Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 23

Thread: Creative Tries Again At Linux Drivers

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,541

    Default Creative Tries Again At Linux Drivers

    Phoronix: Creative Tries Again At Linux Drivers

    Next to drivers for graphics cards and (Atheros and Broadcom) wireless chipsets, the Creative Labs X-Fi series is one of the most complained about pieces of hardware for its Linux support or there the lack of. The Creative X-Fi sound card series is a few years old, but it wasn't until a few months ago that open and closed-source drivers started coming about for this hardware. However, this sound card has still been left in a sorry state, but this week Creative Labs has finally pushed out another Sound Blaster X-Fi Linux beta driver. But does this driver correct their wrong doings from the past?

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=12231

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    126

    Default

    the Creative Labs X-Fi series is one of the most complained about pieces of hardware for its Linux support or there the lack of
    or lack thereof.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    209

    Default

    It has the most ridicule package ever I've seen: a tar.bz2 inside a tar.gz

    So this is "Open Source" finally? Where's the "GPLv2 or later" license text in the code? I see a few details weren't so well explained in the news or maybe it's my inaccurate English :P

    If not (it seems they use a binary blob somewhere), I find the name of the side quite ironical. Where's that "Open Source"?

    What's so confidential about them in the source code? Being a bunch of incompetents with overpriced and underpowered hardware?

    It's legal using a binary blob with ALSA? I'm against binary drivers at all, don't understand why being permissive at them as they gives lots of problems to users and FOSS projects depending on them.
    Last edited by timofonic; 04-18-2008 at 09:08 AM.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,583

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by timofonic View Post
    It has the most ridicule package ever I've seen: a tar.bz2 inside a tar.gz

    So this is "Open Source" finally? Where's the "GPLv2 or later" license text in the code? I see a few details weren't so well explained in the news or maybe it's my inaccurate English :P
    These drivers are not GPL. You will have to wait for the native ALSA drivers for that or the OSS drivers.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    209

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by deanjo View Post
    These drivers are not GPL. You will have to wait for the native ALSA drivers for that or the OSS drivers.
    What's the point of duplicating the effort? Why not just making their developers work into the GPL ALSA drivers directly? :P

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,583

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by timofonic View Post
    What's the point of duplicating the effort? Why not just making their developers work into the GPL ALSA drivers directly? :P
    It's because Creative wants to incorporate the EAX extensions into their drivers. the opensource drivers will not have that support.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by deanjo View Post
    It's because Creative wants to incorporate the EAX extensions into their drivers. the opensource drivers will not have that support.
    Why do they want to do that? What do they gain by not including EAX in the ALSA driver?

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    MN, United States
    Posts
    285

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jackflap View Post
    Why do they want to do that? What do they gain by not including EAX in the ALSA driver?
    I don't know, it wouldn't really benefit them I don't think. I mean nothing in Linux uses EAX, and there probably will never be anything that will use EAX. I mean Creative has never released a EAX compatible driver outside of Windows, the only reason why you would do that is if you're getting ready to shift to another market or Creative thinks/knows that the Linux market is worth betting on. I don't know, its all speculation right now.
    Last edited by Malikith; 04-18-2008 at 12:47 PM.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    38

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Malikith View Post
    I don't know, it wouldn't really benefit them I don't think. I mean nothing in Linux uses EAX, and there probably will never be anything that will use EAX. I mean Creative has never released a EAX compatible driver outside of Windows, the only reason why you would do that is if you're getting ready to shift to another market or Creative thinks/knows that the Linux market is worth betting on. I don't know, its all speculation right now.
    openal can support eax, and it is platform agnostic. it also happens to be pioneered by creative.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    3,046

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by seeker010 View Post
    openal can support eax, and it is platform agnostic. it also happens to be pioneered by creative.
    OpenAL can support anything that handles the effects, given appropriate drivers. Considering this, it would behoove us to evaluate handling OpenAL in a SH stream, in a separate DSP piece, or in some sound device that hands us a DSP edge to work with.

    Creative needs to provide us with EAX or become irrelevant.

    We don't need EAX, though.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •