From alsa-user-owner@alsa.jcu.cz  Thu Feb 11 15:13:37 1999
Received: from neutrino.kek.jp (root@neutrino.kek.jp [130.87.218.139])
	by marvin.jcu.cz (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA18021
	for <alsa-user@alsa.jcu.cz>; Thu, 11 Feb 1999 15:10:28 +0100
Received: from lbscissors.kek.jp (root@lbscissors.kek.jp [130.87.218.173]) by neutrino.kek.jp (8.8.8+2.7Wbeta7/3.4W3) with ESMTP id XAA21638; Thu, 11 Feb 1999 23:10:18 +0900
Received: from lbscissors.kek.jp (really [127.0.0.1]) by neutrino.kek.jp
	via in.smtpd with esmtp (ident sharkey using rfc1413)
	id <m10Awos-000sLXC@lbscissors.kek.jp> (Debian Smail3.2.0.102)
	for <alsa-user@alsa.jcu.cz>; Thu, 11 Feb 1999 23:10:18 +0900 (JST) 
Message-Id: <m10Awos-000sLXC@lbscissors.kek.jp>
To: "Udo Giacomozzi" <udo_giacomozzi@rolmail.net>
Cc: alsa-user@alsa.jcu.cz
From: sharkey@ale.physics.sunysb.edu
Subject: Re: Recommendation for ALSA compat non-CreativeLabs PCI sound card? 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 11 Feb 1999 13:44:41 +0100."
             <010f01be55bf$aae1ecc0$7be1fec3@default> 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 23:10:17 +0900
Reply-To: alsa-user@alsa.jcu.cz
Sender: alsa-user-owner@alsa.jcu.cz
Precedence: list

> Well, I agree that applications and drivers with source code can be less
> buggy. But the problem is that I have already a SB Live!

http://www.ebay.com can take care of that problem.  Or you can post to
misc.forsale.computers.* and look for someone willing to swap.  There are
lots of ways to trade in one piece of hardware for another.  It's a pain
in the neck, but it's possible.

> I love it and I don't want to buy another card just
> because the Live isn't supported by Linux.

It's unfortunate.  It really hurts to have hardware that doesn't work
with Linux.  But what else can we do?
 
> >I *do* think it's good if an OS doesn't support a popular sound card just
> >because it's covered by an NDA.  I think it's wonderful.  It'll put a
> little
> >pressure on Creative to get rid of those silly NDA's on its drivers.
> >Hardware companies should make money on selling hardware.
>  
> Do you think this will help much?

Yes, I do.  I think it's the *only* thing that can help.  It's painful for all
involved, but these NDA's are not negotiable.  These companies only respond
to one thing, and that's money and sales.  If you can't influence that,
then you can't influence the company.

Creative believes that without the NDA, it will lose money to its competitors.
Until it realizes that it will lose even more with the NDA, the NDA will stay.


> They make driver binaries and most SB Live
> owners are happy. I fully agree with you that a driver with included sources
> would be better.

There's another issue beyond the security issue, and that's the compatibility
issue.  In general, one kernel module works with one kernel version only.
(It may work with more than one, but there is *no* guarantee to this.)

If creative labs released a binary-only driver for Linux 2.2.0, and then
Linus released Linux 2.2.1 which fixed some major problems, you then have
two choices:

1) keep running 2.2.0 with its bugs and hope no one crashes your system
2) switch to 2.2.1, have a secure system, but no sound support until
   Creative releases the 2.2.1 recompile of the Live module

How quickly do think Creative will release drivers if they need to release a
new driver for every kernel? Do you want support for development kernels,
too?  Do you want to run SMP?  You're probably going to need both SMP and
non-SMP releases.  Creating a binary driver that works with all Linux kernel
configurations isn't at all easy.  Do you want Creative to tell you how
to configure your kernel?

Windows doesn't have this problem, because it's development cycle is much
longer and it tries harder to maintain backward compatibility with old
binaries at the expense of performance improvements.  And its kernel isn't
configurable.  Everybody runs what they got from MS.

These topics were discussed on the kernel mailing lists recently.  You can
read a summary here:

http://lwn.net/1999/0211/kernel.phtml

Included are three links to messages by Linus where he describes his opinions
on binary modules and how he plans to treat them in the future.

I recommend that you read all three of them, and consider his words
carefully.  I believe his opinions are 100% correct and he's handling this
issue in the best possible way.

> So why Creative covers their cards by an NDA?

They're afraid.

> What are their advantages?

In order to produce drivers they have to pay programmers.  They're afraid
that other companies will be able to take that code/spec sheet/whatever
and use it to develop competing hardware at lower R&D cost.

> I think Creative should learn from OPTi. This manufacturer puts a detailed
> hardware description of their cards online on their web page!

That would be nice.  The importance of Open Source code is increasing.  Its
power in the marketplace is increasing.  We have to use that power, effectively,
and wisely.

Eric


