Information

Dear forum members,
We are delighted to inform you that our forums are back online. Every single topic and post are now on their places and everything works just as before, only better. Welcome back!



Discussion

Discussion on Article:
Creative Technology Threatens SoundBlaster Driver Developer.

Started by: RobIII | Date 04/01/08 03:40:59 AM
Comments: 28 | Last Comment:  06/17/08 04:46:28 AM

[1-4]

1. 
It should be noted that:

http://forums.creative.com/creativelabs/board/message?board.id=Vista&thread.i d=30737&view=by_date_ascending&page=6
"I checked with management, and it was decided we would bring back the Audigy Support Pack thread and allow you to continue in that endeavor. As long as no intellectual property of Creative is distributed, we will have no problem with it. I will get the thread reposted shortly."

Though, clearly this is WAY too late.
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 04/01/08 03:40:59 AM]
Reply

2. 
Creative must have it hard with onboard and stuff like Asus' cards.

And WTH? The card supports the original functionality, yet Creativre refuses to support it? Oh, do they plan to sell us a second time what we hve already bought, with some sort of X-Fi 2 or something?

Hmm... Ok, guess it was the right decision to get a Xonar then. No reason throwing away money for this kind of support.
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 04/01/08 05:13:58 AM]
Reply

3. 
There is no IP involved here. They have disabled functionality for Audigy cards in Windows XP x64 and Vista on purpose to force people to upgrade to X-Fi even though X-Fi itself has shady support for Vista and a lot of unresolved driver issues.
Has an X-Fi been a better supported product they wouldn't have to force anyone into buying it in the first place.
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 04/01/08 05:37:12 AM]
Reply

4. 
A rather sticky problem for Creative in this fiasco is that the cards which the drivers 'fix' were sold in packaging that touted the cards' ability to work with Vista. Now Creative is implying that they don't 'want' the cards to wok with Vista? Isn't that bait-and-switch? And isn't that actionable in a court of law?
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 04/01/08 08:24:36 AM]
Reply

[1-4]

Back to the Article

Add your Comment