why BUY Live?

[Macrostructure]

Sorry (I agree to disagree ), but in my experience that's mostly myth in order to keep people from using cracks.

No ways mate. Cracks don't work. It is not a myth. You've just been lucky. They are definitely filled with virus's, and instability. Either you are lying to yourself, or you honestly don't know.

I wouldn't use a cracked OS or DAW but I have had very few problems with the various try before you buy VSTs and VSTIs I have used over the years. If you know where to go and which crackers stuff to search for then it's generally ok.

Having said that I think it's important to support some developers and I have generally paid for those plugs I have appreciated as time has gone on. Conversely some developers deserve to have their shoddy crap ripped off and not receive reimbursement for their dev time. e.g. NI Intakt, Replicant (some AD products are excellent I would point out). And it's utter rubbish software like this that increases the market for warez. Who wants to lay down a few hundred quid for something that might not work?

And the magazines have a lot to answer for too - they only review if the developer buys advertising space and then the developer expects a good review - and gets it 99% of the time, so it's all a stitch up. Bring on the warez!!!

Which all raises an interesting point - it's ok for developers to release half finished buggy shit, and no-one talks about 'goods not fit for sale', 'misrepresentation of goods' (sold as "working" or "useful" for example), or talks of sueing software houses for compensation for artist's lost time (due to irrecoverable crashes of improperly tested software for example), but everyone shits their pants about using cracked software. Sheeesh....come on guys...

Bottom line is: if it's your primary most important piece of software and generally is known to be good quality, take the long term view - Ableton are more likely to fix more people's bugs if they have the capital to employ the staff to do it than otherwise, so it makes sense to buy the software if you are in it for the long term.

[Mesmer]

BTW,
fixing bugs is not just finding the line(s) of code and changing a "==" for an "!=" or th like.
One has to take great pains to make sure the bug-fixing-code does not actually introduce a NEW-possibly-worse bug, somewhere else in the functionality.

So that means programming tests, lots and lots of testing code. Maybe for your bug I'll have to code two tests ... maybe half a dozen. And then the new code must pass these new tests, plus all of the older ones.

The new bug-fixing-code also needs to be compatible with the codebase's future: wherever the chief software architect means to take the code next year.

So yea, it's not "this is such an easy bug, OMG it could be done this afternoon".
It's most likely 10x more than you think, almost certainly.

all the power to the little guy, really, stick it to them!!
... but just saying, a baby takes 9 months, 9 full months.

my 0.02
over and out.
-h

[mlangsman]

I dont see using a hookey copy of Live as a solution to the bug issue. Depending on the territory you live in, here in the UK as a consumer if you buy something and it does not perform as it was advertised then you are entitled to your money back. I would suggest if you have bought live expecting it to do X and it does not - especially after various bugfixes then you shoiuld be entitled to a refund.

If Ableton are providing good customer service then they should have no problem furnishing this request for you. This is a more positive way of going about it in my opinion than not paying for the software. Whether you go through with this would depend on to what personal level this bug affects your workflow with the product.

Cheers,
Marc

[skipkent]

The kind of software support that some here seem to be fantasizing about does not exist. The idea that you can report a reproduceable (on your system, at least) bug to a company and then expect them to jump through flaming hoops to get that fixed for you as soon as humanly possible is just not going to happen, unless, perhaps, you're an extremely high profile customer paying out the nose for 24/7 top-tier support.

Companies like Ableton don't offer this and if they did you couldn't afford it anyways.

What generally happens is that (hopefully) they at least acknowledge an understanding of the issue you describe, probe you for details as needed, and then work (as time allows) to reproduce the issue on their end.

If it doesn't reproduce fairly easily, or at all, then you can be quite sure that it's not going to be a red light issue for them, even if you yourself are dead in the water. The next step (ideally) for the support staff is to offer some sort of workaround, but that's not always going to be to your liking, as it may involve OS tweaks, re-installs, or updating drivers on other pieces of hardware. Furthermore, because they haven't been able to reproduce the issue, there's absolutely no guarantee that the workaround will work, in which case the 'workaround' becomes something drastic like "Ditch Vista and try XP" which doesn't always go down so well.

Getting all this junk that's out there to play nice one piece with another is not so easy as it may seem. That it all works as well as it does is already a miracle! Vista has caused so many problems that MS has ditched it. I can't really blame Ableton for not supporting it too heavily. Unfortunate and difficult for all involved.

I do software support for a living, so I know how this goes. Beyond that, the logic of "I hate this software so I'm going to use a cracked version of it" seems a bit skewed to me.

Why buy Ableton? Because it works for you. If it doesn't, then go buy or steal something else, but don't come here shouting and looking for pats on the back for stealing what doesn't belong to you.

[Crash]

The idea that you can report a reproduceable (on your system, at least) bug to a company and then expect them to jump through flaming hoops to get that fixed for you as soon as humanly possible is just not going to happen, unless, perhaps, you're an extremely high profile customer paying out the nose for 24/7 top-tier support.

Please share your definition of a reasonable timespan to fix a reproduceable bug, one year doesn't seem long enough for most people on this thread. Also please give us a definition how Support should handle such a customer request after several months have past since the original support request.

[8O]

Timo - you conveniently ignored the first sentence of that quote: "The kind of software support that some here seem to be fantasizing about does not exist." - if you really believed your own warped logic, you'd have no time for posting on this forum or making music as you'd be so busy bombarding Microsoft (and Apple, soon) demanding 100% free of your personal bugs or money back/encouraging others to pirate.

I suspect this is purely because Ableton are nice guys and have an open forum, whereas Microsoft/Apple would simply ignore you.

I loved your defence of using pirated software though - that really took the biscuit.

[Crash]

I loved your defence of using pirated software though - that really took the biscuit.

Did I defend pirated software or did you want to interprete that?

[ewistrand]

There's just so much that's wrong with this post. Shall we begin?

I wouldn't use a cracked OS or DAW but I have had very few problems with the various try before you buy VSTs and VSTIs I have used over the years. If you know where to go and which crackers stuff to search for then it's generally ok.

A crack is circumventing a part of the program that's necessary to keep it running. That's akin to removing the emission controls on your car. Will it run for a while? Yes. Will it eventually do damage to the whole? Yes.

Having said that I think it's important to support some developers and I have generally paid for those plugs I have appreciated as time has gone on. Conversely some developers deserve to have their shoddy crap ripped off and not receive reimbursement for their dev time. e.g. NI Intakt, Replicant (some AD products are excellent I would point out). And it's utter rubbish software like this that increases the market for warez. Who wants to lay down a few hundred quid for something that might not work?

What's wrong with Intakt? It's always worked here.

And, we could say the same thing about your music; we'll just rip that off and not pay you for the time and effort you put into it. Deal?

And the magazines have a lot to answer for too - they only review if the developer buys advertising space and then the developer expects a good review - and gets it 99% of the time, so it's all a stitch up. Bring on the warez!!!

Now that one I'll agree on. It's true that the magazines' review policies can be driven by advertising budgets, and that isn't right at all.

Which all raises an interesting point - it's ok for developers to release half finished buggy shit, and no-one talks about 'goods not fit for sale', 'misrepresentation of goods' (sold as "working" or "useful" for example), or talks of sueing software houses for compensation for artist's lost time (due to irrecoverable crashes of improperly tested software for example), but everyone shits their pants about using cracked software. Sheeesh....come on guys...

Hold on here- you have the right to rip off their intellectual property, yet you expect to have yours respected? If that isn't the case, you have no basis for compensation, do you? And, if that is the case, isn't that hypocritical to say the least?

ew

[8O]

Wrong! Once I pay money Ableton does owe me everything they promised to deliver! If they deliver less than that and don't fix it in reasonable time (less than a year for sure) then either I get a partly refund for having to work with less than was promised for the price or a full refund for stopping to work with it, which leads to them getting no money at all again. Paying for a software licence (you only own the right to use it) is like setting up a contract that binds both parties into responsibilities

Again, according to this "logic" you should be directing your energy at Microsoft/Apple - they too "owe you everything they promised to deliver". But you know what they would do - ignore you completely. Right?

[Angstrom]

My seat creaks

[Crash]

Again, according to this "logic" you should be directing your energy at Microsoft/Apple - they too "owe you everything they promised to deliver". But you know what they would do - ignore you completely. Right?

1. Windows and Leopard summed together cost less than a single copy of Live when I buy OEM versions that don't come with telephone support.

2. No. Email support is still given.

[Moody]

Why buy any thing?

[Crash]

A crack is circumventing a part of the program that's necessary to keep it running.

Did I write Copy-Protection with inbuild audio support somewhere? Ah, yes, I did.

[hoffman2k]

Again, according to this "logic" you should be directing your energy at Microsoft/Apple - they too "owe you everything they promised to deliver". But you know what they would do - ignore you completely. Right?

1. Windows and Leopard summed together cost less than a single copy of Live when I buy OEM versions that don't come with telephone support.

2. No. Email support is still given.

So they fixed every bug you reported and there are no more outstanding issues in XP, Vista and OSX? Well done Sir!

[UKRuss]

My seat creaks

It is important to be aware of all sounds around you at all times.

That creak, properly sampled and daubed with effectery could be the next Hoover Bass phenomenon.

DO IT!