IMO Soft synths and plugins are much better than hardware

[Machinesworking]

So you listed a few discontinued NI products that nobody really gives a shit about, and a bunch of Camel Audio stuff because we know they all ditched everybody but Mac users, etc. Plus a couple things I've never heard of. So, weighing this against the balance of every other plugin product out there on the market, I'm going to stick to my original claim: software becoming unsupported on a current OS happens very rarely.
But seriously, this is an argument for spending thousands on hardware??

No, it's a direct, flat argument against you stating that software rarely goes away, and you're 100% wrong, period. Lol at your piss poor comeback! You have no right as a single person to declare "nobody gives a shit about", nobody gave you permission to speak for them. Not everyone on a Mac uses Logic X, so that whole argument is also moot. You've never heard of Pluggo??? Some of the FX plug ins are in your M4L folder.
I don't really care how many eye rolls and distractions you attempt to make against that initial statement, it's pretty obviously a stupid one, software of course is more likely to not work with a computer fifteen years from now, whereas hardware always will. That's a basic irrefutable fact, just like the fact that hardware is more expensive, which of course has nothing to do with anything we're talking about..

[[erm]]

Please stop with the insults everyone, there's no reason this topic can't be discussed calmly with understanding that it's a polarizing issue.

[Machinesworking]

Please stop with the insults everyone, there's no reason this topic can't be discussed calmly with understanding that it's a polarizing issue.

Good luck with that. The title alone is a declaration of war.
plus at least in my mind so far at least in my case, it's been mostly about our 'argument', big difference between calling someone's argument stupid and calling them stupid, although internet flame wars usually erupt when people can't tell the difference for sure.

[Richie Witch]

My Native Instrument's Replika plugin is broken *again* with the latest Live update, but my Lexicon MX300 seems to be working just fine.

[mholloway]

Maschinesworking is welcome to uselessly sling as many insults my way as he can muster and draw the ire of the forum moderators, it doesn't change my view that it's absurd to argue for hardware usage based on the (at best, Occasionally Annoying) fact that some software goes out of date or becomes unsupported. Some being, as I've said, statistically very few products among the sheer masses of modern plugins, including, yes, the pitiful few that he managed to name, RIP pluggo.

"Camel Audio sold out to Apple and I can't use Alchemy on my PC, ddaaaaamit I should have been buying expensive hardware synths all along!" -Nobody

As if hardware, vintage synths in particular, never needed repairs, upkeep, maintenance and eventually, you know, break and stop working... it's a somewhat analogous scenario.

We obviously just totally disagree on this point, that's fine; no number of times you call my thoughts "stupid" is going to change that, dude, but if it makes ya feel better...

oh and here's another eye roll for you:

[BoddAH]

More importantly. If futureproofing your music creation tools is THAT important to you. You could just not fucking update everything all the time like the OCD-driven consumerist you are.

Your computer would still fucking work along with all the software that already worked before you CHOSE to update and fuck everything up.

You can even continue checking your email on Netscape and ask Clippy for help if you’re stuck in Word. You can’t do that on a vintage synth.

And don’t tell me hardware synths are better in this regard because they are not. The only difference is that you can’t actually upgrade them (you know, in case you actually wanted to get awesome new bug-fixes and features without having to buy the whole fucking thing again).

[BoddAH]

Damn quote.

[TomViolenz]

This reads like the Capitalism/Socialism debates all over again

Let's not give the mods a reason to ban discussions on synths too

[Angstrom]

They both have different merits.
Don't judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree.

Don't buy a modular and expect great patch recall.
Likewise don't buy a softsynth and expect tactility.

[Richie Witch]

Don't judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree.

OMG--that's going to be my signature quote!! It's brilliant!

[Machinesworking]

Maschinesworking is welcome to uselessly sling as many insults my way as he can muster and draw the ire of the forum moderators

Right they're mad at me...
You're the one who started in with replies like "nobody gives a shit" in response to a conversation that included no condescending remarks, then you attempt to play the victim when someone calls your response piss poor? How can you not see what you're doing?

[BoddAH]

Don't judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree.

OMG--that's going to be my signature quote!! It's brilliant!

That quote is originally by Einstein though even though.

[stoersignal]

The only difference is that you can’t actually upgrade them (you know, in case you actually wanted to get awesome new bug-fixes and features without having to buy the whole fucking thing again).

i stay outside of the general discussion, but have you never heared of firmware updates?

[Machinesworking]

More importantly. If futureproofing your music creation tools is THAT important to you. You could just not fucking update everything all the time like the OCD-driven consumerist you are.

Your computer would still fucking work along with all the software that already worked before you CHOSE to update and fuck everything up.

You can even continue checking your email on Netscape and ask Clippy for help if you’re stuck in Word. You can’t do that on a vintage synth.

And don’t tell me hardware synths are better in this regard because they are not. The only difference is that you can’t actually upgrade them (you know, in case you actually wanted to get awesome new bug-fixes and features without having to buy the whole fucking thing again).

Disclosure, I've owned a Memorymoog for about 20 years, and I've been doing music with computers for about that amount of time.
I haven't collected that many hardware synths, I have an Xpander and the Metasonix Wretch Machine. Still, 90% of what I do is in the box.

Let's be hones here, do you know anyone using OS9 or XP on a 15 year old machine? because I sure don't.
Though it's very possible with iPads and Windows Surface that the actual device lends itself to this, i.e. it's small enough to where 10 - 15 years from now people will be using them for discontinued software etc. <-- The problem there is usability VS cash now, a Surface 4 years from now will sell for enough to make a dent in the price of a new Surface... so again computers by their very nature have a built in lifespan.

So yes, the fact you can't upgrade them is actually a huge benefit in this way. The moog typically over the years has cost $2-400 every five years or so tuning it or fixing some issue, but no bug fixes needed. Software on the other hand costs me a lot more to upkeep, but it's worth it for sure. I have zero illusions that software is permanent though. A song from ten years ago will include MIDI instrument NI VSTs that I no longer have installed like FM7, Kontakt 2 etc. but that same song will have a MIDI track to the Moog that plays just fine, no worries.

They both have their benefits and downsides:
Hardware is tactile, interacts fluidly, is expensive up front, can need repair and takes up physical space.
Software is incredibly versatile, requires a lot of preparation to get a controller to be able to control half it's functionality, is cheap up front, and will eventually be extinct, it has a lifespan by the very nature of it's upgradability.

I'm surprised people think these are arguable points? but maybe my own experience makes it seem like they're obvious?

[Division Monarchy]

That is a vague statement. It depends on the hardware. For example, Roland gear from the 90's thru today can easily be outdone by software. Roland gear from the 80's can not, and is still the golden standard. Same with a modern Moog vs vintage Moog. Although both a analog, the circuits in modern gear are not the same. After testing out a Dave Smith synth, I didn't think it sounded any warmer than software, but I can't find anything in the modern world that comes close to a Juno 60.

Too much grey areas in the hardware vs software comparison to have such a black vs white outlook. Also, I'll take something that appreciates in value over time than something that depreciates. Case in point, I bought a Juno 60 twelve years ago for $200, and I sure don't regret that. I can't help but think that at some point every piece of software will be obsolete. But to each their own. I like using both, and you have to use what makes you more productive.