Slashdot Mirror


Creative Backs Down on Vista Driver Debacle

In the wake of last week's driver debacle, Creative has finally decided to back down for PR purposes. Modder Daniel_K, author of the offending Vista drivers, has had his posts on the Creative forums reinstated. According to Creative the move was to avoid infringing on other company's IP. "Daniel_K is incensed by Creative. 'They publicly threatened me, just to show their arrogance,' he told El Reg by email. He told us that Creative contacted him on a chat session. 'They were sarcastic, ironic and asked me if I wanted something from them, as if I were expecting something,' he wrote. 'It was my protest against them and would like to see how far it would go.'"

12 of 228 comments (clear)

  1. Good for him by Megaweapon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The way Creative publically handled the situation was so stupid they deserve the continued bad publicity.

    --
    I'm sure "SlashdotMedia" will improve on all the wonders that Dice Holdings blessed us all with
    1. Re:Good for him by dgatwood · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I kind of wish they would die, if only so we wouldn't have to let down so many disappointed people who bought Creative's X-Fi and Audigy hardware thinking it would be a good card for home recording only to find out that it utterly sucks at it. Between the high latency and all the post-processing it does to make the sound "better" (much of which is apparently hard to turn off), it's about the worst possible choice for that use, yet Creative seems to market it as though it would be good for that. Not to mention that the sound quality on the inputs just isn't up to snuff compared to even the cheapest M-Audio hardware.

      At a minimum, the company deserves the corporate equivalent of life in prison without parole for the number of people the company has harmed with their product claims.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    2. Re:Good for him by DaleGlass · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Some of those geeks work at places like universities and large companies and make purchase decisions. Others give advice to less knowledgeable people.

      An important thing to note here is that a dedicated soundcard is no longer a necessary component of a computer due to onboard sound. A large part of Creative's market are going people who decide on their own to buy a soundcard for some reason, and which card they choose will depend quite heavily on some geek's opinion.

    3. Re:Good for him by mcmonkey · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Throw in Hi def gaming, or a real media center, and a soundcard isn't just an enthusiasts upgrade, it's a necessity.

      IOW, it is just an enthusiasts upgrade.

  2. screw creative by nuzak · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Fire the people who badgered him. No, not the legal folks, they're just doing their due diligence, but the PM's who decided it was okay to actually harrass and intimidate the guy.

    An apology and an announcement of a policy change from here forward would also work.

    Otherwise, all I see is that they got caught and decided they'd just try other means to shut down unauthorized, uh, "unbreaking". There's also the whole deliberate breakage to begin with.

    As things stand right now, my only outstanding question for resolving the Creative debacle is "Turtle Beach or m-Audio?"

    --
    Done with slashdot, done with nerds, getting a life.
  3. Re:Backing down or CYA Manuver? by Kandenshi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm pretty sure that the lesson is "don't do evil in ways where you stand a good chance of getting caught. Do lots and lots of evil (if it's profitable) in areas where you're not likely to get bad publicity/legal action out of it.

  4. Miserable excuses by Creative by TheHawke · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They just grate on my nerves, saying that their drivers are hung up in the Vista approval process. I'd say that they are just buying time to release new products so they can make more profit off of NEW product instead of spending cash on support for old. The pattern shows in the forums as well as their support pages.
    I've seen more than a few companies simply bypass vista's certification process and release their updates, with instructions on how to circumvent Vista security checks. Good for them, bad for vista.

    --
    First rule of holes; When in one, stop digging.
  5. Re:This doesn't happen with free software by iamacat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Daniel_k had no right to modify Creative's software. The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

    Care to explain how constitution, or a constitutional law of Daniel_k's states prohibits him from distributing patches to Creative's drivers, provided that he neither distributes patched drivers directly nor do the patches contain Creative's copyrighted code in excess of fair use amount needed for interoperability.

    Now, it's possible that Daniel did not release his work properly, but he sure has "powers" to modify Creative's code.
  6. Re:Backing down or CYA Manuver? by Enderandrew · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You never know when you might get caught, so the actual lesson is "don't be evil".

    --
    http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
  7. Re:This doesn't happen with free software by hardburn · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That's not how copyrights work. By default, you have no right to do anything with someone else's copyrighted work. It's only through a license agreement that you have any right to even use Creative's code. If the EULA is entirely null-and-void, then there's nothing else that gives you right to use it. Note that certain portions of an EULA wouldn't necessarily hold up in court (technically, they could say that you must sacrifice your firstborn on the Temple of Sho'ka'rei, but that doesn't mean it'd hold up in court), however there has to be something that gives you the right to use it.

    Mind you, that all means nothing in the court of public opinion. While Creative might have had the legal right, their actions made them look like senseless bullies. It would have been far more productive to give the guy a job and release his changes officially.

    --
    Not a typewriter
  8. Let's be clear here by g051051 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    While I respect his skills, Daniel_K didn't actually write replacement drivers that did things Creative couldn't...he reverse engineered the existing drivers and patched out the OS level checks, or he swapped parts of code from other drivers into play, to enable features that were specifically disabled by Creative. He then made those modified, repackaged drivers available, which is a big problem for Creative, and the reason why they tried to shut Daniel_K down.

  9. They ought to start by... by cptdondo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    shitcanning the VP who approved this stuff. Publicly. Then issuing a public apology.

    Anyone who gets this heavy-handed in today's internet society is far out of touch with his/her customer base, and has no reason to be employed by a company that makes computer equipment.

    In other words, incompetent to the point of being actively harmful to the well-being and even survival of the company itself.