One month is too short. Once every two months would be the bare minimum for me, AND:
Each time an expansion needs authorization, it should authorize itself automatically.
When this happens, the user needn’t do anything if they’re connected to the internet. It should just authorize behind the scenes, maybe a “Performing maintenance…” message to explain what’s going on. If the user is not currently online, the message we’re getting now should appear.
During the authorization process, ALL PRODUCTS SHOULD REFRESH THEIR AUTHORIZATION, EVEN IF IT’S NOT TIME YET.
After x (expansions owned) cycles, all products will re-authorize simultaneously, unless the user has manually de-authorized/authorized a new product.
I agree, tho if I’ve already been authorised, and if I’m offline when it wants to re-authorise (why any of this should be happening is dumb, at most it should be happening when a new version is being installed only) I should get a message and not be stopped from using the software, as the only reason it could be checking for re-authorisation is if I’ve already been authorised, meaning its redundant to have to do it again.
Its a bizarre set of choices and I’m definitely at a point of total frustration, to the point where I’m just not going to use it until the next version comes out, and then I’m giving it a month. If it happens all over again, I still wont be able to commit to use the current version in projects, at which point I’ll just be left wondering why I have it installed at all.
I can hold out till its resolved, but this is a really sad situation.
EDIT: If I log in to check for updates, thats the time to check I’m a legit user.
Yep, I don’t think there’s a single user of BFD happy with how things currently work. The software has become “monthly online”, or “monthly offline” depending on how you look at it. There’s no real off-line mode in the traditional sense. Just 30 days of off-line usage and then the program expires. (That would be an awesome demo by the way )
I don’t know if the scope of the software is fully grasped by the powers that be. THE number 1 characteristic people are looking for is reliability. Starting your DAW and not knowing if BFD will work is not indicative of such a trait. Neither is having to go through a checklist before your gig with a red entry “Authorize BFD”. If we were talking about a pack of beatz priced at 15 euros or a multiplayer subscription game, maaaaybe I could justify this authorization process. But for a 300 euro flagship instrument… no. That’s not how it goes. Either you issue a dongle and let people carry it to the top of a mountain (that even Steinberg abandons btw - the dongle, not the mountain ) or you realize that your legitimate clients need portability, reliability, and the least amount of maintenance and you act accordingly.
Well that hits the nail on the head We’re all using a demo
A very expensive demo
EDIT: @Clive@exBFD_Drew I’m really sorry, I’m not trying to stoke the fire or anything, but really… This isnt a good concept and the most positive thing I can do is urge you to rethink it. I want BFD to be the best in the industry, and as a piece of software I really think it is, certainly in terms of sound quality, it definitely seems to be, to me. It just seems like madness to be shooting yourselves in the foot like this.
Especially seeing as I cant currently commit to using it in any projects personally, and I’m left not being able to recommend BFD. And I LOVE BFD. Please listen to your customers and consider the response you’re getting from this.
Definitely a reauth and time sync problem that they’ve built in. That’s why my 3 post-migration kits are on a different schedule than the kits I’ve migrated. I’m coming up on my 30 days for those kits, so I’ll be looking at my calendar to see what happens.
It’s really not a very smart scheme, and pretty amateurish on top of it. It’s pretty obvious what the limitations are. I’m not aware of any software company that has invented something like this. It doesn’t make sense that BFD would come up with something like this on their own, given that there are other working copy protection schemes out there.
I have to say that if this isn’t a new chapter for BFD where the product actually improves, instead of the neglect we’ve seen over the past several, even I will have to cut bait and move on.
Good for you, isn’t it nice when things just work! Did you authorize all your stuff on the same date? It would be worth it to check out what happens in a month.
Since you mentioned Cubase, I would advise that you save each project’s kit manually. (Unless you make it a habit to launch the license manager and check for deauthorized products first, and then launch Cubase and open your projects.)
I’m pretty livid, actually. this worked for a long time. today, due to the thing checking up, much of my day is down the tubes chasing this crap down. Now, I have reverted to 3.4.1 and the licensing system does not work at all. It’s just banging my head against a wall… 3.4.2 created serious instability in VE Pro, which is reall intolerable, so I’m between a rock and a hard place with this thing. inMusic is RUINOUS.
Hey all. We’re looking into this. Please watch this space. Until then, you can re-launch License Manager and re-authorize everything and you should be back up and running. If not, please contact support.
We’re keeping our fingers crossed, Drew, and hoping for the best. I got past the License Manage issue that started this thread, but now the only kits the BFD program will recognize is the BFD Core Library - not any of the Expansion Packs - and all are loaded in the same external drive. I also have the issue of multiple versions of Presets and Kits showing up in the explorer. While the quality of the samples is market leading, the planning and execution on the computer side is a mess. There must be a simpler way. If Steven Slate can do it, you guys ought to be able to.
I think they may have lost the fight. I wouldn’t give them a penny more than they’ve had from me already. I’m so angry. When I bought BFD3 they told me I only needed to be online to download the software. Now I have be online whenever they decide. I have SSD, they don’t sound as good as the London Sessions, but this is f***ing ridiculous. I have lots of purchased software. NONE of it causes this hassle. Cracked version here I come.
Will the ‘fixes’ include honouring the conditions of sale? i.e. only needing to be online to download the software?
Why are they doing this? Do they think it’s going to make life better for them>
This does not address the core issue which is that we should NOT be re-authorising every xx days according to some timetable set by you. The T&Cs clearly stated that being online to use the software was not a requirement. I have not seen any posts from you that directly address this. Just ‘we’re looking at it’ or ‘this is not intended behaviour’ without telling us what the intended behaviour is. We use our DAWs offline - for bloody good reasons - and ‘randomly’ losing drums in a session is beyond infuriating. I am raging about this, . It has caused such hassle. I get little enough time to work on sessions without wasting half of it on a frigging drum machine.
)
) or you realize that your legitimate clients need portability, reliability, and the least amount of maintenance and you act accordingly.
We’re all using a demo 
