On Thursday 20 November 2003 15:59, Robert Schlabbach wrote: > From: "Klaus Schmidinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Robert Schlabbach wrote: > > > AFAIK, the specs for the TT designs have never been published either, > > > and the drivers you have now are the result of guessing and reverse > > > engineering. I don't see why this shouldn't be repeated for more > > > up-to-date designs than the old TT ones... > > > > True - but soembody actually has to _do_ this ;-) > > Apparently the interest in this isn't high enough, yet... > > Maybe the incentives just aren't high enough - why bother reverse > engineering a design that's technically no improvement over the TT ones? > Now if there was a card that was actually a technical advance (e.g. a > DVB-S2 card, or a hybrid DVB-C/T card, or a card with a better suited PCI > bridge with a deep FIFO, or a card with a much quicker sync'ing > demodulator), I'm sure someone would get into reverse engineering it...
Exactly, that's the point. IIRC some recent budget cards also require closed-source firmware, which has to be taken from the windows driver. This is a step in the wrong direction. There is no advantage except that these cards are really cheap. On the other hand, if vendors would really care about selling cards for vdr or other linux application, they would support driver development. But they don't care, and the linux community has to do time-consuming reverse engineering and play with I2C sniffers. Why should we waste out time with cards which are not better than the old ones? Oliver -- Info: To unsubscribe send a mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe linux-dvb" as subject.
