Creative Vista Driver Modder Speaks Out 318
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."
If all else fails, lower your standards.
fp? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Obvious. (Score:5, Informative)
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.
Re:Obvious. (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Obvious. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Obvious. (Score:5, Funny)
Is this real? (Score:5, Funny)
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.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Is this real? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
You were younger?!
Sheesh.
Justin.
Re:Is this real? - Umm yes (Score:5, Funny)
Creative censored & censured him.
Shame on Creative.
Shame on Daniel for making Fista work
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Is this real? - Umm yes (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
This is clear example of how market based principles do not always benefit consumers.
Re:Is this real? - Umm yes (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Is this real? - Umm yes (Score:5, Interesting)
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.
Re:Is this real? - Umm yes (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:Is this real? - Umm yes (Score:5, Interesting)
None of this would be an issue though if Creative would just pay for the licensing though. Jerks.
Re:Is this real? - Umm yes (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Is this real? - Umm yes (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Is this real? - Umm yes (Score:4, Insightful)
lets assume that creative is not the 'bad guy' here (just follow along, for now).
and lets assume that creative made business deals with the rotton stinking dolby-labs (yeah, they suck too) and DTS guys for their xp product offering. and lets assume that they chose to CHEAP OUT and not renew those deals for vista, on certain hardware models.
how can DTS or dolby sue creative on something creative had NO PART IN DOING??
creative did not violate any licensing. THEY did not distribute new functionality that was 'not paid for' to the industry groups.
why the fuck should they care what some user does once the card (and fees, btw) have been already paid for?
IANAL, but it seems creative is harmless here; the driver modder did not involve creative directly and so ANY issues at all would be between the industry groups (dolby, dts) and the driver modder.
creative clearly knows this. this isn't about license fees. this is about having egg on their face when the TRUTH comes out about wanting their business model (lame as it might be) to try to get more money from customers by making them re-buy hardware.
that was the ONLY issue. the licensing was a distraction. nice try creative, but no cigar.
their true colors were shown. they want you to re-buy hardware simply because they have run out of ideas! its just that simple.
don't buy this 'license fees have to be paid!' bullshit. its a smokescreen. its all about squeezing more 'upgrade money' from users and nothing more.
highly dispicable behavior. I'll never buy creative gear again. and I will take ever opportunity to convey that concept (with reasoning behind it) to every shop I work for (I often do sysadmin work and am consulted for machine purchases and hardware specs).
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
how can DTS or dolby sue creative on something creative had NO PART IN DOING??
Ignoring the whole "the owners of this forum aren't responsible for what people post", people still go after the owners for doing so. Just like how you're not allowed to post links to warez on here. If the owner turns a blind eye to it, the owner of the original content can still go after the forum owner. Even though Creative wasn't directly assisting this guy, they still were letting it go on. Don't take a stand, get sued. Simple as that.
For further examples, look at every "Torrent tracker taken down"
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
And I can confirm that the 'test drive' I made with the xfi card did improve the framerates while playing Battlefield 1942, DC mod by 5-6 frames per se
Re:Is this real? - Umm yes (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Reading the article, it sounds like all he did was hack the ALchemy driver so you wouldn't have to pay for it:
Well, I did manage to patch the latest version of ALchemy X-Fi to run on any card, without even removing Safecast, but I'm done with that.
The driver hacker didn't write a DirectSound emulation program - he just hacked up Creative's drivers so they would:
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No, the real moral is to stay away from both Creative AND Vista.
Re:Is this real? - Umm yes (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Is this real? - Umm yes (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Driver issues are one of the primary reasons why people stay away from Linux. Why, precisely, should Vista be any different?
When I purchased my first Vista computer I was amazed at the hardware that I had that didn't work with it. My printer had sub par drivers, and my scanner had no drivers at all. If you follow the email trail from Microsoft's current class action Vista lawsuit several executives at Microsoft had similar problems.
The fact of the matter is that Vista doesn't have nearly the level of
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Driver issues are one of the primary reasons why people stay away from Linux. Why, precisely, should Vista be any different?
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.
Re:Is this real? - Umm yes (Score:4, Informative)
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.
Re:Is this real? - Umm yes (Score:5, Informative)
Clickity [linux-foundation.org]
good article, short read. enjoy
Re:Is this real? - Umm yes (Score:5, Interesting)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Is this real? - Umm yes (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
Re:Is this real? - Umm yes (Score:5, Interesting)
"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.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Is this real? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Is this real? (Score:5, Informative)
Creative won a patent on the algorithm known as Carmack's reverse, which the Doom 3 engine uses extensively. To avoid patent license fees, Id shipped the Doom 3 engine with Creative's EAX shit in it.
see: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20040728-4048.html [arstechnica.com]
Do NOT buy Creative Sound Cards (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
ASUS has been releasing descrete audio cards for like a year or so and I've been wanting to take a dip in that pool and see how it goes. As long as I stay with XP though I'll probably stick with my original non-5.1 SB Live because it features selecting "What You Hear" as an input source for ripping audio from the unrippable without resorting to the analog hole or looping signal around with patch cables.
Re:Do NOT buy Creative Sound Cards (Score:5, Interesting)
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...
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
blips and blaps. (sorry, but I dont' respect gaming. I respect gaming PROGRAMMING, but I can't be bothered with the game itself, sorry).
my 'thing' is music - non blip-blap audio (well, ok, that's also a matter of opinion)
but my point is that relaying 44.1/16 audio is TRIVIAL for even a pentium1 (in software). all good audio hardware has already been designed and there is no more 'room' for other designs since the problem has been solved and re
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Creative Alternatives (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Do NOT buy Creative Sound Cards (Score:4, Informative)
If anyone wants another reason not to buy Creative anymore, two quick ones
Modding closed source can be troublesome (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Modding closed source can be troublesome (Score:5, Insightful)
Fair usage and licensing? (Score:5, Interesting)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
He shot himself in the foot when he did that.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Drivers in (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
OK, I shouldn't say ANY other OS since I've only written drivers for Windows/Linux/Solaris
Re:Drivers in (Score:4, Funny)
The who thing is stupid (Score:5, Interesting)
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.
Braziliantech of A7V BIOS fame (Score:5, Interesting)
Analogy (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
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.
Creative retracts forum post. (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Creative retracts forum post. (Score:4, Funny)
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...
Gave up many years ago (Score:5, Informative)
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.
An Open Letter to Creative (Score:5, Funny)
Looking at it from another angle... (Score:5, Insightful)
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?
Creative have responded... (Score:5, Informative)
Creative is infringing on my patent (Score:4, Funny)
Creative caused customers problems on purpose... (Score:4, Interesting)
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.
Reversing isn't illegal in Brazil at all (Score:4, Insightful)
What I did wrong
(...)
Reversing ALchemy was also wrong, I know. But I reiterate, what is the point of improving ALchemy and changing for it, when it requires an improved driver? It was my protest against Creative.
Actually things run even deeper. Copying stuff for personal use isn't illegal in Brazil, even if you don't have a license. It can be anything, books, movies, software, etc.
Re:Idiots. (Score:5, Insightful)
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)
Re: (Score:2)
From TFA, the grand total of the donations was a whopping $146.00. That's not that much money to give away.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Idiots. (Score:5, Interesting)
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
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: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
IANAL, but there are limits (even today) as to what a company can do to STOP someone from applying their mods to works that are for sale.
if he 'sells' only his time and effort via the patch, that should be fine. if he includes the whole binary (which isn't his) then that's not ok.
but in terms of him making money on the effort he applied, what's wrong with that? if he sells only a patch he should be fine. the
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Idiots. (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
On the other hand, I wonder how this is going to affect their reputation? Creative has always been a bunch of jackasses, but this thing caused a lot of problems for Microsoft, and I imagine they don't have much of a sense of humor about that right now.
Re:Idiots. (Score:5, Insightful)
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)
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.
Except that it's their strategy (Score:5, Informative)
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: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, there is. He's profiting off their IP. If he keeps the money, Creative has a clear avenue to pursue action against him. If he gives it back, or gives it to Creative, their options for litigation get much diminished.
Of course, an interesting option (if he doesn't mind the hassle) would be to keep the money, and let Creative sue him over a profit of $146.00. If initially hammering him for fix
Re:Idiots. (Score:4, Insightful)
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...
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
That's probably what he believes, but the effect of his work is that the victims of Creative's shoddy behavior can continue to use and buy Creative's shoddy products. So working for free to fix the problems of Creative's victims is in effect tantamount to working for Creative for free.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That's probably what he believes, but the effect of his work is that the victims of Creative's shoddy behavior can continue to use and buy Creative's shoddy products.
I would normally say something similar myself- Daniel K no doubt started out simply intending to fix Creative's shoddy drives, where what you say applies.
However, it's now apparent in this case (and by this stage) that it wasn't simply a case of Creative being blase or cheap about fixing the bugs. On the contrary, they quite clearly and deliberately *didn't* want them fixed.
You know, I might have defended Creative on the basis that the guy modified their own drivers and got them to work on all soundcar
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I wonder what his IP rights are to his mods? Could he turn around and sue Creative if the issue a Vista patch that fixes the drivers in the same way that Daniel-K's mods did? But from the sounds of his response, he would never try to pursue that line.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
If they are a derivative work of the original drivers, which they probably are, the answer to that question is that he probably doesn't have any because such derivative works are prohibited by the license "agreement". (IANAL. TINLA.)
Re:Modder or Hacker? (Score:4, Funny)
"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.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The original meaning [catb.org] is closer to manipulation of systems:
Personally, I prefer using it in the most expansive sense: "One who enjoys the intellectual challenge of creatively overcoming or circumventing limitations." Hackers would, therefore, include engineers, surgeons, editors, lawyers, politicans and so forth. You can have interesting discussions with people wh
Re: (Score:3, Informative)