Herbert Graf wrote:

> > of the USB spec. I don't have a problem with different drivers
> > for different
> > classes of device, but I DO expect that the spec would require
> > all of a particular
> > class to use a 'standard' driver. e.g. Storage devices, mouse device, etc.
>
>         Again, don't blame the spec. The spec HAS defined "standard" devices, the
> MANUFACTURERS decided to "go it on their own", and USB allows them to (can't

OK Herbert, I agree with you. The problem is Manufactures who 'go their own way'
rather than trying to use an existing, well defined protocol that could work
for them. Must be their compulsive need to "own" intellectual property.

> blame USB for that, leaving things open for devices outside of "predefined"
> types was pretty much required). Again, it's not USB's fault that you had to

Of course.

> load all those drivers, put the blame where it belongs.

OK, you've convinced me. The spec is good. The makers are bad for
not using it well.

> > So how exactly, is my ATTEMPT to use USB MP3 players 'not what
> > USB was meant for'?
>
>         The manufacturers require a custom driver and didn't conform to the mass

No, they CHOSE to use a custom driver. The device does nothing more than
decode/encode files that are stored on it.

It may also have to do with licensing FATxx from Microsloth.
I tried one player that used SM cards. Couldn't see the card when
I wrote the file directly to the card. Had to 'format' the card in the unit, and
then shove the file out via their USB program. Of course the card wasn't readable
elsewhere. What a PITA.

> storage spec. The manufacturers made this choice based on the threat of
> attack from the RIAA if they didn't. So, blame the RIAA, I do. They (or

How pathetic. So instead of a one step process and choices on how I
interact with the copy process, I have a two/three step.
But it sure cut down on piracy didn't it? (yet another long thread <G>).

> their equivalent in other countries) are the reason I pay a "tax" for every
> piece of blank media I buy, even though I'm not using it to store copyright
> material (mostly pictures I've taken, backups of my servers, etc.). Of

I have exactly the SAME complaint. And they just raised the rates while
they're sitting on $61 million that was supposed to go to the ripped
off Canadian artists. Who the heck is pirating Canadian artists? The big
ones are all signed up with American distributors.

> course in the case of my country it pretty much makes downloading
> copyrighted music "legal", so I guess there is some benefit.

Here it's now legal to clone CD's for 'personal use'. Transcoding
to MP3 is technically illegal because strictly speaking, it's no
longer a 'copy' even if it sounds nearly the same. But you are also
allowed to make a 'backup' copy of your media, so who knows.

> ----------------------------------
> Herbert's PIC Stuff:
> http://repatch.dyndns.org:8383/pic_stuff/

So why doesn't your logic analyser use a USB interface instead of that
'legacy' parallel port?? ;}

R

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email listserv@mitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body