Re: [linux-audio-user] (OSS vs. RME) vs. (OSS + RME) [slightly OT]

New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Other groups

Subject: Re: [linux-audio-user] (OSS vs. RME) vs. (OSS + RME) [slightly OT]
From: Marek Peteraj (marpet_AT_naex.sk)
Date: Sun Dec 19 2004 - 16:16:14 EET


On Sat, 2004-12-18 at 19:01, Rick Taylor wrote:
> On Saturday 18 December 2004 10:48 pm, Marek Peteraj wrote:
> > On Sat, 2004-12-18 at 14:56, Rick Taylor wrote:
> > > Is there anyplace where you get stats and demographics as to the number
> > > of RME users on linux? Maybe if you could approach them with concrete
> > > numbers?
> >
> > In case of RME this wouldn't be that accurate since there don't seem to
> > be that many people who are willing to participate on a market research
> > type project(enter your name and type of card). The forum thread didn't
> > go above 30 posts, but there were many RME users who participated in the
> > RME thread on lad/lau, which in turn didn't participate in the forum
> > thread, and a rough search through the lad archives revealed another
> > dozen of RME users(haven't tried lau and ardour dev/user lists). There
> > are people who bought 2 products from RME. And there are many people
> > outside lad/lau which do use linux audio and probably RME hardware(so
> > such project would need to be broadly announced, /. and similar).
> >
> > The ATI numbers are pretty accurate though (the ATI petition).
>
> It's too bad there's no way to notify all linux users of something... like a
> newsticker for administrative issues, security announcements and so on.
>
> It just makes sense that if linux as a whole is going to maximize its
> capabilities that it be organized.

Absolutely agreed. However, judging from a year old discussion, it seems
theres no consensus to do this at least for linux audio.
 
> > Copyright isn't the issue here. The issue here is basically - someone
> > does work he doesn't get paid for, and another one profits from such
> > work.
>
> I meant RMEs copyright to their firmware/drivers.

I know. :)

> It's the only thing really
> keeping you from just using that code. If folk could give them a reason to go
> open source with it I'm sure they'd let go of it or write linux firmware and
> work with developers to get compatible software put together.

This is different for specifications, drivers and firmware.
In case of firmware, the are probably more hurdles than just the wish to
stay proprietary, since there are no free devtools for for most fpgas,
dsps and such.
In case of specs or drivers, they are free to do what rme did with
fireface or what audioscience usually does with their own products.
It all becomes a moral issue right now.

> {I don't see
> why they'd not want to pay folk to write linux firmware. {open source or not}
> Apparently they don't realize how many linux users they have.

But it seems ridiculous to me that a typical company isn't tracking
every opportunity to generate revenue.

Marek


New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Other groups

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Sun Dec 19 2004 - 14:22:22 EET