Sometimes I wonder if open-source tools would be better if people were forced to always pay for the software they use.
The https://www.imsta.org/piracy.php page throws some interesting thoughts.
> Serum reportedly has a piracy rate of 94% and it is still being developed.
> It would be a mistake to infer that the popularity of a music software product automatically translates into riches for the software developer.
🤔
@falktx@mastodon.falktx.com i like how they just entirely disregard the part where it takes hours of troubleshooting flaky activation servers and invasive always-on drm and backwards policies (e.g. pay per computer rather than per user) when they already know it's not a question of money for the millionaires they name and shame
@AriaSalvatrice what millionares? I really question if audio software developers get to the point of millionaires, this is a very niche category of "products" after all.
But in any case, the use of obtrusive DRM is not directly correlated to software being commercial. Plenty of commercial software has no DRM at all.
If we are going to question pirating DRM software, that is a tough one. Supporting the devs is nice, but not such practices.
IMO the best is just skipping using stuff with DRM
@falktx@mastodon.falktx.com oh by millionaires i was talking of the big name artists on that page they caught using cracks
You know they're the kinda people who just took the path of least resistance rather than people who would think twice before making a $300 gear purchase. Draconian always-on activation schemes and hardware dongles have really poisoned the well in pro audio, now many people feel that something cracked by the big scene teams will have a much better chance of working out of the box