hi there,
well, after having read all these threads, i guess it couldn't be a
bad idea to let them Korg guys know that at least a couple dozens of
us are really willing that they release the code for the Poly-800.
Maybe we could get on the same page as regards what will be asked and
then act in consequence. I'mm all for M. Hawkins move. Count me in.
Dave
--- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Atom Smasher <atom@...> wrote:
>
> > I showed them your email, but I'm sorry to tell you that we
cannot
> > comply with your request. It is our general policy not to release
this
> > kind of information - How we design, code and develop our
products is
> > part of our long-attained equity as a company and we simply do
not in
> > any circumstances release that information out into the public.
> ============================
>
> Mr Kovarsky, you've probably never heard of me. I've published some
> hardware modifications to the Poly-800 series of synthesizers that
seems
> to have contributed quite a bit to it's cult following.
>
> Since both the software and hardware of the Poly-800 series of
synths are
> entirely obsolete, it would seem that Korg would have absolutely
nothing
> to lose from releasing details about the software. Further, it
would
> demonstrate that Korg is a company that puts long-time loyal users
ahead
> of obsolete secrets.
>
> We all know that software details of the Poly-800 would reveal no
useful
> information at all about any current gear made by Korg. Nor would
this
> information be useful to anyone wanting to make a new synthesizer;
partly
> because the feature set is limited by modern standards and partly
because
> the hardware is obsolete.
>
> I would certainly understand Korg not wanting to release software
details
> about these synths in the 80s, or even 90s, but this is 2006. The
software
> details of the Poly-800, known to be limited by features and then-
current
> hardware, are absolutely useless except for one thing: breathing
new life
> into an old hardware synth with a loyal following.
>
> I'm hopeful that a mutually beneficial arrangement can reached with
Mr
> Hawkins: Perhaps you can release the code to him with a non-
disclosure
> agreement? This would allow him to independently breath new life
into this
> old synthesizer (and share his compiled code), without publicly
releasing
> any company "secrets".
>
> If Korg were to publicly release such information at this point in
time,
> it would only demonstrate that Korg is willing to allow (or even
> encourage) independent support for long obsolete gear. Nothing
could be
> more helpful in selling new gear than confidence that the gear will
be
> supported long after it's been forgotten. The good PR that Korg
could gain
> by releasing the obsolete code for an obsolete synth with a loyal
> following is priceless. I will certainly consider this in future
> purchases; not all synthesizer/effect manufacturers consider such
> information to be a secret after 20+ years.
>
> While I certainly understand that these details are the property of
Korg,
> and that Korg had invested resources into it's development, I just
can't
> see any justifiable reason to keep the code locked up at this
point. Nor
> can I see how it might benefit Korg in any way to keep the code
secret. I
> can certainly understand that the code was, at one time, a very
valuable
> asset to Korg and worthy of being locked up. While locked in a safe
that
> asset certainly must have depreciated to zero within the last
several
> years, if not earlier. Thus, it's "equity" to the company is
currently
> much greater if it's released than it is if it's kept secret. If
there's
> anything that I've overlooked in my reasoning or I don't seem to
> understand, please feel free to contact me and let me know what I'm
> missing.
>
> I hope that you can understand my reasoning, and that you may be
able to
> advocate this position within the company. Perhaps a request such
as this
> should be directed to R&D, or the legal department. If that's the
case,
> please send their contact information to me and Mr Hawkins, so we
can
> pursue this further.
>
> Thank you for your time.
>
>
> --
> ...atom
>
> ________________________
> http://atom.smasher.org/
> 762A 3B98 A3C3 96C9 C6B7 582A B88D 52E4 D9F5 7808
> -------------------------------------------------
>
> "Everything that can be invented has been invented."
> -- Charles H. Duell,
> Commissioner, U.S. Office of Patents, 1899
>