Software/Plug-in Development

[jbuntz]

So I'm working on some plug-ins, pretty much in the algorithm testing stage right now, and almost done. My question is, what format would be the best to go to first if it's a new plug-in idea? TDM? VST? Audio Units? What about protection against pirating?

[stealthbalance]

pro tools tdm. what have you got brewing ???
s

[fishtop_records]

Originally posted by jbuntz
what format would be the best to go to first if it's a new plug-in idea? TDM? VST? Audio Units? What about protection against pirating?

The first question, format, depends on what target market you want. ProTools TDM is one choice for that market. A larger market (but usually less interested in real expensive stuff) is the Windows DXi market for use in things like Cakewalk Sonar.

Serious piracy protection is hard. For some comments on it, look at the Pace FAQ developed by Sonar users at:
http://www.pfarrell.com/prc/pace.html
It is a draft, but will get you started.

[Randall]

thats funny, Sonar 3 has already been fully cracked and is everywhere

[fishtop_records]

Originally posted by Randall
thats funny, Sonar 3 has already been fully cracked and is everywhere

Huh?
Sonar has a trivial protection scheme.
A Sonar "crack" would be trivial, not
worth the effort.

It does not use Pace. But many of
the plugins do.

And Sonar 3.0 Producer has VSampler
bundled in, which uses a Pace-like
protection scheme, or did until it caused
so many problems that Twelve-Tone made
the developer revert to a simpler, more
reliable approach.

[ctrl+alt+del]

Originally posted by jbuntz
So I'm working on some plug-ins, pretty much in the algorithm testing stage right now, and almost done. My question is, what format would be the best to go to first if it's a new plug-in idea? TDM? VST? Audio Units? What about protection against pirating?

Well, it depends : if this is your first plugin, you might want to choose VST as it's quite simple.
Also, AU and VST are easier as you are free to develop for this format : do you have the Digidesign agreement to develop for RTAS or TDM?
The last point is the 'plugin idea' in itself : if the plugin is gonna use a lot of memory, forget TDM as there is not much memory on board.

Another bad point for TDM : you say that you're testing your algorithm right now.
If you are using floating point operation, beware you'll have to rewrite the entire algorithm for TDM (and fixed point math is tricky)

Cheers

cad

[matucha]

Be prepared for being cracked if few weeks, sorry... they are unstopable. Copy protection? Kind of wasting your time, do something simple, unbreakable by normal users and then put your time into promotion. There are people who will buy it and there are the ones who don't ever buy software. Can't change that.

Good luck

[drew]

Have any iLok plugs been cracked?

[jbuntz]

Does Digidesign have some type of liscensing required for a TDM SDK? I can't find one anywhere.

[peteri]

You need to apply to Digidesign to get the SDK, check www.digidevelopers.com.

I tried a few years ago, and had to jump through loads of hoops and got nowhere. I've been told the process has improved since then.

Digi are meant to give you more support in a trade of for that, they also used to put some pressure on not to develop VST plugins - they wanted to keep you RTAS/TDM only - but again I think this may have changed.

Good luck!

Pete

[jbuntz]

Sounds like a mess.

[fishtop_records]

It is a mess.

I think it can be a nice little side business. Which is what, for example, db-audioware.com looks like.

Make a cool product, sell it to folks who
like it, put in simple registration and
don't worry that it will be cracked.
With luck, you'll be able to buy a
couple of nice microphones, or
at least a new, fast computer.

The semi-serious plug-in makers
have been crashing and burning
a lot latey. Some had some nice products, i.e. Ultrafunk.

[Urs]

Originally posted by drew
Have any iLok plugs been cracked?

I've heard, iLok has a 14 days trial feature. - I've been told there's a hack that resets these 14 days for each plugin again and again...

My bet on copy protection: make a simple registration scheme that prevents casual piracy. Anything else will cause more hassle and will be cracked anyway.

;) Urs

[fishtop_records]

Originally posted by morpheus

Fishtop_records thinks plug-in development is only good for developers making pocket change.

The Sonar FAQ on PACE reads like sour grapes.

No, but I think asking for critical
market research on a forum
means that either you are just
starting out, or are aiming low.

The business failures of vendors
with good to great plug in products
is well documented.

The cakewalk.audio FAQ on Pace
states that it is a work in progress.
How would you suggest changing
it?

iLok looks like a reasonable product.
InterLok and InterLok Pro
can not deliver either "copy" or "use"
protection.

The fact that DigiDesign has used
Pace and achieved near universal
market share over the years does
not mean that Pace enabled it.
It could be that they have a wonderful
product that is a success in spite
of the fact that they use a "user hostile" license enforcement scheme.

You are probably right that the DXi market is more likely to be a short
term winner. But some of the
potential depends on outside events,
such as whether ProTools keeps its
current market share.

The only thing I'm willing to bet money
on is that there will be a lot more
WinTel machines sold than Macs
over the next five years. Beyond that,
my crystal ball ges fuzzy.

[Urs]

Originally posted by morpheus
Urs - your comment on the iLok trial feature is partly incorrect.

Hehe, I was just posting what I heard... stuff I gathered from fellow developers...

As to pocket change:

Audio plugin developers do not get rich by what they do. It's not like inventing ebay.

But from all I've heard from my developer friends, you can make a decent living. - My Zebra runs quite well, so I tend to believe that. It's a little early to say how it will be in the long run, though.

What really matters is quality. If you deliver useful products, good support and invest in QA (Zebra beta testing started 6 months before release, and was improved over that period), it will certainly pay out.

Cheers,

;) Urs

[jbuntz]

I'm starting a VST version. What is this iLock thing? I found lots of hits of obviously the wrong things.

[fishtop_records]

Originally posted by jbuntz
I'm starting a VST version. What is this iLock thing? I found lots of hits of obviously the wrong things.

http://www.pfarrell.com/prc/pace.html

and
http://www.paceap.com/

Between the two, you can get up to speed.

Their dongle product is iLok.
InterLok and InterLok Pro are
their software only products.

The claim is that they prevent bad guys from stealing your software.

[fishtop_records]

Originally posted by morpheus
Anyone willing to go to the lengths necessary to crack Interlok better make sure they have a good attorney, because I read that the guy who cracked Interlok a few years back on OS 9 ended up in jail.

Thanks to the DMCA, which the million dollar a year lawyers of the RIAA wrote for your compliant congressment to agree to, any attempt to reverse engineer arround "copy protection" is illegal.

Too bad the RIAA wasn't paying any attention to the interests and rights of musicians, songwriters or engineers. They are owned, lock stock and
barrel, by the Big 5 labels.

So you will never see me talk about
how to crack it. I will stand by
my assessment that it can not deliver
what PaceAP claims.

[CV7]

I would definitely think VST has alot of potential.

[fishtop_records]

Originally posted by morpheus
I'm not a huge fan of the DMCA, but I don't have a problem with someone who hacks plug-ins going to jail. It's theft, and they are putting honest people out of a job.

If people don't like copy protection, then don't buy music software.

I'm not arguing with you. Don't quite understand where you are going with this. Use of unlicensed software,
or use not in accordance with
the license is theft. Breaking the
"copy protection" or not has nothing
to do with the moral or ethical problem.


I wrote crypto code and DRMs professionally for years. It isn't
that I dislike "copy protection"
it is that no one provides it.
You can copy anything. It is the use
that they protect.

The distinction is not just symantics,
it has serious impact on the design and
use.

I've reworded your suggestion only
a tiny bit, if you don't like "copy protection" schemes used by
one piece of music software,
don't buy it. There are choices.
That is what is great about capitalism.

And if there is great software that
is unique and uses one scheme or
anther, let folks know so they
can make informed decisions.

That's what engineering is all about.
Trading functionality, "quality" against
cost.

Otherwise, we've be buying original
Telefunkens for gigiing rock bands.
You have to apply the right tool
at the right time.

[salvator]

I'm starting a VST version. What is this iLock thing?

Hello jbuntz,

What kind of plug ins are you doing ?
Reverb ? EQ ? FX ?

I'm in the final steps of my own too, so I'm very interested by the copy protection subject.

Anybody know how to implement copy protection ?
Any code for simple registration form ?


Thanks,

[jbuntz]

It's not really eq, reverb or effects. I'll just say it's a very useful utility plugin that's begging to be made. Email me krampus108@hotmail.com

[jbuntz]

People buy lots of the hardware versions! And they are pricey!