Death of Audirvana?

[miguelito]

Publicity?

No, simply litigation threat. And frankly if I were Damien I would not stand my ground unless I have a bullet-proof argument invalidating the patent.

 

Playing hardball Mr. Robinson? What do you think you will get out of such actions? I actually hope that:

1- iTunes starts selling high res

2- They block you and your POS soft out (including A+). But A2 is coming, you have nothing.

 

Miguel

[miguelito]

With that kind of publicity, who needs detractors. It could be just the thing to make people stop associating PM with being buggy.

You mean cuz there will be something worse to say than PM is crapp?

[freddie40]

Patent litigation is so expensive I'd be amazed if anything happens because of this Patent. Two companies selling inexpensive software to a niche market have no business fighting it out in a court room for Patent infringement.

 

I totally agree. I would cost him a fortune to file and lawsuit. Threatening is a way to go, but he will make many people mad along the way.

 

Dave

 

Dave

[miguelito]

Angry people are making rash statements still!

Agreed. I will try to hold my ire. Still will not give Mr. Rob a cent anymore.

[YashN]

Actually, this bolsters my incentive to pay for an upgrade to Audirvana Plus.

 

That's great too. I was thinking more of boosting adoption for new users, so perhaps a mix of both is best.

[YashN]

However, the patent is not as broad as some of you seem to think. It requires a proxy file that "comprises a silent data block comprising a duration and sample rate equal to that of the media file". I believe that the current version of Audirvana does not have that feature.

 

The last version changed something to the proxy files as there were some related bugs.

 

However, suggesting that the implementation of a proxy file as you described is something patently original is pushing it. It's the same implementation anyone would have done and doesn't require 'innovation' to think about doing it nor to execute the idea.

[YashN]

With respect to all you angry men... Have Channel D announced they will be suing Damien. Before getting up in arms about how Channel D are going to screw the world of computer audiophile perhaps you should wait and see. Perhaps they have already contacted Damien and there is an agreement in place.

 

There is a long distance between a patient to protect your ideas and suing others out of existence!

 

It isn't about someone potentially suing someone else for me: it is about the broken software patent world. You get people knowing nothing of software development or engineering issuing patents, sometimes even about algorithms.

 

This is a terrible mess.

[YashN]

I have been very pleased with using PM, then A+, now PM 2. But this makes want to try JRiver.

How

Much is the full boat with JRiver?

 

I like JRiver's real-time upconversion to DSD, but in my system, it sometimes glitches when changing file format with my iFi iDSD, so I cannot say the last trial nudged me into buying it. I tried them all before settling on Audirvana+ and I like how things develop with Damien.

 

PM has some good things going for it although I find it very bloated and hence not very stable: multi-channel DSP is well implemented.

 

Audirvana has the best value for money in my opinion. Updates are fast, and all interaction with the software and the maker is hassle-free. You feel there is a real love of music and audio behind it, not a pursuit of money.

[YashN]

This kind of Software patents are just stupid.

The whole software industry is getting more and more screwed by this kind of behaviours.

 

ChannelD patenting proxy files methods is just another reason not to buy or use their sloppy software. They should invest in proper designers and good engineers.

I'll never buy anything from them.

Just my 2 cents.

 

Yes, it is stupid, but you have to consider: ChannelD on its own cannot patent a thing: there is a judging party which issues the patents. The whole system is broken beyond recognition.

[Leonardo Piras]

Yes, it is stupid, but you have to consider: ChannelD on its own cannot patent a thing: there is a judging party which issues the patents. The whole system is broken beyond recognition.

 

True, the whole US patent system has huge cracks, but just requesting a patent for protecting something like "proxy files" may show that the company is very short sighted.

 

Instead of learning from Audirvana and/or Fidelia in terms of UX, software design and efficiency for the OS X platform, they continue to deliver buggy, unfriendly, slow, poorly designed software AND they try to gain competitive advantage patenting "common" methods.

Not my cup of tea i'm afraid.

[wappinghigh]

Could someone please summarise for me what this spat is all about?

 

I get that a patent has been filed, but has there been a brawl or fight or something between these two guys, because if there has, I've missed it.

 

Where was it?

 

On the web?

 

In a thread here on CA?

 

Where.

 

Link please.

 

Cheers

[wappinghigh]

The other question follows my previous.

 

If there has been a spat and it's taken further, will this stop Damien developing A+ 2.0?

 

Because that would be a shame....

 

Like I said before who needs itunes?

 

I've been waiting for a cut down simple music library that runs beautifully on OSX to replace itunes for years...

[wappinghigh]

Itunes and it's "model" died like last century...

 

This sort of nonsense makes one just want to go use Spotify and Pandora..

 

That's want the next generation are doing ....

 

I mean seriously 99.999% of people out there now would simple say who cares?

 

The reality is the world has moved on from complicated music libraries anyway..

 

There is still a place for a cut down simple music media library like A+ 2.O on OSX or MinimServer running on a NAS.. but anything else for me.. just forget it.. I simple don't have the time for all that other complicated library management, sorting and tagging nonsense.. I just want to play the music!!!

 

I mean if I can't source and stream a higher rez track direct from MinimServer and play it seamlessly in 0.5 sec flat, I'll get impatient and jump on Rhapsody within Sonos and stream the same music from there...

 

Both these guys should be ploughing their intellect (they clearly have it) into developing hirez/DSD streaming services...

[PGRPGRPG]

Itunes and it's "model" died like last century...

 

This sort of nonsense makes one just want to go use Spotify and Pandora..

 

That's want the next generation are doing ....

 

Fully agree with That. Y generation is already ready set to Music as a service with likes Spotify, Deezer...

From my perspective, embedded software and local music storage will be soon totally "old fashion" way to enjoy music.

I'm fully convinced that just as for business, Cloud is the future. Let's just get the right streamed Hirez/remastered Files based on faster broadband networks, with decreased files prices due to mass distribution, and everyone might be happy, Producers, Artists, End-users...

For sure this is for tomorrow. Today, with my Cell Phone monthly fee, I already get Deezer for free...

My 2 cents

[miguelito]

Fully agree with That. Y generation is already ready set to Music as a service with likes Spotify, Deezer..

This is "computer audiophile". We care.

[wappinghigh]

I'm fully convinced that just as for business, Cloud is the future. Let's just get the right streamed Hirez/remastered Files based on faster broadband networks, with decreased files prices due to mass distribution, and everyone might be happy, Producers, Artists, End-users...

 

Absolutely SPOT on.

[wappinghigh]

This is "computer audiophile". We care.

 

I care too..

 

I just use "computers" in a different way

[Allan F]

There iis a long distance between a patient to protect your ideas and suing others out of existence!

 

I'm confused, Eloise. Which one is the patient, Pure Music or Audirvana? And what is the patient suffering from?

 

Seriously, the only reason to apply for a patent is to license it to others for consideration or otherwise control its use, or to force others to cease and desist.

[Laowei Steve]

I made the decision to do that a while ago - just after he misrepresented the thread on A+ Direct Mode. Keep in mind that he warned against using Direct Mode because some folks reported having kernel faults in early betas. Damien stabilized Direct Mode and embarrassed Rob by making that advice seem awfully foolish.

 

^This

[Allan F]

Patent litigation is so expensive I'd be amazed if anything happens because of this Patent. Two companies selling inexpensive software to a niche market have no business fighting it out in a court room for Patent infringement.

 

The threat of litigation is sometimes enough to force a settlement or get a party to quit. My guess is that Robert Robinson has deeper pockets than Damien, but I could be wrong. OTOH, Damien could possibly stall long enough to launch Audirvana 2 and render the threat harmless. But, as you suggest Chris, it all could end up being a tempest in a teapot.

[Jud]

I'm with Eloise. I see lots of sound and fury, so far signifying nothing. Think I'll just wait to see what if anything happens.

[YashN]

True, the whole US patent system has huge cracks, but just requesting a patent for protecting something like "proxy files" may show that the company is very short sighted.

 

Yes, but if the issuing service were more precise and picky about issuing the patents, then people would think twice about trying to patent frivolous ideas.

 

Instead of learning from Audirvana and/or Fidelia in terms of UX, software design and efficiency for the OS X platform, they continue to deliver buggy, unfriendly, slow, poorly designed software AND they try to gain competitive advantage patenting "common" methods.

Not my cup of tea i'm afraid.

 

Well said.

[YashN]

Could someone please summarise for me what this spat is all about?

 

I get that a patent has been filed, but has there been a brawl or fight or something between these two guys, because if there has, I've missed it.

 

None that we know of.

 

But to understand this thread and why some are worked up about it, you'd need to read up on how people think the software patent world is irretrievably broken.

[YashN]

I'm with Eloise. I see lots of sound and fury, so far signifying nothing. Think I'll just wait to see what if anything happens.

 

The sound and fury is legitimate: it's yet another example of profiteering based on the broken software patent system instead of actually innovating.

[Jud]

The sound and fury is legitimate: it's yet another example of profiteering based on the broken software patent system instead of actually innovating.

 

And you know it is a legitimate example of the broken software patent system based on your patent law expertise, audio software programming expertise, or a combination of the two?

 

With regard to "profiteering," do you have an actual occurrence of this to report, within just days from the granting of the patent? Do you have an understanding of the code used by A+ or other audio player software plus the legal expertise that allows you to say whether and how far any other software infringes the precise scope of this patent?

 

I'm a lawyer who Damien asked to review some Audirvana licensing documents back in the day, and I was sensible enough to tell him to get a real software licensing expert to do that. Here I see a thread full of software patent law experts, who also apparently have inside knowledge of the way various popular audio players are coded, plus advance business knowledge of the profit-making moves that are to be made on the strength of this patent, and I am amazed that everyone knows so much.