Subject: [linux-audio-dev] Fwd: Creative's IP concerns
From: Bob Ham (node_AT_users.sourceforge.net)
Date: Thu Jan 24 2002 - 01:10:46 EET
-----Forwarded Message-----
> From: Garin Hiebert <ghiebert_AT_creativelabs.com>
> To: Bob Ham <node_AT_users.sourceforge.net>
> Subject: Re: IP concerns
> Date: 23 Jan 2002 14:44:00 -0800
>
> > I don't use the emu10k1 driver; I use alsa. The actual output works,
> > it's just in mono.. not very useful.
>
> If the ALSA code doesn't support stereo (which seems odd to me), then you
> might want to try out the emu10k1 code.
>
> > I wonder how much they would be helped if you (as you appear to have
> > accepted the role of spokesperson for creative) were a little more
> > forthcoming with specs?
>
> It I were to personally release a specification for the emu10k1 or any part
> of our proprietary codebase, I would be fired. I have and will continue to
> push for the release of chip specs -- just don't hold your breath. I have
> been told before that it isn't going to happen, and I'll be told again...
>
> > Fair enough, I appologise for being insulting, but I do think I deserve
> > an answer to the question beyond that: why *are* you so guarded with
> > specs on, not only your chips, but the cards that they are sat on, when
> > many other companies in a similar position (ie, loads of cash spent on
> > R&D and the possibilty of little chip companies at the rear nicking that
> > hard earned profit) aren't?
>
> The chip and the card are one and the same when it comes to programming an
> audio driver (at least for a Creative card). The interface for the chip is
> essentially right on the bus. As I said earlier, it is the position of my
> management that we will not release the full specification of the chip
> because doing so will reveal intellectual property to our competitors.
>
> If you can provide me with evidence that Creative's competitors are releasing
> specification information on their chips that are being used to create
> advanced effects (reverb, decoding, something like that), I'd be happy to
> have the information. If it turned out that I can covince Marketing that we
> are losing significant sales (which to Creative would have to be 100,000
> units or more per year I would think) to a competitor because of the lack of
> a spec, then perhaps the situation can be changed.
*Are* any of creative's competitors releasing specs for chips that do
advanced effects? I understand RME and MidiMan have been quite open,
but they use FPGA chips, and am I right in thinking those are
off-the-shelf chips with already open specs?
And, obviously, 100,000 is not what we're looking at, but does anyone
have any idea what the numbers could be? Is it 3 figures? Less than 2
*shudder* ? Any way to find out?
Bob
--
Bob Ham: bob_AT_ham.org GNU Hurd: http://hurd.gnu.org/
http://mp3.com/obelisk_uk
A pessimist expects the weather to get worse.
An optimist hopes it will improve.
A realist adjusts the sails.
attached mail follows:
On Wed, 2002-01-23 at 18:45, Garin Hiebert wrote: > > And then we come > > to linux. I can't even use the headphone socket on the front panel in > > linux. > > The utility you want is "dm" in the utilities directory -- it will allow you > to redirect the audio to the headphone socket.
I don't use the emu10k1 driver; I use alsa. The actual output works, it's just in mono.. not very useful.
> I understand. I'd like to say that we have a team of programmers working on > Linux support, but we don't. We have nobody at all working on Linux except > as a casual side-project due to personal interest. That said, the > open-source suppot is there for basic functionality.
I didn't buy the card for basic functionality. If I wanted basic funcionality I could have stuck with the motherboard's onboard "soundcard". And I don't care if creative assigns a swarm of programmers to linux support, I'd still want the specs so as I can do as I see fit with the hardware that I *own*, and share what I do with others.
> Some experimentation > has been done with the DSP functionality as well, but I don't know how mature > those efforts are.
I wonder how much they would be helped if you (as you appear to have accepted the role of spokesperson for creative) were a little more forthcoming with specs?
> > All this, and I really can find no reason in my mind as to *why* > > creative has decided to become such a crap company. > > Pardon me if I move on to my next email...
Fair enough, I appologise for being insulting, but I do think I deserve an answer to the question beyond that: why *are* you so guarded with specs on, not only your chips, but the cards that they are sat on, when many other companies in a similar position (ie, loads of cash spent on R&D and the possibilty of little chip companies at the rear nicking that hard earned profit) aren't?
Bob
--
Bob Ham: bob_AT_ham.org GNU Hurd: http://hurd.gnu.org/
http://mp3.com/obelisk_uk
A pessimist expects the weather to get worse.
An optimist hopes it will improve.
A realist adjusts the sails.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Thu Jan 24 2002 - 01:07:38 EET