Seeing as the support form isn’t working, I’m going to leave this here. Had enough of this!
Hi,
I’ve been a BFD customer and user since 2005 starting with BFD 1. I upgraded to BFD 2 & 3 and have added god knows how many expansion packs.
Since you’ve taken it over I’ve had nothing but problems - constantly being asked to enter passwords, licence manager then not being able to connect to server… the amount of time I’ve wasted trying to get it working rather than being able to get on and create the music for which it was purchased.
It’s been a problem since the day I had to migrate my account to your servers. Until now I’ve just kept typing my password, checking for updates and hoping it gets better.
At this point though, I’ve had enough! Not only have I never had this kind of problem with BFD, I don’t think I’ve ever had this much of a problem with any other software.
Whatever you’ve done is broken and you’re clearly not fixing it. having been a loyal happy BFD customer for 16 years, I’m now done with it and will be sure to avoid any of your other products in the future
Surprise sur-fucking-prise, your support form doesn’t work either and won’t let me submit enquiry
This is just a fecking tragedy the way BFD/Inmusic are losing loyal customers. What is really pissing me off is the lack of transparency and detail about the authorisation system. I’ve just had to reauthorise all my packs for the umpteenth time again today. Is it because its the 31st of the month? Feck knows, not me. @BFD_Drew , I really respect your efforts trying to firefight this shitshow but can’t your masters see what’s happening here? Please, please make a detailed statement about the authorisation system and what are our obligations under it. We need to have forewarning about when authorisations are going to fail because (how many times does this need saying) sometimes we are using this stuff when there is no internet access available.
To be honest, transparency would make absolutely no difference to me at this point.
If it was a case of growing pains I’d be prepared to give it some time, but this is not a new product - it’s a new problem. And it’s one that’s clearly been introduced so that the authorization process can benefit the new owners in some way (data-mining much?). It’s certainly to the detriment of, and with callous disregard for their customers.
The ineptitude also doesn’t bode at all well for any future ‘developments’ for BFD. If you really want to protect your investment, put it back to the way it was or just haemhorage whatever customers you have left.
I was happy with BFD but now it’s time for me to go away. The need for re-authorisation is a shame for me. I was working and bfd tells me to re-authorize it. My internet was disable where I was, so no way to work til I get internet back… Very bad
BFD really has to address this directly. Even if one is willing to work with the new authorization scheme, there’s absolutely NO reason not to give those users a clear countdown timer, and allow them to explicitly reauthorize any time before the timer is up.
Changing the auth time on the server to 90 days doesn’t address the basic need to allow reauthorization when it’s convenient for the user. And an interruption every 90 days is still a significant interruption.
I just can’t understand why BFD would choose to shoot itself in the foot like this. It’s already an unpleasant scheme, and shows a basic lack of trust and customer appreciation. It’s not going to win anybody over, and will always make any investment in BFD risky. But to make the experience unreliable on top of that just takes the cake.
Please, for the love of god, stop failing like this. It’s totally unnecessary.
That seems to be it. I had to re-autherize BFD last week because of rolling back to a time machine backup. Now, only 3 days later it asks me again to authorize my product.
However, it doesn’t seem to work because the LM is checking the internet connection. Which is clearly working as I’m posting this from the very same computer.
BFD3 is EOL anyway with BFD4 on the horizon (I guess). Why not just kill this whole copy protection nonsense? What are you hoping for? That we throw money at you for BFD4 just in the hope, that the update will fix this?
I’m using BFD since 2005, too. BFD1, BFD2, BFD3, maaaaany expansions from fxpansion and third party.
And yes, I also can’t remember any software being such a PIA about authorization.
So apart from the annoying fact that the software wants to connect to the internet every so often it now can’t because of yet another stupid bug? Get your stuff together!
If I were to deliver this work in my daily job, I’d be homeless in starving in no time.
I agree that transparency is needed. But if they come out and say “BFD needs to be reauthorised every 30 days” or whatever the time frame may be. i’m not doing it - it’s user hostile and, based on the fact that I have no other software that makes me do this and the licence manager never required this under fxpansion it would seem to be totally un-necessary.
As regards BFD4 - hadn’t heard any rumours about it until I came to this forum to express my frustration and look for a solution. In the FXpansion days I would have definitely upgraded. But now, with this experience under the new owners, there’s absolutely no way I’m throwing any more money on top the not inconsiderable amount that I’ve already spent for software which is no longer fit for purpose. It’s actively stopping me working now!
And with regard to the speculation that it may be going subscription… well that would just be the. final nail as far as I’m concerned.
I’ve been a fan and supporter of BFD for more than 15 years - a new version would normally be cause for some excitement (especially with the gap to BFD3’s launch). Sadly that couldn’t be further from the truth anymore…
I´ve been a loyal customer to FXPansion since DR-008 - until the Inmusic migration there has never been a big problem for my usage of BFD (1-3 with several expansion packs). How the authorization issue has been handled by Inmusic is a disgrace and there´s no way I´ll spend one more penny on BFD or expansions until this issue has been satisfactyingly solved for all users.
I.e. I’m not at all interested in a new version until authorization and usage of BFD3 is as painless as it used to be or better - I (as all customers) paid for the license(s) and have the right to use BFDx whenever and wherever it pleases me after authorizing once - i.e. even where there’s no internet avaliable. I didn´t give up that right when Inmusic bought BFD, if I (we) did it should have been clearly stated in the info about the migration so we could make a thought through decision whether to migrate or not.
If the old FXpansion authorization model worked, why can´t it be used after the Inmusic migration?
Is piracy really such a big problem with the old method?
If so - is the problem so big that it excuses that (I assume) all legit license owners are affected?
Or are there alterior, not piracy related, motives behind this mess?
It would be nice to get an answer from someone higher up the ladder than the developer team(who is not to be blamed) - they shouldn´t have to deal with anything on the forums but actual technical issues with BFD itself and possibly having a laugh with the forum members now and then.
Which leads to the question - where are the responsible Inmusic representatives?
Now this is obviously speculation based on other speculation, but it occurs to me that one reason for requiring the licence manager to call home every 30 days would be if BFD was moving to a subscription model as I saw rumoured elsewhere. Rather than fighting piracy they would need to check that you were still subscribed each month.
Doesn’t excuse the current shambles, and would ensure for me personally that I ditched BFD, but it could explain the change to the licence manager and wouldn’t be a surprise if the new owners thought this was their ticket to making the most profit from their new purchase.
do not delete system caches, or you could wind up with things that are no longer authorized and other serious irritants. I tend to doubt it was a coincidence that this immediately worked. I took out a support ticket, but both messages were the same log in/log out, restart routine as we are all aware of by now.
