Messages posted by Studiomagic

Quote Studiomagic - You don't know how to use this forum. You caused a text formatting error in your second thread when you quoted someone but you put your response inside the quote. That person did not say that. You did so there is the text formatting error. You can fix it by deleting your post or fix it so everyone can read it properly.

If you have any issue you need to start a new post and use the forum correctly.

I think I do know how to use the forum since you’re responding to something I wrote.

What I think you meant was I left a tag in there when cutting unneeded filler from a response, didn’t notice and bad syntax makes you nervous. My quote is clearly outside of other people’s comments and it's very very clear I'm responding to someone.

Anyway, I’d gladly edit it, but I’m going to leave it there just to be irritating. Enjoy.

[Moderation Note: Formatting issue corrected to avoid confusion]

"Did you see my above bolded words? Those are EXCEPTIONS, with the numbers clearly defined (like 2 or 3 but not whatever), they are not the general rule for software.

Vegas and Adobe are pro level programs that cost at that level and that price can "cover" the one or two extra installs."

Vegas is not any more a pro-level program that PD. PD is a better professional option in my opinion. To your point though... it's also sold at the same price point as PD.

Adobe isn't a program, it's a company. Adobe Premiere on it’s own can be licensed pretty cheap.

Regarding covering the cost of extra installs… what cost? Is someone coming over to code it directly on the 2nd machine? lol

It’s not lost revenue because nobody in their right mind will pay full price to put a tool they purchased on a secondary work station. It’s nonsense. Cyberlink is simply walking away from this very resonable consumer need and forcing clients to find their own solutions.

I'm going to contribute my two cents to this old forum because the issue is currently affecting me as a PD15 and CD user.

I have to admit; I'm surprised at everyone’s response here. If they are truly not agents for Cyberlink or pros who get free product demos, then I don’t know how fellow consumers can support a practice that’s unfair toward the consumer. I'm not feeling the single computer policy defenses… they sound very much like they’re coming from the perspective of the software developers.

Also, let’s not marginalize this woman because she’s not from the US. She’s right.

To the person using MS Windows as comparable software that can’t be used on multiple computers, this is flawed logic. Windows is an operating system, not a tool used within one. If you want to bring up Microsoft, they DO offer reasonable solutions for using tools you’ve purchased on more than one machine. They always have. Every reputable software company does.

Saying most applications you purchase are for only one computer is bluntly false IF you measure it against the appropriate products. Aside from Microsoft, all firms from Adobe on down provide reasonable solutions for more than once activation. Cyberlink must realize this is a controversial policy because it’s hidden upon purchase and omitted from the FAQ section.

Multi computer use is allowed because it’s within the scope of a customer’s legitimate needs. If you have a work station and you want to edit on the road with your laptop too, it's unreasonable to buy an entirely new copy of the software. Unless you're opening an editing class, buying 10 copies in bulk from a 2nd hand provider is a non-solution being dressed up as a legit option. You can't put lipstick on a pig and pretend it's a woman.

Short-term thinking in the tech business promotes software piracy. If people are provided with a reasonable path to pay for a 2nd setup, Cyberlink would be able to upsell their current clients and even start a consistent flow of revenue if they go the rental route. THAT is the right way to get paid for your code. Everyone is happy/ everybody wins.

By offering NO solution (again, buying TEN copies isn't a solution), consumers will feel justified to torrent. Is this unfair? Maybe. But if someone feels they already paid for the software and that's their only solution...

Is it unfair to hide a product’s unusual limitations and make the consumer discover it on their own after purchase? I believe it is.

The lesson lost in a world where too many firms don't get properly compensated for their products is this:
Every business has a responsibility to read the market, charge what the consumer will pay and cater to their customers. Software developers are competing with "I'll get it for free" and need to do their part to ensure the ROI encourages clients to stay in the system. Most people prefer NOT to get software from a torrent site and would pay a small fee or a subscription rate to use it on another computer.

Everyone here HAS paid for this product and supported it. We are not software pirates, we are clients. I need this on a laptop and I'm absolutely not going to double down on cost or buy TEN licenses from a 2nd hand source. I don’t want to. I own this copy of PD15 and while I have no right to reproduce it, I do have a right to use MY software on another one of my own devices.

Now what?

PD is wonderful software, but I can't even recommend it to anyone because I consider this policy a fatal flaw. Sad.