Another ...DAW Poll

[deadbeef]

May I say that I do appreciate your reading and responding to my post; I know I am not someone who normally posts here, and I confess I am not a regular DP user (though I do own and appreciate much MOTU hardware), but you allowing me to weigh on on the subject matter is most gracious.

To your response, however:

I'm not ranting nor am I committing libel, so tone down the hyperbole.

I think it is fair to say that your opinion is stated in such ways that it qualifies as a rant, according to definitions such as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rant" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; .

As for the libel statement, you generally do say "it is my opinion," but you also do state things (there have been more in other threads, I'm pulling a couple from this thread):

Yeah, these methods for disabling the nag screen are distributed just as freely as the R•••••.

This is wrong! People who distribute cracks for REAPER (and they do, just like other software) are condemned, and discussing methods for working around the license verification is very much scorned.

You have to hand it to them, they're building a large user base with these scorched earth tactics. It's easy to gain market share when you're product dumping.

This is just full of inaccuracy! There is no scorched earth tactics or product dumping happening. Cockos has a business model that does not require copy protection, that is simply it.

Oh, and word up: you are not the "internet at large." Secondly, what have you got against serial protection as a minimal form off cooy protection? There's already NO copy protection on R•••••. What difference will it make if the serial is cracked? I could see thieves not liking it as they might have to work a tiny bit harder to steal something.

I've explained the difference in my previous post above, but I will elaborate here

• It takes engineering effort to implement CP
• Legitimate paying users are the only ones who are ever adversely affected by CP (suppose I am at a gig and have to reinstall. Where'd my license key go? Crap!). People who wish to pirate will pirate.
• If someone who is evaluating REAPER is not ready to purchase a license at the end of the 30 days, if REAPER disables, they are likely to either A) uninstall REAPER from their system, or B) download a crack. In either of these cases, their probability of purchasing a license after that event is much lower than if REAPER did not disable. The counter argument there is that they may have been persuaded to purchase a license at the time of disabling, and that is likely true, but that also has other downsides, especially relating to support.

I am curious -- short of compromising the quality of REAPER, is there any fact you could learn that would help you change your opinion? If REAPER made more than enough money to pay business expenses and the salaries of those who work on it, would that be meaningful? If you learned that it was a viable business, and that the percentage of people who purchased licenses, while not 100%, was substantial?

Also, a discussion that might be worth having is: how do you feel about users in poor third world countries pirating software? If someone makes USD $50 a week, do we really expect them to spend hundreds of dollars on software for a hobby?

[Killahurts]

Also, a discussion that might be worth having is: how do you feel about users in poor third world countries pirating software? If someone makes USD $50 a week, do we really expect them to spend hundreds of dollars on software for a hobby?

Sorry I have to get involved here.

Mr. Deadbeef, a person making $50 a week in a third world country has no business having a "hobby" of any kind. He should be 100% concentrated on working for money, to try to better his condition, and rise above the dung hole he lives in. Or, working towards getting to a better country.

The thought of some desperately poor person sitting around playing with pirated software on his computer (and where did he get the money for that?) sickens me. I just don't see how any thinking person can think that's OK.

If someone is destitute and hungry, I would want to feed them if I could. If someone is destitute and wants to crack the software I had to pay for, I would want to slap them if I could..

I am of the camp that believes that the R****** folks can and should be able to do anything with their property they want, even if they want to give it away. I personally don't know anything about that software, and I never will because I have no respect whatsoever for the company that created it. I'm sure they have some sort of long tail end-game they're shooting for, but again, I have no respect for their methods, so I won't even go to their website to see what it's about. Why would I want to use third world friendly software?

[daniel.sneed]

I'd like to bring up some facts:
- This board is privately owned by James.
- He has clearly stated that he wants it to stay within *zero tolerance for software piracy* limits.
- I respect much his time and strain to help the Motunation community.

[FMiguelez]

Mr. Deadbeef, a person making $50 a week in a third world country has no business having a "hobby" of any kind. He should be 100% concentrated on working for money, to try to better his condition, and rise above the dung hole he lives in. Or, working towards getting to a better country.

The thought of some desperately poor person sitting around playing with pirated software on his computer (and where did he get the money for that?) sickens me. I just don't see how any thinking person can think that's OK.

Totally agreed.

The problem with most poor people, as I see here every day, is that they come to expect FREE everything: free energy, free water, free food, free schools, etc. They are poor, so they think they are entitled to anything. And they usually get all that!!! Our own system is creating people who prefer not to work... what for? Why should they? They get what they want for free anyway, so there's no need to work or to try to get a better life.
So if they get all that stuff for free, no wonder they want everything that comes inside a computer for free as well.

Most people here don't even know it is "wrong" and against the law to steal/pirate/distribute and get unpaid-for software. They see it either, as a business to make easy money (selling stolen intellectual property for pennies), or just something to desire to have, easily attainable, and not even getting a slap in the wrist for stealing it.
It's even "in" at schools. Even at our best schools (which are not that good anyway) teachers and students promote and pirate software and music all day long. I know this as a FACT.

Gee... they must be crying and devastated by guilt.... (cynical emoticon here).

I don't think what I wrote is political... it's just reality, but I better shut up now before this does turn political and James kicks our arses.

Anyway. About Reaper... people I know here who have Reaper refer to it as "the FREE APP". Not that they'd pay for it if they actually charged money for it anyway

Hey! We are not doing too bad in that poll! (considering DP is Mac-only and it's GS)

[James Steele]

Deadbeef it's obvious you're here to shill for Reaper behind your anonymous identity. And I don't need to read your link. I express my opinion on the matter passionately, but I reject your flippant dismissal of my opinion as a "rant" because that word is used by you to imply that I have not given serious thought to my position nor stated a coherent argument. I reject that out of hand.

Further you have no business coming here and attempting to label my exercise of my free speech as libel. You do so again and I will delete you and block you from this site.

It is my opinion that making a DAW freely downloadable and lacking any sort of copy-protection but an ineffective once-per-day nag screen has the effect of creating a user base out in the world with a much higher percentage of non-paying (pirate) users among its ranks. It seems to be common sense. If you can prove otherwise, I'm all ears.

I further contend that serial protection would be ridiculously easy to implement. The simplest $10 shareware utilities implement it. I personally feel that Reaper's lack of even this most simple and non-intrusive form of copy-protection indicates that they're not interested in making their app less easy to steal. You may want to attribute this to their warm fuzzy "we trust you... CP is bad" public stance and let's all join hands and sing "Kumbaya." But I feel there exists the possibility that this rationale is simply cover for an aggressive strategy to build market share by undercutting on price (thus potentially damaging all DAW developers by creating unrealistic pricing expectations) as well as making the app ALMOST EFFORTLESS TO STEAL.

That's my position. Always has been. It's why I block the words Reaper and Cockos on this site, because I feel their motivations are, or how it "makes sense" to them, it's short-sighted, self-serving and may have a detrimental effect on the audio software industry as a whole, as theirs a risk of creating a whole new unrealistic price-point expectation in the minds of consumers, not to mention those consumers who treat the DAW as if it's free. One only need to read other forums out there to see people saying "get Reaper-- it's free..." This is why I feel Reaper's user base figures, whatever they may be, will always be tainted. Common sense will tell you that it's much more likely to have a higher percentage of pirate users than apps by developers who make even a snall effort to discourage theft. Again, the Reaper nag screen is a joke.

So again, that's my opinion. I stand by it completely. And again, I would publicly challenge Cockos to prove to the world that they aren't taking advantage of Reaper's "ease-of-theft" to swell their user ranks by implementing serial copy protection. C'mon. They've got a monthly techniques feature now in SOS. Certainly they can take off the training wheels now and compete on features alone? Well that and undercutting on price, but that will remain. Just make STEALING it a little more difficult than dismissing a dialog ONCE PER DAY.

[James Steele]

Hey! We are not doing too bad in that poll! (considering DP is Mac-only and it's GS)

Yep. We're neck and neck with Reaper. Apparently word went out on their forum also about the poll.

I'd like to see a poll that limited voting to users who actually PAID FOR THEIR DAWS. I'm curious if it might affect the showing of some of them.

[FMiguelez]

Hey! We are not doing too bad in that poll! (considering DP is Mac-only and it's GS)

Yep. We're neck and neck with R•••••. Apparently word went out on their forum also about the poll.

I'd like to see a poll that limited voting to users who actually PAID FOR THEIR DAWS. I'm curious if it might affect the showing of some of them.

Errrr... then that poll would be almost empty (for lack of voters)

[James Steele]

Hey! We are not doing too bad in that poll! (considering DP is Mac-only and it's GS)

Yep. We're neck and neck with R•••••. Apparently word went out on their forum also about the poll.

I'd like to see a poll that limited voting to users who actually PAID FOR THEIR DAWS. I'm curious if it might affect the showing of some of them.

Errrr... then that poll would be almost empty (for lack of voters)

Well we know that piracy is a serious problem. I know you jest about it being empty. I will say that I'm sure that pirates do care about the image of their stolen platform of choice and they vote in these polls.

[Dan Worley]

In time, having a "free" DAW out there could endanger the further development of other DAWs. I'm against that. MOTU and others have built this market and I'm unconformable with squatters coming in and claiming part of the land with unfair practices. There is a business plan behind all of this and it's not all hearts and flowers and hugs. Thinking so would be very naive. I have been involved with companies who developed and manufactured innovative medical equipment that had to go out of business because of this kind of undercutting, mostly from foreign companies outside the USA which stole the designs and made cheapo copies that they could sell for much less. It's a little different situation, but the point is, it's very hard to protect yourself from it. I'd like to see a demo/trial period for Reaper and then customers having to pay for serial authorization and protection.

What they're doing may be legal but it doesn't make it right or ethical--in my view. Sadly, many companies (or people) don't care about that anymore.

c-ya,

Dan Worley

[n2mpujack]

Deadbeef it's obvious you're here to shill for R••••• behind your anonymous identity.

James:
I wondered why the username deadbeef sounded familiar. Back in 2006 there was a user by that name that posted over in the Cakewalk Sonar forums. Two posts. I won't tell here explicitly but the user's real name was/is one of the two people behind Reaper. Upon request I can furnish a link to what I found on the CW site or even just the person's name although you have to be logged in to the CW site to view the page.

[n2mpujack]

[*] If someone who is evaluating R••••• is not ready to purchase a license at the end of the 30 days, if R••••• disables, they are likely to either A) uninstall R••••• from their system, or B) download a crack. In either of these cases, their probability of purchasing a license after that event is much lower than if R••••• did not disable. The counter argument there is that they may have been persuaded to purchase a license at the time of disabling, and that is likely true, but that also has other downsides, especially relating to support.[/list]

The thing is Reaper does NOT disable after 30 days. If it did then this whole conversation would not be taking place.

[melenko]

Done!