[wdmaudiodev] Re: Mixer API under Vista build 5308

  • From: "Frank Yerrace" <Frank.Yerrace@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <wdmaudiodev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2006 16:27:13 -0700

Drivers should still use the same mechanism to expose meters to the OS.
The change is at the API layer, not the DDI (as evidenced by your meters
being displayed in the Vista audio control panel). Applications that
truly need direct access to hardware controls- such as some of your
customer applications- may need to migrate to a new API for this level
of hardware access.

The mixer API compatibility mode that we're pushing into Vista, based on
feedback from this mailing list (and which has a good chance of becoming
a reality thanks to Larry Osterman's hard work), should reduce any need
for a manufacturer to "redesign [an] entire product range overnight."
Instead, they can make their product more Vista-friendly on their own
schedule.

Regarding the timing of any documentation release and its accuracy, I'll
have to consult with others here and rely on them to respond.

Frank Yerrace

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights.

-----Original Message-----
From: wdmaudiodev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:wdmaudiodev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jeff Pages
Sent: Sunday, April 16, 2006 3:01 PM
To: wdmaudiodev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [wdmaudiodev] Re: Mixer API under Vista build 5308

This is exactly the point I was trying to make. Even the Windows Vista
WDK 
Beta 1 documentation, dated 27th May 2005, includes the table showing
the 
mapping of topology nodes to mixer controls, and there is no indication 
anywhere that this would not be supported under Vista. Quite the
contrary, 
in fact, as it says the peak meter mapping is supported in Windows XP
AND 
LATER.

Is there a more recent release of the WDK available publicly that more 
accurately describes what is supported under Vista? It's now only six
months 
until the slated public release of Vista, and we can't redesign our
entire 
product range overnight.

Jeff


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Daniel E. Germann" <deg@xxxxxxxx>
To: <wdmaudiodev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 12:48 AM
Subject: [wdmaudiodev] Re: Mixer API under Vista build 5308


>I think what's most frustrating is that, as developers, we rely on the 
>documentation to tell us what we can and cannot do in our hardware and 
>software.  When we read in the docs that the WDM Audio layer translates

>KSNODETYPE_PEAKMETER into MIXERCONTROL_CONTROLTYPE_PEAKMETER for
Windows 
>Me, Windows XP and later (see 
>http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/Audio_
d/hh/Audio_d/pcdesign_fe656849-bfc3-45cc-8931-0c251afe6f04.xml.asp), 
>we tend to develop on that basis.  For example, we put input and output

>peak meters on the feature list of future products, and are designing
the 
>hardware to that spec.
>
> This is different from a statement like the DirectKS disclaimer (see 
> http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/device/audio/DirectKS.mspx): "Be
forewarned 
> that the DirectKS approach is unlikely to work on operating systems
after 
> Windows XP and Windows Server 2003."  We all know what we're signing
up 
> for when we use the DirectKS approach.  But we don't expect our
hardware 
> and software functionality to disappear when using documented and 
> supported features.
>
> That being said, I think we all realize that Vista's audio changes are

> extensive, and there are going to be a few bumps along the way.  Is
there 
> a "white paper" that provides a list of all the feature areas where
we're 
> likely to run into problems?
>
> -Dan
> --
> Dan Germann
> Digital Audio Labs
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> Subject: [wdmaudiodev] Re: Mixer API under Vista build 5308
>> Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 16:11:09 -0700
>> From: "Frank Yerrace" <Frank.Yerrace@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> The mixer API is an abstraction layer. Unless an application is
>> intentionally written for a specific subset of hardware, it should
not
>> assume any particular set of controls exist.
>>
>> That said, some applications are indeed written for a small set of
>> hardware configurations and they properly rely on those hardware
>> features to be accessible through this mixer API. Users and
>> manufacturers of these kinds of applications or associated hardware
>> might rightfully be frustrated by changes like this which affect them
or
>> their business. However, we expect that an incredible majority of
>> Windows applications are unaffected. We rely on releases like CTPs
and
>> Betas to prove or disprove this.
>>
>> Regarding some of your other comments, please realize that in order
to
>> make progress on some of the larger Vista initiatives, sometimes
there
>> are compromises around compatibility. It's a delicate trade-off and
>> clearly it would be self-destructive for us to intentionally "quietly
>> delete features" in ways that knowingly would have a large adverse
>> impact. We make the best choices possible with good intentions given
the
>> available data and/or experience. Early adoption and feedback from
>> people like those on this mailing list are an important part of
getting
>> this right and I hope this list's membership sees that they can
impact
>> what we do.
>>
>> Frank Yerrace
>> Microsoft Corporation
>>
>> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
>> rights.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: wdmaudiodev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> [mailto:wdmaudiodev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jeff Pages
>> Sent: Saturday, April 15, 2006 2:59 PM
>> To: wdmaudiodev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: [wdmaudiodev] Re: Mixer API under Vista build 5308
>>
>>> Just to confirm that I understand you correctly: you feel there are
>> some
>>> applications that will work better if the Vista mixer API (in normal
>>> mode, not the proposed compatibility mode) included line controls of
>>> type MIXERCONTROL_CONTROLTYPE_PEAKMETER. Do I understand you
>> correctly?
>>
>> Yes, that is correct.
>>
>>> If anyone can provide this list of apps, then we'll have better data
>>> when considering such a change.
>>
>> It's Easter Sunday here, and I won't be back in the office until
>> Tuesday,
>> but off the top of my head, here goes.
>>
>> "Newsboss", by Desktop Technologies (www.newsboss.com), which is a
>> newsroom
>> management package widely used by radio stations, has multiple audio
>> inputs
>> and an on-screen display of input levels using the peak meter
controls
>> in
>> the mixer API. I'm not sure how much its functionality is degraded if
>> peak
>> meters are not supported, but when peak meters were originally
omitted
>> from
>> the WDM audio model in Windows 98 and 2000, their developers insisted
>> that
>> we provide a workaround for them to directly access the peak meter
nodes
>> in
>> the topology port of our sound cards (which we did, although it was
>> pretty
>> cludgy). There were great sighs of relief when peak meters were
>> reinstated
>> in XP and ME.
>>
>> "Plaything", by the Community Broadcasters Association of Australia,
is
>> used
>> by practically every community radio station in Australia for the
>> management
>> of satellite feeds. It features on-screen input and output level
meters
>> that
>> are driven from the peak meter mixer controls. If these controls
don't
>> exist, the software will still function but there will be no display
on
>> the
>> on-screen meters (which will be rather disconcerting for the end
users).
>>
>> Most broadcast software packages (such as WaveCart by BSI and
Audiovault
>> by
>> Broadcast Electronics) have on-screen input and output level
indicators.
>> I
>> don't know for certain if these use the peak meter controls, but
would
>> think
>> that there's a good chance that they would at least take advantage of
>> them
>> if they're available.
>>
>> In any case, peak meter controls are a documented feature of Windows,
>> and
>> I'd have thought that application developers would have had every
right
>> to
>> expect that they could use them without having them pulled out from
>> under
>> them without notice. I mean, none of these changes have even been
>> publicly
>> documented yet - we're only discovering them when we try various
things
>> on
>> the CTPs and find they don't work any more. How many other "features"
of
>> the
>> audio subsystem have been quietly deleted? I'm sorry, but this really
>> stinks.
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "Frank Yerrace" <Frank.Yerrace@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> To: <wdmaudiodev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Sent: Sunday, April 16, 2006 7:03 AM
>> Subject: [wdmaudiodev] Re: Mixer API under Vista build 5308
>>
>>
>>> Jeff,
>>>
>>> Just to confirm that I understand you correctly: you feel there are
>> some
>>> applications that will work better if the Vista mixer API (in normal
>>> mode, not the proposed compatibility mode) included line controls of
>>> type MIXERCONTROL_CONTROLTYPE_PEAKMETER. Do I understand you
>> correctly?
>>>
>>> You said "a couple." Is this literally about two or three apps?
Also,
>> do
>>> these apps not work at all or is some minor functionality not
working?
>>> If anyone can provide this list of apps, then we'll have better data
>>> when considering such a change.
>>>
>>> Frank Yerrace
>>> Microsoft Corporation
>>>
>>> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
>>> rights.
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: wdmaudiodev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> [mailto:wdmaudiodev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jeff Pages
>>> Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2006 3:46 AM
>>> To: wdmaudiodev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Subject: [wdmaudiodev] Re: Mixer API under Vista build 5308
>>>
>>> Thanks Frank. I'll compile a list of applications that we're aware
of
>>> that
>>> might require this and forward it to Richard.
>>>
>>> There are also a couple of applications that would probably be okay
>> with
>>>
>>> Vista's mixer API except they expect to be able to see input and
>> output
>>> peak
>>> meters, which Vista currently isn't virtualising. Is this something
>> that
>>>
>>> could be added easily at this stage?
>>>
>>> Jeff
>
> ******************
>
> WDMAUDIODEV addresses:
> Post message: mailto:wdmaudiodev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subscribe:
mailto:wdmaudiodev-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=subscribe
> Unsubscribe:
mailto:wdmaudiodev-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
> Moderator:    mailto:wdmaudiodev-moderators@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> URL to WDMAUDIODEV page:
> http://www.wdmaudiodev.com/
>
>
> 

******************

WDMAUDIODEV addresses:
Post message: mailto:wdmaudiodev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subscribe:    mailto:wdmaudiodev-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=subscribe
Unsubscribe:
mailto:wdmaudiodev-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
Moderator:    mailto:wdmaudiodev-moderators@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

URL to WDMAUDIODEV page:
http://www.wdmaudiodev.com/

******************

WDMAUDIODEV addresses:
Post message: mailto:wdmaudiodev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subscribe:    mailto:wdmaudiodev-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=subscribe
Unsubscribe:  mailto:wdmaudiodev-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
Moderator:    mailto:wdmaudiodev-moderators@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

URL to WDMAUDIODEV page:
http://www.wdmaudiodev.com/

Other related posts: