On Fri, 2004-11-26 at 23:17, Mark Knecht wrote: > On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 00:34:17 +0100, Marek Peteraj <marpet@xxxxxxx> wrote: > <SNIP> > > 2. I can only understand the point of view of open source developers > > here, since they also invested an awfull lot of time (and money that > > they didn't get back!) into developing linux audio applications, many of > > which are state-of-art at least with respect to technology. And they're > > free as in beer/speech. > > That was their choice. Right? Sure but the result is the _same_ with respect to what they deliver(state of art technology), which has the same value for me. Not the same with respect to what you get in the end.(a non-functioning device you paid a lot for, just because this and that) > > > That said i really don't understand the point of view of those few how > > actually kindof defend the position of RME (or any other manufacturer in > > a similar position), no offense intended. > > RME's position, and I am only guessing here, is that they would be > happy to release info to the Open Source community __IF__ that > information didn't help their competitors develop hardware that > competed with RME. How? To achieve 1ms less latency? > It is natural for people who have spent money to > want to protect it's value. We are that way with our own purchases, > correct? I (and I think you...) would not be happy if I bought > something and then it stopped working, Worse. It actually never worked in my case. > or if the company you bought it > from stopped supporting it. Worse. They never did in my case. > RME is the same way. They invest hundreds > of thousands, if not millions of Euro's developing new hardware ideas. Hence the analogy with oss developers. They do that too without being cowards and misers. > They create software to support it and make it work. Then all the > technical information goes into the public domain and some low cost > manufacturer from Taiwan or Russia or somewhere else knocks off a copy > and sells it for 1/2 the price. No one buys RME hardware, RME doesn't > make money and goes out of business. Did this happen? See how many RME cards are supported. Almost all. Perhaps all except fireface. Did someone from russia or taiwan knock-off a copy? Does RME suffer from us having alsa drivers? Are russian engineers or taiwanese engineers(envy24 btw AFAIK) not smart enough to come up with their own superb design? Is it too hard for smart people to reverse-engineer? In other words - what are you talking about? > > What's so hard to understand? Pretty much everything. Considering that they have used proprietary protocols in their hammerfall series anyway. > > Which seems like it's the beginning of end for linux pro-audio hw > > support if we don't fight for it. Right now it concerns just me, but it > > might concern everyone in the near future. > > This I agree with, but the best way to fight for it (speaking as a > business man) is to develop a real market for it. We need thousands of > buyers. Develop the market and hardware manufacturers will come. Perhaps it's here already. I think there's more of us RME or M-Audio customers than one might think. Marek
