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/