In order to have UI scaling either you need to create raster graphics in a range of sizes to accommodate most zoom levels requested by users. That invariably increases the size of the plugin. An alternative is using vector graphics instead, but then you have to recreate the plugin’s graphics to vectors. In that case, you might see a slight increase in resource usage by the plugin as the images are calculated on the fly and scaled on the fly as well. There’s also the IK approach which involves using 3D interfaces.
Quality pitch shifting would require a fair amount of latency, it’s meant to be a studio mixing plugin - not a live/tracking plugin. For that there are plenty of other options out there, even free ones. It has nothing to do with what year it is - the pitchshifting/DSP/computing time for such an effect hasn’t changed all that much in the past 20 years. You either have low-latency weak sound pitchshifting, or high latency high quality.
I actually appreciate the addition of the pitch plugin with quality in mind instead of latency, because when I’m mixing, I already have plenty of other plugins adding latency so there isn’t much of a difference… Latency doesn’t stack across plugins unless they are in series, so if you have a plugin that creates 400ms latency, and a plugin that creates 300ms latency in separate chains… the 300ms plugin just operates within the latency of the 400ms created by the other plugin, as long as your CPU/memory can handle both. tasks simulataneously
In regards to feedback loops, for 99% of users, it makes sense to avoid feedback loops and blowing peoples ears/equipment. For the 1% of people who want to utilize feedback loops - they can devise their own methods or use a plugin with cross-plugin routing. Cubase is a global corporate commercial piece of software, feedback loops is more of a boutique thing dude, a niche of niches. We should be grateful Cubase has retained and even reinvested in it’s normal niches, like PLE.
I bet you have a whole book of silly complaints that have lead you to believe Steinberg will be gone in 5 years… so I’m not going to continue… Steinberg could probably survive off Dorico alone…. you know… the new benchmark in scoring software pretty much everyone has switched to… or Wavelab, pretty much the most popular mastering purposed software…. Groove Agent… Halion… ASIO… Cubasis…Spectralayers… VST platform… Nuendo… There’s a reason Yamaha invested in Steinberg, I wouldn’t presume you know more than all these people…
Other companies / DAWs also don’t scale plugins that don’t have that feature built-in. They might allow the OS to do it, but most of the time it looks unsightly.
If there’s any criticism in this regard to Steinberg, it’s they should’ve made Retrologue, Padshop, etc. scalable years ago. It’s not like 4K+ screens are a new fad that started this year. I’ve been struggling with it already around 2017/18 and it was one of the reasons I left Ableton for Bitwig because of it.
Anyway - back to the topic, please 
1 Like
if you have a Steinberg dongle and old registrations, you could get these up and running on a separate computer.
1 Like
No, I don’t 
You could get these open in the current version of Cubase as well, but they won’t work without their license.
1 Like