* Thomas Lord <[email protected]> [2022-02-02 02:34]: > > Jean, I also respectfully disagree with you when you write > (about the Arturia keyboard): > > > So it is issue of proprietary software, not hardware. > > No, it is not. The issue is that the device uses > an extension to the MIDI communications protocol (known > as SYSEX for "system exclusive") messages which are > not documented. The hardware maker does not need to > provide any software at all to document the protocols. > Relying on software from the vendor to "reverse engineer" > the protocols is inadequate but such software may or > may not contain all the needed information, and in > any event can be arbitrarily obfuscated.
I cannot follow, where is the problem? I cannot see any problem that is analog to free software related freedoms. That user may miss knowledge about function of hardware is very common. I don't know how my blender function, and what is all inside, but I grind coffee and cocoa. None of the free software related analogous freedoms are brought in question by using blender that grinds coffee. Sure, blender is proprietary, but I care less, I purchased it and it works. It is not analog to proprietary software. MIDI device does something like taking music from music instrument, converting some signals. What is important is that there is free software that can access that device. That device is proprietary is clear. You cannot force that manufacturer to give you all the rights to produce that device yourself, but you are free to ask. What you can also do is to design such device yourself and publish with free software. Those are all options, though I don't see where is the problem. Help me understand it. Jean Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns: https://www.fsf.org/campaigns In support of Richard M. Stallman https://stallmansupport.org/ _______________________________________________ libreplanet-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
