[Greg Nieman]

I guess sometimes no answer actually is an answer. I’d just delete it but that ability isn’t enabled, so let’s just leave it at, “I guess I should just recognize hyperbole when I see it.”

[Greg Nieman]

Look, I’d argue here that you didn’t prove anything other than what I just said. But… You were nice enough to reply and you did make an investigative effort and in appreciation I think I’d just like to let it drop and just move to the 161 tempo till I bring the MIDI back into the DAW. It ain’t 100% optimal but I can live with it in the long run, so WTH.

Again, thanks for checking, much appreciated. But let’s just put this one to rest for now.

[Greg Nieman]

Two completely different installations with very, very different software setups. And if you’re hypothesis is correct and it’s resource contention, then  why doesn’t it continue when you move up to 161? And goes away after knocking off only 1 BPM?

Again, I debug issues a developer customer base, and this has a very math-y, somebody got too clever for their own good kind of smell to it. Again, not my code, I can’t see it, but when something just occurs at a specific value across two heterogeneous setups my spidey sense just tingles.

So while I appreciate the input, I don’t think think that assertion passes the test for me. Not really expecting much here anyway. Just assuming I’m going to need to run a funny looking tempo while I’m building in SD3 and go back to 160 when I move it back over to the DAW. Or maybe I’ll just stay there and edit in Cubase. There’s a few upsides to staying in SD3 but it’s not like I’m doing anything that complex.

[Greg Nieman]

On 2 different classes of machines that both exhibit exactly the same behavior? And I mean, not much extra is running at the time. Not even the DAW initially since it showed up in SD3 standalone.I guess anything’s possible but from the perspective of someone who troubleshoots a lot of software issues on a daily basis coincidences like that are few and far between. If switching activation status per machine and the associated limits weren’t kind of a PITA I’d do an installation on my Macbook Pro to see if it was consistent.

[Greg Nieman]

Not sure what to say then. It does it on my self assembled workstation in my studio and on my new Dell XPS.  Curious on your setup though, since it’s not specified and makes me wonder if it’s hardware or OS related. Thanks for checking that, BTW.

[Greg Nieman]

@Erik said:

Forgot to answer. This bug is fixed now.

Actually just noticed this the other day installing on my second machine. Thanks for the heads up though, and for getting it fixed in a timely manner.

[Greg Nieman]

Sorry, didn’t see you were a mod. Email replies don’t show it as that, and it was my turn to miss something when I came back to reply. But there are two components to this question. One EZX *does* require you to authorize 2x. Is that as expected, but doing both authorizations should only show up as 1 slot when you look at your products in the portal? Or is it that you should only have to do one auth per EZX?

Again, it isn’t so much the mechanics of the request as that when it happens it leads to uncertainty on how to proceed. I would think that even if you did two authorizations and it showed up that way in the portal you’d want to document somewhere that some EZX packs diverted from the convention.

[Greg Nieman]

@Erik said:

So I thought… I checked and you are right. You only get two slots instead 2 + 2.

Regardless, it’s just a matter of sending a request to support and they will fee up the slots for you.

It would probably have been appropriate to check whether it worked that way before issuing a knee jerk response. And THEN checking and finding that wasn’t how it worked. I realize you were trying to be helpful, but straight up, it didn’t come off that way.

I realize that I have enough authorizations to cover the 2 computers, but that’s not the point. The point is, they don’t tell you how it works in any of the pre or post sales reference material, and you don’t get any options during the installation to plan for that. So you really can’t make an informed decision about what to do. It may, in fact, be stated somewhere but if it is then it isn’t somewhere that jumps out at you or anything.

AFA resetting authorizations, they DID reset them for me once. Even though I had the product for 4 years and had only asked for one re-auth,, the reply I got contained a snarky warning about installing on more than one computer. I mean, one request in 4 years and they feel the need to accuse you of piracy when you do take advantage of what you say is no big deal? And the last support request I turned in was completely ignored, actually. No response at all.

I’ve always said they make good products but from a customer focus perspective they have some challenges. I review everything I buy, and I posted this to make sure I understand what the circumstances are before I actually post something stating what my opinion of it is. If they say, “Oh sorry, we didn’t actually think about that” or “Oh, it’s described here but you have to do this to find it.” then I’m probably going to view it differently that if it’s along the lines of, “That’s the way it is, so get over it.” Or maybe they don’t reply at all again. But I’ll wait and see before I jump to any conclusions.

[Author]

Replies