Jeeeshhhh!<br>Some people sure take their time with updating the drivers!<br>M-Audio is sooooooo slooooooowwwww with the 'Leopard' drivers!<br><br>[color:blue][/b]Hodie mihi. Cras tibi.</font color=blue>[/b]

Don't get me started on drivers. I have an almost bran new HP scanner . . . no drivers for Leopard. HP says there's a work around, but geeze!<br><br>&#63743; &#63743; &#63743; &#63743;

Let me throw a little gas on the fire.<br><br>They've had more than a year to get the job done! Let's face it, they walked away leaving work undone because there are more pressing matters to attend to. Namely, focusing on the squeaky wheels, which is evident from the Straw poll being conducted prior to downloading any M-Audio drivers. <br><br>The graphic below is a screenshot of the polling data being collected by M-Audio. Notice what is at the top of the list of OS's and more importantly, what is absent from the list?<br><br>I do know that Name, E-Mail, and OS are mandatory entries and is indicative of how Avid (owner of m-audio) chose to manage the situation. They want to concentrate their resources only where it matters and I'm sorry to say Leopard doesn't matter right now because 10.5 has been marginalized by Vista and the mounting pressure of Bill Gates to foster his DRM'd Signed Drivers process.<br><br>Tiger audio support is a no-brainer because it is basically falls into the realm of Class-Compliance. In other words much of the heavy-lifting is done by the Mac OS and requires very little third-party support. As incremental changes in the Open Source community find their way into the Mac OS they are adopted by third-party developers and funneled into the Class Compliant standard. That is why there are usually no drivers available on the software CDs that ship with third-party products and the reason for very little after-market support. Apple, and its consumers are inadvertently being punished for following standards and embracing open source products. On the other hand, Windows consumers get the lion's share of support because their products are overly complicated.<br><br>Microsoft follows their own standards of compliance and drivers must be written for every iteration of the OS. This whole drivers issue has become so convoluted and frustrating for Microsoft, they have finally drawn a line in the sand and will require signed drivers. Vista 32-bit doesn't require them but for the 64-bit version it will be mandatory. Notice Vista 64-bit in the list below? In fact, Bill Gates decided that Vista 32-bit customers will not be able to play back Blu-Ray or HD-DVD movies! Tell me Microsoft is not getting serious about this DRM issue? There is a tide swelling in the industry, fueled by dollars from the content providers, to embrace Microsoft's ideology.<br><br>Now I'm not saying M-Audio has pulled their resources from Leopard development to focus mainly on Vista but what I am saying is companies like Avid have probably flagged all work in this area in order to realign with Microsoft's signed-driver strategy in their move to support DRM. Avid's business partners include a long list of powerful PC-centric businesses and Apple isn't among them and while Leopard is 64-bit and the process to tweak class-compliant drivers to work with Apple's newest OS would be relatively easy, there is more serious political work underfoot that could make Apple irrelevant once again; the bid to monetize DRM.<br><br>DRM; you're either with us or agin' us.<br><br><br><br><br>M i c h a e l (OFI)

That just pi$$es me off!<br>I bet M-Audio (Avid) will just take their sweet time and NOT update 'Leopard' drivers till next year if ever. I'll never, ever buy anything from those lazy bums!<br><br>[color:blue][/b]Hodie mihi. Cras tibi.</font color=blue>[/b]

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p><br>Microsoft follows their own standards of compliance and drivers must be written for every iteration of the OS.<br><p><hr></blockquote><p><br>Not entirely true. Win9x could largely share the same drive from 95 thru Me. Some drivers could be shared between 98SE/Me & 2000/XP. Other drivers could be built for just 2000/XP. Of course, the 64bit drivers are completely different story, since they have to be built for the 64bit platform (unlike OS X, since 10.5 uses a 32bit kernel).<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p><br>Vista 32-bit doesn't require them but for the 64-bit version it will be mandatory. Notice Vista 64-bit in the list below? <br><p><hr></blockquote><p><br>Part of this is probably due to if you want your drivers to pass WHQL, you must have a 32bit and 64bit version in Vista. And you can install unsigned drivers in 64bit Vista, but you have to press a key at every bootup to acknowledge you're using unsigned drivers.<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p><br>In fact, Bill Gates decided that Vista 32-bit customers will not be able to play back Blu-Ray or HD-DVD movies! <br><p><hr></blockquote><p><br>It was either go the DRM route, or not play back HD-DVD/Blu-Ray at all. Like some other OSes. You can thank the MPAA.<br><br>But I agree, DRM sucks.<br><br>Play World of Warcraft, for free!