Of course, but some have. Example: FL. for many years their demo install was the entire thing from demo all the way to most complete and expensive versions in the same file. My comment was not about the relative ease for someone to find a full installer from an actual supplier. It was about starting with randomly uploaded ones from who-knows-where and with who-knows-what added to them. Like something from a petri dish.

 

The "teams" have no need for "marketing". Their "products", so to speak, are not in need of any "marketing". Never have been.

There's no need for any of that... But, you just hit upon the very reason that the sister will never be obsolete due to the fact that it acts as a test bed for most anything released. Via the community, one can see first hand what a release is doing to a host system, how it runs, pitfalls, possibilities, and bugs. That is a most valuable resource when dealing with stuffz...

 

When Teams claims that "crack versions are faster than legit ones" it is a self-certification, actually this has never been proven by anyone. It seems that you have no doubts on the subject: is this religious faith in the Cult of Warez or have you already done some tests?
Until you publish the results of your tests we will all remain in doubt. At the moment, the thesis “crack vers. are faster than the legit ones” remains in the realm of pub talk

 

hey [insert dev name here]

anyways, google is your friend. from the nfo file of one of r2r's older releases:

 

Here's a thing. If you're in doubt, get the legit non-cracked (tryout) version of some scene released plug/app that you have there, and do your OWN test. simple.

 

I think I have already read this info, it introduces a quite logical concept: protections do eat resources to the machine, the key phrase, explicitly written by R2R is:

“Test yourself, plugin loading time is quite faster than original”

• Quite faster means what in detail?
• Has anyone actually taken the test?
• Note that this file is from 2017: how much do protections affect today's computers?

Until we answer these questions the whole discussion remains very vague

I don't install iLoK on my computer, I don't want it, not even for a software trial. You're the one who first wrote "cracks load faster" so it's up to you to prove what you say.
Post your iLok tests now (if you've done them), otherwise you don't even know what you're talking about

 

i would love to test all the Mac stuff I have that uses iLok vs non-iLok versions. They aren't cracked, and if they had been; i'm not going to say I would have bought all of them to "support" anyone. It's just why I haven't already deleted/sold them. They could be faster but we can also be discussing milliseconds on a 2023 cpu and a DAW with latency compensation. Not every justification needs to be based on incorrect information.

 

Last edited: Sep 20, 2023

That depends, If they are bypassing loads of protection code of course it'll be faster. It may be just a few msecs in some cases but still faster.

 

If Usain Bolt (R2R) can run the 100 meters in 9.58 seconds, why can't he do the same with hurdles every 10 meters to jump over? It's the same with the protection impediments devs throw into the mix, even if it is just milliseconds of a difference in opening time. Prove me wrong.

 

Last edited: Sep 20, 2023

I dont run ANY dongles on my production machines and wont have them either my friend. However I have had experiences of cause and effect with scene release vs legit versions of a number of video production apps, the scene versions being NOTICEABLY improved in terms of speed of operation. Personally I'm tired of your snippy condescending attitude on this, and I am done with you. If you don't believe the witches (like they have reason to lie about anything) then go out and BUY the stuff and quit pissing about stupid shit here...

 

When you come up with a theory, you must also demonstrate it: this is how the scientific method works, otherwise someone might call you mythomaniac. I'm starting to suspect that there is no evidence for this “warez version - faster than original” theory (and no, I don't believe the witches). It could be true, or could even be the opposite: cracks damaging the original algorithm, creating malfunctions, latencies, etc.. Nobody knows the real truth until some geek will study in-deep this problem, with accurate measurements.

I apologize if I made you nervous, that wasn't my intent: since you seem like a tech-savy I was trying to motivate you to finally have a test. I guess it's a topic that concerns many of us in here

 

Last edited: Sep 21, 2023

The difficult part arranging the test is getting someone to buy an iLok application they have an available copy of just to test this. Maybe not even just one, because they have other encryption to consider. (the above pspaudio related image shows this). Another variable to test would be the performance of licenses stored on a dongle, or iLok web-based storage. I do believe R2R's statements about it, but from what my own experience is with iLok web storage, i'm not sure how much faster it could really be. I have Falcon set as my default "new software instrument" in Logic and when I create one it is not measurably different than loading an empty new midi software instrument channel. It's instantaneous.

 

ill just wait till those UAD native plugs are available along with WAVES and Plugin Alliance ;) soon

 

my freind has an iLok key, she puts all her plugins on it, demos on the cloud account and when she goes to a studio she installs the plugs and they run of the usb key....the whole ilok thing is that it syncs home, you can how ever break a demo (I wish I could) and then block the syncing..after this move them to the computers you want..

 

WAVES and PA are already available - have been for years. But hells yeah on the all the UAD natives - crack em twice!!

 

@tzzsmk
Hmmm, who are the two ladies in your avatar?

 

tzz and smk