access to our accounts, and so can see the financial commitment to the IOS platform. They know full well that switching to the nearest equivalent, Microsoft Surface just ain't gonna happen. So, they can afford to be 'less than excellent.'

  • @u0421793 said:
    In many ways, I'm losing interest in buying apps, mainly because of the App Store. I think what it really is is that I've lost interest in the App Store. I can see the point in the way that Korg sells their macOS products not through the App Store and I think overall I'd come to prefer that, if I were to buy a Korg macOS app, like Gadget.

    I find the IOS App Store increasingly irritating and filled with utter crap. The Mac App Store, by comparison, is sparse, and often behind the times. I got a refund for the Mac Notability, as compared to the excellent IOS version it was crude and lacking proper Dropbox sync.

  • @Zen210507 said:

    @MonzoPro said:
    It wouldn't make the slightest dent in Apple's profits, to keep a server or two as a repository for old apps. They can have disclaimers that they're no longer supported and only available for existing purchasers to download.

    The fact stuff like this doesn't happen, shows a complete disregard for customers.

    Indeed. Our purpose is to funnel cash into the great machine. Nothing else. As my recent experience with hardware shows only too well.

    I am having to return this very iPad, as it periodically turns itself off, requiring a hard reset. So, I asked Apple for a replacement, and found the almighty policy is to send out prepaid returns packaging within 2-4 days, then aim to return or replace iPad within 3 more working days. The on-line American wonk I was dealing with ended the 'chat' inviting me to sign off if he'd 'provided excellent service.'

    Excellent service would have been sending a replacement with return packaging. But no, as it's past 14 days from new, hoops must be jumped through. No consideration for the sheer hassle of having to back the faulty unit up, be without a device, restore from back up and spend a day getting everything to where it was originally. Even when I said personal circumstances are difficult, due to health issues, it cut no ice. An exception would not be made.

    The thing is, Apple have instant access to our accounts, and so can see the financial commitment to the IOS platform. They know full well that switching to the nearest equivalent, Microsoft Surface just ain't gonna happen. So, they can afford to be 'less than excellent.'

    Sure that used to be 21 days, must have changed with the new regs.

    We bought a bike online for Monzo Jnr last week and it turned up looking like an elephant had been sitting on the box. Forks were bent, so had to spend an hour repackaging it, and then convincing the horrific Sports Direct to take it back. They kept stalling, probably trying to push it out of the 14 day window so we had less consumer rights.

    Since the packaging is completely ineffective and couriers couldn't give a monkeys, it's going to get more damaged during the return so fully expect them to quibble paying a full refund.

  • edited August 2017

    @MonzoPro said:
    Since the packaging is completely ineffective and couriers couldn't give a monkeys, it's going to get more damaged during the return so fully expect them to quibble paying a full refund.

    Ahhh, good luck with that. Know what you mean about couriers. I once had a substantial delivery of computer gear, on a palate transported by DPD. They sent just one bloke, who had no chance of lifting said palate on his own, and so could not make a proper delivery. But the worst bit was him refusing to open the packaging wrap, and then when I did it, refusing to help carry items into the building. I could have countered by refusing to accept delivery, but that would've been counterproductive.

  • @Zen210507 said:

    @MonzoPro said:
    Since the packaging is completely ineffective and couriers couldn't give a monkeys, it's going to get more damaged during the return so fully expect them to quibble paying a full refund.

    Ahhh, good luck with that. Know what you mean about couriers. I once had a substantial delivery of computer gear, on a palate transported by DPD. They sent just one bloke, who had no chance of lifting said palate on his own, and so could not make a proper delivery. But the worst bit was him refusing to open the packaging wrap, and then when I did it, refusing to help carry items into the building. I could have countered by refusing to accept delivery, but that would've been counterproductive.

    A number of years back awaiting my first MacBook Pro delivery, I heard a van turn up outside and watched and listened in horror as the driver threw boxes around in the back. He then picked one of the thrown boxes up from the floor, and brought it to my door.

    No visible damage so I accepted it but it heated up like an electric bar fire when I tried it out, so got a full refund.

    Couriers here are idiots. The one picking up the bike was the one that delivered it, so I made a point of telling him it'd arrived damaged. Thing is it's a win-win for the couriers as they get another delivery job out of it.

  • So, here's the latest. I was actually toying with the idea of "if only FabFilter had a subscription service option for their VST plugins," because I'd like to start producing on the PC again but just can't seem to bring myself around to it given Auria spoiled me. :D So, I actually wrote Fabs on Facebook, and they actually did consider that but ultimately decided it's not the way to the future. Looks like I'll have to save the "old-fashioned" way after all, lol. I don't mind it though, because at least that's ONE major music software company against subscriptions, amirite? ;)

    OH, and by the way, remember when I sparred with a certain dev, and one of my arguments about "subscription bundles with expandable content would be worth it" was paired with "Waves Mercury Cloud at $29.99/month for example"? Well...

    http://www.waves.com/subscriptions

    ...even their subscriptions are f-cking overpriced. :D What are they, living in the late 1980s?

  • tjatja
    edited August 2017

    speechless

  • There's no extra protection being on a desktop. There's lots of abandonware out there for Windows and Mac OS as well. It's just that the major players in the music market place all make enough that they keep going, because there are way more people recording on their laptops than on their phones and iPads. iOS is not so secure; way fewer customers, and they have to charge way lower prices.

    And we all tend to like small shops, like WaveMachine, and Sebastien, and all these other great small devs. But, what's the succession plan? If Rim or Sebastien say, "Pffffffft", I've had enough, I'm going to go work at Costco, what happens then? Hopefully the products get bought by someone else and supported going forward. But if the economics aren't great, that might be more difficult than it sounds.

  • edited August 2017

    @rickwaugh said:
    But, what's the succession plan? If Rim or Sebastien say, "Pffffffft", I've had enough, I'm going to go work at Costco, what happens then?

    >

    That would be a rather sad day. But with a little notice we could all keep going with what we already have, which is a lot. Do we really need the next IOS, if the whole music scene here were to collapse. I don't think so.

    The best thing that could happen is someone with power at Apple WAKES UP and realises what they have. IOS could be so much more, and with the kind of promo Apple could throw, would be sure to produce hit recordings. The desktop could, eventually, go the way of the dinosaurs. If only there was the will among those with the power to make it so. Or, an artiste with a big enough profile making an album using IOS.

    Much as I dislike her 'work' if Taylor Swift made a hit single using IOS, everything would change. And waiting in the wings, loads of peeps here....

  • @rickwaugh said:
    There's no extra protection being on a desktop. There's lots of abandonware out there for Windows and Mac OS as well. It's just that the major players in the music market place all make enough that they keep going, because there are way more people recording on their laptops than on their phones and iPads.

    I think it's due to the hardware lasting longer, and being more stable than the iOS platform.

    I'm running an 8 year old PC with Windows 7 on it, and recently installed Komplete on it. I'm triggering it via the Maschine Mikro, which is about 6 years old, and generally everything runs fine and dandy - particularly since NI are still supporting the controller. I don't bother to use it now but my 12 year old copy of Reason still works too.

    I

Sign In or Register to comment.