What's new

NI will no longer activate discontinued products from May 31st (NOW FIXED]

So NI says in their terms:
I would say to clone the drives on your current working PC or Mac (with Acronis TrueImage or something like that), so you can always restore the hard drive image(s) if anything fails. That preserves activations. Acronis will restore even if you have to swap out a legacy motherboard, etc...

Unfortunately that's not the case. Most developers base activations on your board serial number AFAIK. (Different from your machine's generic serial number, and often not accessible to you as the user.)

I've cloned to new machines a good 4 or 5 times in the past 9-10 years. Machine-based activations never stick, (IME at least). NI, Izotope, Acustica, IK Multimedia, iLok Machine-based Activations, ... the list goes on... All required re-activation every time. While I'm not crazy about being tethered to an iLok its one upside is you can move it to any machine as long as you keep the license on a physical key.

The short version is machine based activations require the same machine to work. This means while it's a good idea to clone a drive of your current config, it also means you should hang onto your old machine and run it as a legacy box unless you're willing to part with these libraries.
 
Last edited:
I think NI is handling this pretty well after all. Thank you Matt for keeping us updated. Yes one could argue the whole thing shouldn't have happened at all in the first place, but then again things happen. I really don't want to believe they did this out of pure evilness or not caring about their customers. It would probably just have been more convenient for them to let all these old products go, maybe thinking people don't even use or care about them that much anymore. But people actually do, as we've now seen. And NI seems to be listening and trying to come up with a better solution. I think to us customers these things sometimes appear more simple than they actually are. We simply ask, "can't they just make it so we can keep reactivating our stuff". For NI I believe it's lot more complicated: how to do it, what's the cost, are there any risks involved, contracts to be taken into account, etc.

That being said I really hope they come up with a solution. I don't own or use any of the products on the list, but as a beginner composer I'd feel somewhat uncomfortable to keep building my system around Kontakt knowing my libraries are only good for certain-yet-unknown time period. IMO it also makes buying a perpetual licence seem more like a subscription model, which is kinda funny (but not really). On the other hand I'm not sure why it bothers me that much. Do I really believe I'm able (or willing) to use the libraries I buy today in 2040?
 
I certainly agree and see now that there was better ways to address this topic from the start. I also totally see why we need to be closer to the users on forum such as VI and get different perspective on such matters.

I disagree that this is important. NI has always been remote and opaque compared to small developers who hang out on forums and chat. But this was never a problem as long as NI's actions were honorable.

Two years ago in response to a direct query I was told in no uncertain terms that offline activation would continue to be supported for those products that were purchased when the rules of the old Service Center were in place. This promise is not being kept. Keeping one's promises is far more important than being "closer to users on forums" or "getting different perspectives." Communicating effectively about why you're doing the wrong thing is not the same as doing the right thing.
 
as a beginner composer I'd feel somewhat uncomfortable to keep building my system around Kontakt knowing my libraries are only good for certain-yet-unknown time period.

Just don't assume any of the proprietary players aren't under the same threat of DRM activation mechanisms getting abandoned in the future. If it uses DRM, it's a threat to your investment. The question isn't "if", it's "when" it's going to stop working for one reason or another.

The advantage with Kontakt imho is that (afaik) it's already cracked, and it's "single point of failure" for the DRM scheme, meaning you only need a cracked Kontakt to use all your libraries again vs. having to find cracked versions of each individual library. I'm thinking of events like NI going out of business or similar. And even with future OS incompatibilities and such, with just one very important app ruling an entire ecosystem, there's a chance that some reverse engineering wizards would go in and try fixing things even without the sourcecode.
 
Last edited:
I certainly agree and see now that there was better ways to address this topic from the start. I also totally see why we need to be closer to the users on forum such as VI and get different perspective on such matters.
The main issue is that the timetable is really un
Hey Everyone,

Matt here from NI.

I'm slowly trying to address everyone on all the platforms.We sincerely appreciate all the feedback about this and want to directly engage with you all about it.
As a result of everyone's feedback, we updated our end of life article with some additional information but also went back to discuss this internally. As you would be able to read at the bottom of the page, we will spend more time investigating this topic and look into possible workaround to address the end of life of our old activation mechanisms.
https://support.native-instruments.com/ ... 0006053397

I hope this helps clarify a few elements and happy to answer more on here directly
It's nice you chimed in here, I certainly appreciate seeing NI make an effort... (Especially with how toxic forums can be...)

The most obvious issue to me is the timetable. NI certainly could have opted to give a minimum of one year notice. I think that would go a long way to fan some of the inevitable flames.

The other issue, and it's a serious one AFAIC is the point Charlie Clouser raises in the 1st few pages. If you haven't read that you really should... Something like this has the ability to disrupt delivering to various film or TV franchises. For some people here this has far bigger consequences than just being an inconvenience.

And out of curiosity... Is this decision really partially tied to Catalina? If so this has some pretty huge implications for people tethered to macOS.

Hopefully you can relay some of the more consequential issues in this thread, like the one raised above, up the chain... And as I said, I think it'd go a long way for NI to consider the pushing the timetable back so people with real world gigs tied to these libraries have some time to figure out an alternative...
 
Last edited:
@jcrosby if I could offer an alternative POV to two things you posted above:

1) The timetable might be of practical relevance to some, but has nothing to do with the core ethical issue: the right to use the software for as long as our computers are able to run it. Losing a library solely because the developer is no longer willing to activate it is never okay, regardless of whether the deadline is May 31st, 2020, 2025 or 3025.

2) Yes, there are some who are using some of the libraries for high-dollar, high-stake TV or film, and yes, this is a big deal for all concerned. It does not, however, in any way make it more important that the developer honor the ethical obligation to allow a library to either be activated or else liberated from the need for activation. The right to use what one has paid for is exactly the same for both the world-renowned professional and the most inept, clumsy amateur.
 
The main issue is that the timetable is really un

It's nice you chimed in here, I certainly appreciate seeing NI make an effort... (Especially with how toxic forums can be...)

The most obvious issue to me is the timetable. NI certainly could have opted to give a minimum of one year notice. I think that would go a long way to fan some of the inevitable flames.

The other issue, and it's a serious one AFAIC is the point Charlie Clouser raises in the 1st few pages. If you haven't read that you really should... Something like this has the ability to disrupt delivering to various film or TV franchises. For some people here this has far bigger consequences than just being an inconvenience.

And out of curiosity... Is this decision really partially tied to Catalina? If so this has some pretty huge implications for people tethered to macOS.

Hopefully you can relay some of the more consequential issues in this thread, like the one raised above, up the chain... And as I said, I think it'd go a long way for NI to consider the pushing the timetable back so people with real world gigs tied to these libraries have some time to figure out an alternative...
This is when they will quit supporting new installations. I don't understand why that is an immediate issue for most people who use these libraries. If you aren't planning on getting a new computer, it isn't an issue for maybe years. And hopefully NI will provide a solution before then.
 
I don't understand why that is an immediate issue for most people who use these libraries. If you aren't planning on getting a new computer, it isn't an issue for maybe years.

The fact that the immediate issue is for a subset of users (what percentage we have no way of knowing) doesn't make the issue unimportant. After all, a LOT of people in this field buy new computers every few years. Last year my MOBO died suddenly, and I had to rebuild my computer. We have examples above of active, busy, seemingly successful composers for whom this is an immediate issue.

And perhaps the most important outcome of this issue COULD affect most users, the weakening of trust in the future reliability of what they have purchased. It is much harder to rebuild trust than to build it originally. How NI handles this will determine if they can shore up what trust they have built, or they will face the daunting alternative of rebuilding trust.
 
Sad also for Nostalgia set. but is really bad thing. btw i dont own any of these but i talk one what i thinked getting. i feel i can luckily get few sounds what i mean form other ways.
 
And out of curiosity... Is this decision really partially tied to Catalina? If so this has some pretty huge implications for people tethered to macOS.
Well, it was mentioned more than once in the NI forum post. Catalina doubles down on security, so if Service Centre is wanting access to deeper level hardware data etc, that's where the block is. Maybe. I'm not a programmer, so take this as amateur mulling.

Reading between the lines, it looks like NI aren't really straying from the original plan too much. Key is the term "work around." Perhaps this will be some sort of "legacy" product registration service, with future activations done directly via email in tandem with NI support.
 
I certainly agree and see now that there was better ways to address this topic from the start. I also totally see why we need to be closer to the users on forum such as VI and get different perspective on such matters.
Refreshing.

We're your lifeblood. We want you to succeed. Win-win.
 
The fact that the immediate issue is for a subset of users (what percentage we have no way of knowing) doesn't make the issue unimportant. After all, a LOT of people in this field buy new computers every few years. Last year my MOBO died suddenly, and I had to rebuild my computer. We have examples above of active, busy, seemingly successful composers for whom this is an immediate issue.

And perhaps the most important outcome of this issue COULD affect most users, the weakening of trust in the future reliability of what they have purchased. It is much harder to rebuild trust than to build it originally. How NI handles this will determine if they can shore up what trust they have built, or they will face the daunting alternative of rebuilding trust.
The comment was related to a comment that complained about the short time frame until NI would no longer support authorizing these libraries. I was just saying it isn't a short time if you have no plans on changing your system any time soon. Most commercial studios run the same systems for years because changing the computer means downtime they can't afford. So I don't understand why this is an issue. Especially not if NI provides a fix.

Now that said, I don't own any of these libraries (though I would have loved to have the EW ones) and I am concerned about the future libraries I do own, since Kontakt is my go to sample player. I'm waiting to see if NI follows their EULA and provides some sort of license key to allow these libraries to work. I doubt they can remove the DRM from non NI libraries. If they do, I won't worry so much about it.
 
“Something like this has the ability to disrupt delivering to various film or TV franchises. For some people here this has far bigger consequences than just being an inconvenience.”

This.
 
Looking on the bright side, maybe Native Access will at least stop marking such products as in need of being installed. :) On macOS, I have tried every workaround imaginable, and spent hours to no avail, finally giving up a month ago.

Also this will make it more obvious to us, when we have forgotten to delete a superseded product.
 
For example, I believe that Intel CPU's have serial numbers embedded in the microcode. I don't know whether they are included in NI's activation codes but they would be if I were developing a DRM system.
They do, it's a GUID that gets created based on the CPU/Mobo combo. Every restore I've ever done, such as someone wanting their hard drive in their laptop swapped out with a new SSD, has resulted in the machine firing right back up and all software like Office, etc, working. HOWEVER, I admit I haven't done a restore to NI stuff, so if they have worked in DRM to that level, then I guess there's a chance it wouldn't work. TrueImage has a way around the different mobo issue during the restore process, and Windows is still activated after the restore with the same CPU in a new Mobo. If NI takes it farther than that, then OK, yeah, NI isn't being very nice.
 
Unfortunately that's not the case. Most developers base activations on your board serial number AFAIK. (Different from your machine's generic serial number, and often not accessible to you as the user.)

I've cloned to new machines a good 4 or 5 times in the past 9-10 years. Machine-based activations never stick, (IME at least). NI, Izotope, Acustica, IK Multimedia, iLok Machine-based Activations, ... the list goes on... All required re-activation every time. While I'm not crazy about being tethered to an iLok its one upside is you can move it to any machine as long as you keep the license on a physical key.

The short version is machine based activations require the same machine to work. This means while it's a good idea to clone a drive of your current config, it also means you should hang onto your old machine and run it as a legacy box unless you're willing to part with these libraries.

Valid point. I replied to another reply of the same nature here. The concept should be tested but that's no a simple task.
 
I bet those numbers are a tiny percentage of the NI userbase. Something we do a lot on this forum is forget we’re a niche in the wider music tech universe.

Yes I think that's where the confusion started I would think. We relied on numbers rather than asking communities. The number of activation is quite small and partners also mentioned that these products were all end of life.
What we should have done is reach out to communities such as VI and engage in an honest conversation about the difficulties we are facing and how we can find a suitable solution for everybody.
 
Well, it was mentioned more than once in the NI forum post. Catalina doubles down on security, so if Service Centre is wanting access to deeper level hardware data etc, that's where the block is. Maybe. I'm not a programmer, so take this as amateur mulling.

Reading between the lines, it looks like NI aren't really straying from the original plan too much. Key is the term "work around." Perhaps this will be some sort of "legacy" product registration service, with future activations done directly via email in tandem with NI support.
Fair point... Well, at least I know to focus my angst where it actually seems appropriate; Apple... Catalina's raised a ton of concerns for me about longevity since day one. And since I anticipate people quoting this out of context I'm placing this here now... Security's fine; the security argument however doesn't have to default to removing a users ability to define which of these two take higher priority.... (But its Apple so you know...)
 
Last edited:
I think NI is handling this pretty well after all. Thank you Matt for keeping us updated. Yes one could argue the whole thing shouldn't have happened at all in the first place, but then again things happen. I really don't want to believe they did this out of pure evilness or not caring about their customers. It would probably just have been more convenient for them to let all these old products go, maybe thinking people don't even use or care about them that much anymore. But people actually do, as we've now seen. And NI seems to be listening and trying to come up with a better solution. I think to us customers these things sometimes appear more simple than they actually are. We simply ask, "can't they just make it so we can keep reactivating our stuff". For NI I believe it's lot more complicated: how to do it, what's the cost, are there any risks involved, contracts to be taken into account, etc.

That being said I really hope they come up with a solution. I don't own or use any of the products on the list, but as a beginner composer I'd feel somewhat uncomfortable to keep building my system around Kontakt knowing my libraries are only good for certain-yet-unknown time period. IMO it also makes buying a perpetual licence seem more like a subscription model, which is kinda funny (but not really). On the other hand I'm not sure why it bothers me that much. Do I really believe I'm able (or willing) to use the libraries I buy today in 2040?

Appreciate the feedback!

There is indeed a completely different perspective especially when it comes to the technical aspect from each side but we should be able to tackle that by being as transparent as possible. I think what we usually missing is actively engaging with you guys and offering more details than the more broad announcement we make. Good learning and hopefully we'll see more of that in the future.
 
Top Bottom