Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Creative Vista Driver Modder Speaks Out

Posted by kdawson on Tue Apr 01, 2008 03:38 PM
from the no-good-deed-goes-unpunished dept.
hol writes sends a followup on Creative Labs shutting down the modder who made their drivers work with Vista. Wired is running daniel_k's response to the contretemps."
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Hardware: Creative Goes After Driver Modder 385 comments
FreedomFighter writes "Since the release of Windows Vista, Creative has promised their Sound Cards as being 'Vista Ready'. Unfortunately, as many unlucky customers did discover, this is not true. What the users actually found were buggy, feature crippled drivers. Creative insisted that features such as Decoding of Dolby® Digital and DTS(TM) signals and DVD-Audio which worked fine in WinXP, would not work on windows Vista. With Creative releasing less than one new driver a year, things seemed bleak. Fortunately, a talented user, Daniel_K, was recently able to 'fix' many of the drivers, enabling the incompatible features and also fixing many bugs. Just today Creative has decided to put a stop to this. They removed all links to his modified drivers, and banned several users who were posting links to the now banned drivers."
[+] Creative Backs Down on Vista Driver Debacle 228 comments
In the wake of last week's driver debacle, Creative has finally decided to back down for PR purposes. Modder Daniel_K, author of the offending Vista drivers, has had his posts on the Creative forums reinstated. According to Creative the move was to avoid infringing on other company's IP. "Daniel_K is incensed by Creative. 'They publicly threatened me, just to show their arrogance,' he told El Reg by email. He told us that Creative contacted him on a chat session. 'They were sarcastic, ironic and asked me if I wanted something from them, as if I were expecting something,' he wrote. 'It was my protest against them and would like to see how far it would go.'"
[+] News: $90 Asus Sound Card Whips Creative's Best 387 comments
EconolineCrush writes "Sound card giant Creative caught plenty of flak for its recent driver debacle, and has long been criticized for bullying competitors and stifling innovation. But few have been willing to compete with Creative head-on, allowing the company to milk its X-Fi audio processor for more than two and a half years. Now the SoundBlaster has a new challenger in the form of Asus' $90 Xonar DX, which delivers much better sound quality than the X-Fi, PCI Express connectivity, and support for real-time Dolby Digital Live encoding. The Xonar can even emulate the latest EAX positional audio effects, providing the most complete competition to the X-Fi available on the market."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • fp? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 01 2008, @03:39PM (#22934390)
    what is everybody busy reading the article or something?
      • Re:Obvious. (Score:5, Funny)

        by mrsteveman1 (1010381) on Tuesday April 01 2008, @06:32PM (#22936292) Homepage
        April fools day is confusing me.... are you pretending the Creative drivers for XP don't suck?

          • Re:Obvious. (Score:5, Informative)

            by Macthorpe (960048) on Wednesday April 02 2008, @02:26AM (#22938354) Journal
            How is this insightful? You clearly didn't read the article at all.

            Creative broke parts of their Vista drivers even though those parts would have worked fine. The modder re-enabled them and Creative threw a wobbly. This has nothing to do with DRM or media companies, and the only link to Microsoft is the OS the drivers were written for. It has everything to do with Creative forcing an upgrade path on their customers.

            Good work on writing a comment with all the buzzwords necessary to look insightful, though.
  • by bennomatic (691188) on Tuesday April 01 2008, @03:41PM (#22934420) Homepage

    I never know whether to bother with /. on April 1. The fact that TFA is on Wired is no help. April fools is no longer funny.

    • by Finallyjoined!!! (1158431) on Tuesday April 01 2008, @03:46PM (#22934450)
      The guy tried to fix the drivers for Creative products, that worked in XP, but didn't work in Fista.

      Creative censored & censured him.

      Shame on Creative.

      Shame on Daniel for making Fista work :-)
      • by kesuki (321456) on Tuesday April 01 2008, @04:00PM (#22934648) Journal
        It's way at the bottom of TFA but
        "Alchemy: My last ALchemy release (1.00.08) was completely unlocked and could be used with any sound device from any vendor."

        So the reason why they shut him down was he released a version of their software that would enable advanced creative only (software) features to say, work on an integrated sound driver. His bad, and he did that as a result of creative 'removing' all links on their support forms to his (working) vista drivers.

        According to his words in TFA he's still modding but 'not the forbidden mods' that creative really was upset at him for doing.

        He's lucky he's in Brazil, I guess.
        • by MightyMartian (840721) on Tuesday April 01 2008, @03:54PM (#22934554) Journal
          So the real moral of the story is stay away from Creative.
            • by MightyMartian (840721) on Tuesday April 01 2008, @04:00PM (#22934640) Journal
              Well, as much as I despise Vista and Microsoft in general, they can't be faulted for some greedy hardware manufacturer trying to scam more money out of people that have already bought their stuff. It's part of the good faith agreement between consumer and manufacturer that the hardware, for a reasonable amount of time, will work on modern common operating systems.
              • by AnomaliesAndrew (908394) on Tuesday April 01 2008, @05:08PM (#22935396) Homepage
                It's a shame Creative bought E-mu. I sold my upgraded Proteus 2500 the day they sold out.

                My experience with Creative (post-SoundBlaster 16) has been nothing but horrible. The Extigy was one of the worst abortions in computer hardware history. It was marketed as a pro-level 24-bit external sound card, but really was no better than the junk sound cards you can find sitting on a pile at a flea market. And while one version of the driver (also unofficial at the time) was capable of offering the 24-bit capabilitiy the box so boldly proclaimed... I believe the hardware secretly only ran at 16-bit. And it would have constant dropouts any time the host computer would do any disk or network activity... and it was a new computer. This was because there was basically no capabilties in the box -- it was all just host-based. There wasn't even a significant buffer onboard, so all it took was a tiny bit of lag on the USB bus and it was stutter-city.

                A friend also had an Audigy back around this time, but didn't know where the driver disc was. Creative had only driver updates available online -- you had to purchase CD copies if you wanted at the original. I guess this makes sense considering their idea of a sound card driver is bloatware too big to download.

                Don't get me wrong... they allowed me to hear speech for the first time on my 486 in Wing Commander III, but they haven't made a difference since then. I'm really glad they're getting all of this well-deserved negative publicity. They just plain suck. The only reason they're still around is because of brand recognition. Hopefully now they'll start to be recognized for what they really are... crap.

                I guess if all you listen to is taco farts played through a kazoo, they're probably right for you.
                • by jandrese (485) <kensama@vt.edu> on Tuesday April 01 2008, @04:26PM (#22934936) Homepage Journal
                  I thought they must be under some sort of contract restrictions with Microsoft (who is under restrictions from the media companies) that has harsh legal fines for enabling things like that. That's the only sane reason I can think of that Creative would do something like sue a guy who was pretty much fixing their drivers for free. Likely part of the contract is that they're not allowed to speak publicly about the restrictions in it, nor are they allowed to let third parties bypass them.

                  Or they are just lawsuit happy jerks. That is a nonzero possibility as well. I thought it was funny that the Creative exec was basically saying "It's our right to release broken drivers if we want to". Clearly Creative knows a lot about broken drivers.
                  • by toleraen (831634) * on Tuesday April 01 2008, @04:42PM (#22935140)
                    I believe the situation is that Creative licensed certain technologies from Dolby for use in Windows XP, but they haven't ponied up for the licenses for use in Windows Vista. Since the guy is posting the drivers in Creative's forums, Dolby could go after Creative. Creative took the steps necessary to stop a possible lawsuit.

                    None of this would be an issue though if Creative would just pay for the licensing though. Jerks.
                    • by barc0001 (173002) on Tuesday April 01 2008, @10:17PM (#22937498)
                      Actually, the sub-issue here is that Creative's Vista drivers for said hardware don't work properly at all. So this guy's drivers are the only useful Vista drivers for that hardware. The fact that he re-enabled Dolby is an interesting sideshow and the one Creative's using as a club here to beat him, but the real spotlight should be on what the hell is wrong with Creative that they can't have their team of day-job programmers make drivers that work in a year, but a lone hobbyist tinkerer can.
              • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 01 2008, @04:05PM (#22934700)
                No, the real moral of the story is that knowledge is power and thinking for yourself is freedom.
                    • by Jason Earl (1894) on Tuesday April 01 2008, @06:36PM (#22936328) Homepage

                      Because one of the major reasons Linux has driver problems is the refusal of the kernel developer to settle on a stable ABI so companies have something to develop for.

                      Interestingly enough, Microsoft doesn't offer a stable ABI either. It just releases new versions of its operating system kernel so slowly that it *seems* that there is a stable ABI. The fact that Vista has problems with hardware compatibility is proof of that. What's more, Microsoft's "black box" model is clearly at least partly to blame for Windows' stability problems. As part of the discovery in its Windows Vista class action lawsuit Microsoft was forced to reveal that 30% of Windows crashes in 2007 were the fault of nVidia's drivers [engadget.com].

                      If you include old but perfectly serviceable hardware that is never likely get a usable Windows Vista driver then a modern Linux distribution almost certainly supports more hardware than Windows Vista, and it does so without having to load questionable black-box drivers. In fact, if it weren't for a few companies that create popular hardware and seem to have an aversion to Free Software (nVidia and Broadcom being the most well known) it would be pretty clear that Linus' insistence on source code has paid off well for Linux users. After all, once a piece of equipment has Free Software drivers these drivers tend to work well with Linux even when new versions come out. Most other hardware manufacturers have basically decided to give the Linux developers what they need. These days you don't even have to be particularly careful in your choice of hardware to get hardware with Free Software Linux drivers. Heck, you can even order a laptop from Dell.

                      Not that any of this has anything to do with my original point. Hardware compatibility is a real problem for Windows Vista. Tons of perfectly good hardware doesn't work (or work very well) with the operating system. That's a real concern for people with investments in existing hardware. This Creative example is only one of many in which hardware that works perfectly well under Windows XP doesn't work or works poorly with Windows Vista. Microsoft pundits often use similar hardware compatibility problems as a reason to stay away from Linux. However, when Windows Vista has some of the exact same problems it apparently gets a pass.

                    • torvalds said it himself:

                      Clickity [linux-foundation.org]

                      I get asked a lot, which this probably won't surprise you, why doesn't the kernel have a stable device driver ABI?


                      Linus Torvalds: Well, there's - the lack of an ABI is two-fold: one is we really, really, really don't want one. Every single time people ask for a stable ABI, the main reason for wanting a stable ABI is they want to have their binary drivers and they don't want to give out source and they don't - certainly don't want to merge that source into the stable kernel or the standard kernel.

                      good article, short read. enjoy

                    • by Jason Earl (1894) on Tuesday April 01 2008, @07:26PM (#22936696) Homepage

                      I used Windows XP when it came out, and the fact that most Windows 2000 drivers would work in XP helped quite a bit. Besides, there is little doubt that upgrading from Windows 98 to Windows XP was a truly worthwhile upgrade, even if you had to chuck your crappy ISA sound card.

                      I suppose that I am a little bitter because both my scanner and my expensive printer didn't come with workable Windows Vista drivers. I'm not the only one that feels this way. If you read the Microsoft email from the class action Vista lawsuit you'll see that several Microsoft VPs had similar experiences. We aren't talking about ISA sound cards either.

                      On the bright side my wife hated Vista so much that I was finally able to get her to switch to Ubuntu (where the printer works flawlessly). That's worth the price of Vista for me, right there.

                      What I find truly curious is that so many Windows users apparently don't mind if their hardware doesn't work with Microsoft's new operating system. You paid good money for this software and there basically is no good technical reason that this hardware shouldn't be supported. After all, Linux manages to support ridiculously old hardware.

                      Either way, it's more than somewhat hypocritical to dismiss Linux for hardware compatibility issues, and then fail to point out that Microsoft faces many of the same problems with new versions of its software.

        • by PopeRatzo (965947) * on Tuesday April 01 2008, @04:49PM (#22935224) Homepage Journal

          They licensed this for their XP drivers, but have not yet licensed it for their Vista drivers. Until they do so, they can't enable their Vista drivers to offer the full range of support that their XP drivers had.
          What an elegant example of why the intellectual property laws are ridiculous, outdated and do more damage than good.

          I'm hoping that China, filesharers and hackers like Daniel violate our IP laws so thoroughly and ceaselessly as to make them useless. At that point, we can start thinking sensibly how to approach the issue.

          And don't tell me that innovation will disappear if there were no IP laws. That is simply not true.
  • by Buzz_Litebeer (539463) on Tuesday April 01 2008, @03:45PM (#22934444) Journal
    Thats the solution. You have it from Creative's mouth. They purposefully are positioning themselves to cripple your hardware to make the actual cost of your card higher if you have Vista.

    This is not a problem with Vista, it is a problem with Creative if they do that.

    So, do not buy Creative sound cards and let them go out of business.
    • by pembo13 (770295) on Tuesday April 01 2008, @04:17PM (#22934840) Homepage

      If anyone wants another reason not to buy Creative anymore, two quick ones

      • When I bought my Muvo2 years ago, they advertised it as upgradeable to support new codecs -- never happened, can't even get the dumb remote which is required to use the advertised FM radio on the Muvo2
      • Creative has decided that having drivers that work for most of their cards in the vanilla Linux kernel is simply too good to be true, so they are moving a binary blob model like Nvidia. God forbid I shouldn't have to go through hoops to get hardware I paid for to work.
      • by colinbrash (938368) on Tuesday April 01 2008, @04:28PM (#22934950)
        Terratec and M-Audio both make quality sound cards, and I much, much prefer those companies to Creative.
        • by Dutch Gun (899105) on Tuesday April 01 2008, @04:38PM (#22935082)
          Ok, I just had to chime in here... I happen to do audio development for a gaming company. Make no mistake, most on-board audio is absolute crap. The drivers very often have glitches/bugs, missing features, or simply emulate "hardware" features (badly) in the driver. Creative's X-Fi lineup is one of the few decent audio cards still available, and that's a pretty small percentage of our consumer base anyhow. Generally speaking, about 75% of our customers have on-board audio, with the remaining 25% scattered among add-on cards. The X-Fi has perhaps one or two percent of the total.

          That being said - the future is software processing anyhow. With multi-core machines being standard equipment on all new machines, it makes sense to simply devote part of a core to audio processing, and screw the hardware and the many, many troubles it causes audio programmers. Vista doesn't support audio hardware acceleration anymore (Creative wrote their own OpenAL pipeline to get around this). Our upcoming game will probably only support hardware acceleration on X-Fi class cards. Anything else, it's simply not worth it, and we'll switch to software mode.

          I'm not condoning Creative's actions by any means. It seems pretty obvious that they're a bit panicked about the tanking sales of PC audio hardware, and so are making idiots of themselves by irritating their few remaining customers. Stupid...
  • by postbigbang (761081) on Tuesday April 01 2008, @03:51PM (#22934514)
    Hardware makers, especially those that make drivers for their gear, don't understand a hacker's mentality, or even the rebuke they get from not listening to customers. I applaud the guy; did what he needed to get the Vista Not Ready gear working. They should hire him after they throw out their software contractor and their VP of whoever thought that killing the driver was a good idea.
    • by GreatBunzinni (642500) on Tuesday April 01 2008, @05:06PM (#22935368)
      Well, that would be fine and dandy if the real problem behind Creative's Windows Vista drivers were the result of incompetence. On the other hand, what daniel_k said made me strongly believe that Creative was intentionally fucking up the drivers in order to make their products appear rotten in Windows Vista and then force their users into an upgrade cycle. That has nothing to do with misunderstanding a hacker's mentality. That's screwing us all, the potential clients, up the ass.
  • by Bombula (670389) on Tuesday April 01 2008, @03:53PM (#22934540)
    Can anyone elucidate the issues of fair usage and licensing as they apply to hardware? I'm assuming when you buy a piece of computer hardware you're not licensing it like you are with software, so you should be able to do with it whatever you please. But since it 'requires' software in order to run, then I can imagine how the issue gets a little murky. As an example, when I buy my car I expect to be able to use it however I please within the confines of the law - not how GM or Ford has licensed me to use it. And if I can find or write software that will control the car's hardware better and give me better performance, shouldn't I be able to use that software? Last I checked, there was no licensing/fair use law against overclocking, for example - even though overclocking is always done through software (bios).

    So while I understand Creative's beef about messing with their software, the reason this is a firestorm issue is that since the software in question is a driver the hardware becomes an inseparable part of the equation.

    And this leaves aside the whole other issue of crippling.

  • Drivers in (Score:5, Insightful)

    by slapout (93640) on Tuesday April 01 2008, @03:58PM (#22934614)
    Windows are very difficult to write. If this guy modded someone else's, they should hire him.
  • by mlwmohawk (801821) on Tuesday April 01 2008, @04:04PM (#22934690)
    The person "modding" the driver has a license to use that driver. The person receiving the driver must have a license because they have a creative labs card.

    So, there is no "infringement" here.

    Daniel should phrase what he does better, he isn't getting donations for the "driver," as this is a free download and already licensed by creative. He is getting donations for the "work" of modding. In other words, he is being paid for support not the driver.

    Thus he is not running afoul of any IP laws. He is lawfully applying his expertise to private customers running third party hardware and and software, which they have the right to use.
  • by klui (457783) on Tuesday April 01 2008, @04:08PM (#22934746)
    I didn't recognize the name but "Braziliantech" did ring a bell. He did some pretty good mods for Asus's A7V BIOSes.
  • Analogy (Score:5, Insightful)

    by apodyopsis (1048476) on Tuesday April 01 2008, @04:16PM (#22934826)
    Software crippling is standard practice. I am a professional embedded software engineer and I guarantee that the majority of model sperated features are all only a few bits of cleverly coded SW to tell them apart. Hell most of the jobs I have ever had in consumer electronics or industrial applications are implemented this way - ie. one standard set of HW and a configuration file and different stickers to tell the top of the range from the basic model.

    This is really all Creative were doing, attempting to force enough of a difference between bottem end products and older products and the new top of the range technologies to ensure sales stay up. You cannot really blame them this this commercial decision.

    ...BUT...

    what I take exception to is the fact that they have made none of this clear to the consumers. and worse, they have actively degraded the functionality of hardware people have already paid for by means of drivers for a new operation system.

    In other words it is as though you purchased a car hifi and used it for a year in your Ford. Then you purchased an Mercedes and fitted the same car hifi and found the audio output was at half the resolution in your new car. If you have wanted to spend the money and pay for double the resolution then nobody would of batted an eyelid - but you would reasonably expect that the original performace would of been preserved. At the very least you would of expected some notification or warning.

    And thats why Creative are in hot water - apart from their shockingly rude and arrogant behaviour that is.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 01 2008, @04:22PM (#22934898)
    Creative has replaced the original threatening post on the forum with a very defensive one http://forums.creative.com/creativelabs/board/message?board.id=soundblaster&thread.id=116332 [creative.com] Chunks of the original post are still available on the Wired.com article. Here's a smart guy who archive the original post http://www.woyano.com/view/7839/Archive-of-Creative-Labs-Letter-To-Community-Modder [woyano.com] .
    • woah dude! Go read the new post if you haven't! :O

      Translation: "aaaarrrrrghhhh help us jeebus no geez ack please remaining loyal customers don't gooooooo we're having that VP troutslapped in the basement as penance we lub you we like you! (we need you to fixourcra^H^H^H^H^H^H (we lub working with 'independent third parties,' really we doooooo....!)"

      I think calling it "defensive" is an understatement of British proportions. "Desperately, sweatily, forehead-slappingly afraid" might be closer...
  • by Brit_in_the_USA (936704) on Tuesday April 01 2008, @04:35PM (#22935040)
    I went through SB live and incompatibilities with very popular VIA chip sets.

    I bought a Audigy (1) and never got the firewire port working or any drivers to work since XP SP2.

    For years I had been annoyed at the rubbish that installs with the drive CD's and how the GUI is totally at odds with Windows.

    I switched to Diamond (with DDL optical output) and Via sound cards (24bit / 96kHz) for a fraction of the price. I haven't looked back, updates are available for vista and they work just fine.

    Due to my bad experiences with Creative and driver support I actively steer clear of *any* product they make for over 5 years and advise family and friends to do the same.
  • by Knight of Shadows (1163917) on Tuesday April 01 2008, @04:45PM (#22935178)
    Dear Phil O'Shaunessy, We, the public, have heard your comments and belief that 'whether or not it cripples its Vista drivers is a "business decision that only we have the right to make." ' and we would just like to say we fully agree with and support your belief: any company has the complete and total right to be an absolute asshat and fuck over it's customers. The public, on the other hand, has the complete right to do anything and everything to put your sorry ass out of business, and to tar and feather your sorry ass and run it out of town on a rail. Now that you and your company has shown its colors, it is up to us, the public, to cut off your balls and run with them. Therefore, we have decided to not buy your lousy products, ever. We will do everything in our power to spread the word to our customers, friends, family, strangers on the street, on what a sad, pathetic bunch of fucktards you really are, and anything else imaginable to steal your sales and lessen your profit margin. Oh, and Phil, be careful when you are crossing the street, because none of us will bother braking for your evil, moneygrubbing, worthless ass, and will claim a temporary overwhelming need to do the world a solid after running it over. We don't need you, Phil, or your bullshit products. What you need, dickless, is our money, and we're putting an end to your shit now. Fuck you, and have a great day. There you have it, folks. This should be copied by each and every computer owner in the country, put into practice, and copies mailed to our friend Phil at Creative Labs. All it takes is ONE SHOW OF STRENGTH BY THE BUYING PUBLIC. LET'S SEND A CLEAR MESSAGE OF 'FUCK YOU FOR TRYING, YOU PIECE OF SHIT' TO THESE BASTARDS! Or you can sit on your asses and get what you deserve. Your choice.
  • by Whuffo (1043790) on Tuesday April 01 2008, @05:26PM (#22935664) Journal
    Creative had a good run for many years; perfectly adequate sound cards (not great, but not bad) and a line of reasonable MP3 players.

    But things have changed; the iPod has made Creative's portable music player largely irrelevant - and on-board sound is a standard feature of motherboards these days.

    So what is poor Creative to do? They could take the honorable path; see that their market has dried up and either innovate in another market or close down their business. But no; they're used to getting those dollars coming in on a regular basis and decided to try something less-than-honorable.

    But they got caught at it. Too bad; Creative is in a worse position now. Not only are they still faced with sharply declining revenues, they've also got a public relations nightmare to deal with too.

    Couldn't happen to a more deserving bunch; here's payback for all those crappy drivers you dumped on your customers. Die in a fire, OK?

  • by Shemmie (909181) on Tuesday April 01 2008, @05:32PM (#22935720)
    Creative Forum [creative.com]

    We have read the strong feedback about Creative's forum post regarding driver development by Daniel_k and other outside parties. Creative's message posted on our behalf by our Company spokesperson tried to address our concern about the improper distribution of certain software which is the property of other companies. However, we did not make it as clear as we would have liked that we do support driver development by independent third parties. The huge task of developing driver updates to accommodate the many changes in the Vista operating system and the extensive testing required, including the lengthy Vista certification requirements for audio, makes it very difficult for Creative to develop updates for all past products. Outside developers have been very helpful to Creative and our customers by developing updates for many of our Sound Blaster products, and we do support and appreciate these efforts. This however does not extend to the unauthorized distribution of other companies' property. We hope to work out a mutually agreeable method for working with Daniel_k in supporting his efforts in driver development. Going forward, we are committed to doing a better job of working more closely with third parties to support their development for our products and our customers.
  • by Pedrito (94783) on Tuesday April 01 2008, @06:11PM (#22936092) Homepage
    I have a patent on sound waves and I'm pretty sure Creative is infringing on that. I was just going to let it go, but after this. Forget it. Time to call the lawyers..
  • by TheNetAvenger (624455) on Tuesday April 01 2008, @06:12PM (#22936112)
    Anyone that has worked with Vista over the past year usually know one thing. Creative is screwing its customers...

    There is no reason that the same hardware level of support is being provided by Intel and even generic Realtek drivers and yet the sound industry leader, Creative, has been unable to deliver working drivers.

    Vista new sound model is designed around an agnostic system that allows for more options than was ever available under XP, and Creative continues to tell people that they can't get the Vista drivers to work properly. If this is true, then Creative has horrible driver developers working on these products.

    Look at generic drivers from Realtek, on Vista they support as many of the new Vista features as they are capable of, even on old Audio hardware.

    Virtually every game out there, has also made adjustments to easily work with Vista's sound system, making it even EASIER for sound card manufacturers. Several games even have their own additions for EAX and other features, but you have to use non-creative cards for these features, which is freaking insane at best for Creative to let their cards be the only ones to consistently have problems and fail.

    XP's sound system was barely in the range of industry standards, not supporting a lot of features becoming standard for music professionals and even gaming enthusiasts. XP's sound had no idea of multi-channel (5.1,7.1,etc) had limits on sampling rates, and combining multi-application streams at high quality sampling rates.

    Microsoft's revamp in Vista was known a LONG time ago and was necessary to bring the Vista sound system up to the industry current standards, and also give Microsoft some design headroom to extend beyond what Apple and OSS was doing with Audio. (For example the self optimizing speaker technology, the basic realtime filtering of levels and noise, unlimited channels and sample rates, etc.)

    - In Vista you can use a crap internal microphone on a laptop and with it processing for feedback and background sound from the laptop, get ok recordings for meeting notes, and even handle the sound well enough that speech recognition works well on low quality input like htis.

    - Vista also handles internal processing and mixing of sound far beyond what XP did and even past Apple and other core technologies in the OSS world. Play any type of sound, same sound device, same speakers, and the Vista clarity is surprisingly there - making even high compression audio stretch back to levels that is borderline impressive.

    - MS did kill off the older version of DirectSound, because of the problems with it, and its dependance on the XP sound system, which was severely limited.

    10.1 DirectX replaces DirectSound for the hardware audio layer, and even prior to 10.1 sound in Vista is not 100% CPU bound, even though people try to scare people with this, as Vista is agnositic at what is processing the audio, but defaults to the CPU for advanced processing if the features are not inherent of the Audio hardware.

    This is where Creative messed up, and instead of working 'within' the new API and driver model provided, are trying to work around Vista's audio and driver model, implementing things in good old XP fashion, so there is no wonder why their drivers are crap on Vista.

    XP with basic API you could play sound, letting the format and output quality be handled outside the basic application level of understand. In Vista you can jam 20% of a sound to the RL speaker if you have Quad or higher speaker configuration. This is a good thing, and the right way audio should be handled from both a user and a developer standpoint.

    Creative continues to dig themselves into a hole with the whole Vista mess, especially starting out by not even having drivers during the beta process for Vista, tell all testers to wait until Vista was released, and then losing all that tester and developer feedback and time, and releasing crap drivers AFTER Vista RTM'd, in fact waiting until after Vista was shipping at the retail level in 2007.

    • Re:Idiots. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by TheGratefulNet (143330) on Tuesday April 01 2008, @03:45PM (#22934442)
      He should make out a cashier's check for the total amount of donations he's received, mail it to Creative Labs

      must be the new 'american way'; to reward companies for bad behavior (multiple times over) with a CASHIER'S CHECK.

      (sigh).

      no, he should NOT send money to the company that caused the problem. good grief, man, what are you thinking?

      • Re:Idiots. (Score:5, Interesting)

        by CannonballHead (842625) on Tuesday April 01 2008, @03:50PM (#22934498)
        I doubt $146 is really going to make Creative any richer. I think it's more of an insult than a profit.
        • Re:Idiots. (Score:5, Interesting)

          by Zymergy (803632) * on Tuesday April 01 2008, @05:44PM (#22935836)
          I have read all of the threads here: http://forums.creative.com/creativelabs/board/message?board.id=soundblaster&thread.id=116332&view=by_date_ascending&page=1 [creative.com]
          and here: http://creative.edited.us/ [edited.us]

          Creative summarily wiped their VP's Original posting from their forums that started this whole epic saga. Good thing somebody mirrored it all here: http://creative.edited.us/page.php?start=1 [edited.us]

          In summary, here are a few key points (in no particular order):
          (1) Creative may have licensed some software for Windows XP and NOT licensed it for Windows Vista. Thus that is *in part* why they crippled it. (and it helps promote new hardware sales for Vista) It seems this is true for the Dolby portions of the code.
          (2) Creative stated they cripple their hardware (depending on what model it is) in their drivers based on the Operating System version and what the item was sold as. They state they have the legal right to do so.
          (3) Creative stated that anyone re-enabling features (however it is done) is "stealing" from Creative.
          (4) Apparently, the Windows XP drivers ignore the Vista "Protected Path" DRM killswitch flags and work quite well. (Recall that Vista is built on Windows XP technology and WinXP drivers *can be made* to WORK FINE in it. It is probably very likely that this violates some NDA from Microsoft to Creative as it likely bypasses their DRM mechanisms in Vista that were not included in WinXP (at least up to WinXP w/SP2).
          (5) This is pissing people off in a major way. There are people planning on never doing business with Creative again: http://boycottcreative.com/BoycottCreative.html [boycottcreative.com] and http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/BoycottCreative [petitionspot.com]
          (6) Creative is not doing very well (at all) financially (Gee, I wonder why?): http://www.creative.com/corporate/investor/ [creative.com] and http://finance.google.com/finance?q=OTC%3ACREAF [google.com]
          (7) A Driver "Modder" known as Daniel Kawakami (AKA "Daniel_K") found ways to re-enable 'features' for certain product Creative lines under Windows Vista, notably restoring the Full functionality on the various Creative Hardware under Windows Vista.
          (8) This modder also made their Alchemy software work on non-creative sound products too, likely pissing off Creative more.
          (9) The modder asked for donations for his freely available work, he acknowledges that was dumb, and pretty much everybody dumps on him for it.
          (10) Many Creative Forum posts have been deleted (redacted) and many are available here: http://creative.edited.us/deleted.html [edited.us]

          Interestingly, I created my /. account many years ago while sitting at my desk at Creative Labs Inc. 1523 Cimarron Plaza, Stillwater, OK 74075. 405-742-6655.
          Those of you whom also worked there probably knew me, you certainly know the above address and phone number all too well. You had the job while you were in college, learned skills, and happily left around graduation time.
          I am not here to badmouth or flame, just to say that I was completely unsurprised when this came to light. I could not believe the VP's posting and how he is clearly so out of touch with the reality of Creative's die-hard customers, their motives, and their sense of loyalty and fairness. He has probably lost the company hundreds of thousands of dollars with that single post if not more!
          IN some people's opinions, Creative has now firmly placed itself on the path to be considered as clost to "The customer is always right." as the likes of Microso
    • Re:Idiots. (Score:5, Funny)

      by Freeside1 (1140901) on Tuesday April 01 2008, @03:48PM (#22934480)
      mailing it to a charity (for the deaf?) would be a better solution IMHO
    • by an.echte.trilingue (1063180) on Tuesday April 01 2008, @03:53PM (#22934552) Homepage
      Except for that the drivers appear to be broken on purpose. The installer checks to see if it is on Vista, and if so it turns off certain features or replaced working drivers with buggy ones. All he did was disable the checks and replace the Vista drivers with the XP ones. According to TFA, the company has said "that whether or not it cripples its Vista drivers is a 'business decision that only we have the right to make.'"

      Looks to me like they are trying to cash in on the Wintel upgrade cycle for no good technical reason: "Oh, if you want to enable all of Vista's advanced features, you need to buy this card over here."

      Bastards, but probably bastards who will make lots of money.
      • Re:Idiots. (Score:5, Insightful)

        by plague3106 (71849) on Tuesday April 01 2008, @03:53PM (#22934548)
        Well, since it's pretty obvious that what he was doing was un-crippling software that they had intentionally broken, I think it's understandable that they're pissed.

        Normally I'd agree. But why should I lose features in Vista because Creative decided that the card I already bought shouldn't work in a new OS? I can only think it is to encourage people to buy new cards. That's slimey.
        • Re:Idiots. (Score:5, Insightful)

          by glwtta (532858) on Tuesday April 01 2008, @05:10PM (#22935432) Homepage
          But why should I lose features in Vista because Creative decided that the card I already bought shouldn't work in a new OS?

          Because you're Creative's bitch.

          Remember how we used to buy and "own" things? Well, now apparently companies are claiming the right to tell us how we may, or may not, use their products after "buying" them, even with physical hardware. Since the number of people who care about things like this enough to stop buying shiny gadgets is minuscule, I see no reason why this tactic shouldn't work.

          After all, it's their product, why shouldn't they have complete control over how you "consume" it - there's money to be made, after all.
        • Re:Idiots. (Score:4, Insightful)

          by dwandy (907337) on Tuesday April 01 2008, @04:39PM (#22935094) Homepage Journal

          He's profiting off their IP.
          Once upon a time the car manufacturers sued to stop 3rd party modders from making parts for their cars (aka: their IP). The car companies lost, and today we have a vibrant and profitable after-market for car parts that not only doesn't impede the car companies from making car sales, but often determines which car someone will purchase.

          I'm not sure how we ended up down the path where just because a mod happens electronically it's suddenly possible for the manufacturer to win the same argument. It's important to note that he's in fact not "profiting off (Creative's) IP", he is actually profiting from his addition to their product, just like car modders of days gone by...

    • by amplt1337 (707922) on Tuesday April 01 2008, @04:45PM (#22935176) Journal
      Modders modify things. Often cases, but sometimes drivers.

      "Hacker" is often taken to mean someone who circumvents computer protections for nefarious purposes, but around here you're more likely to see it used in the original sense of "somebody who's a competent-to-excellent programmer with a knack and desire to solve problems."

      In this case he's a modder because he was just making modifications to a driver set that he can't really claim to understand, while a hacker would've reverse-engineered the drivers and rewritten them in lisp, then included a module in them that runs the linux kernel on your sound card. Or something.