According to CrunchGear, the same pulses and blips used in modems can be recreated on your computer, and sent to another using the speaker and microphone. Lofgren laid out the basic rules for soundcard file transfers, which includes translating to binary code to noise and back, as follows:

For every character:
For every bit:
Send a short pulse if the bit is 1.
Send a long pulse if the bit is 0.
Send a silence.
Send a very long pulse (4 times as long as the shortest pulse).
Send a silence.

After that, its just a matter playing the noises out a speaker, with goes into a microphone rigged to sit against it, and that mic transfers the sound to the other computer. But then there's the matter of converting the noise back into 1s and 0s, which is a slightly more involved. Luckily, Lofgren lays out the whole thing on his blog which you can read here. [Awesome Geek Blog via CrunchGear]

On the one hand, Daniel says "They publicly threatened me, just to show their arrogance. They were sarcastic, ironic and asked me if I wanted something from them, as if I were expecting something. It was my protest against them and would like to see how far it would go."

On the other hand, Creative does have a legal right to protect their software, and if they want to force users to upgrade in order to get proper functionality, it's their right to do so (even if it is somewhat of a dick move). Daniel himself admits that he crossed the line, both with asking for donations and this:

Reversing ALchemy was also wrong, I know. But I reiterate, what is the point of improving ALchemy and changing for it, when it requires an improved driver? It was my protest against Creative.

To Creative's credit, they do realize the error of their ways and are being more acceptive to new forms of development. But Daniel's not without his faults here, which seems to be something glossed over on recent accounts of the situation. In the end, the posts are back up and people can go ahead and get their cards working on Vista, which is probably the most important thing any of us will take away from this mess. That, and the fact that John Stamos has aged quite well. [The Register]

Creative's statement:

We have read the strong feedback about Creative's forum post regarding driver development by Daniel_k and other outside parties. Creative's message posted on our behalf by our Company spokesperson tried to address our concern about the improper distribution of certain software which is the property of other companies. However, we did not make it as clear as we would have liked that we do support driver development by independent third parties. The huge task of developing driver updates to accommodate the many changes in the Vista operating system and the extensive testing required, including the lengthy Vista certification requirements for audio, makes it very difficult for Creative to develop updates for all past products. Outside developers have been very helpful to Creative and our customers by developing updates for many of our Sound Blaster products, and we do support and appreciate these efforts. This however does not extend to the unauthorized distribution of other companies' property. We hope to work out a mutually agreeable method for working with Daniel_k in supporting his efforts in driver development. Going forward, we are committed to doing a better job of working more closely with third parties to support their development for our products and our customers.

We're not too sure why Creative wouldn't want their old products having proper cross OS support implemented. Sure, they do provide beta drivers, but word is they aren't to stable, plus we're guessing their newer, shinier and more expensive replacement devices have something to do with it. Frankly, those won't sell if some asshole is putting down his own, backward compatible drivers to bring old hardware up to speed. Checkout what Creative had to say below:

Daniel_K:

We are aware that you have been assisting owners of our Creative sound cards for some time now, by providing unofficial driver packages for Vista that deliver more of the original functionality that was found in the equivalent XP packages for those sound cards. In principle we don't have a problem with you helping users in this way, so long as they understand that any driver packages you supply are not supported by Creative. Where we do have a problem is when technology and IP owned by Creative or other companies that Creative has licensed from, are made to run on other products for which they are not intended. We took action to remove your thread because, like you, Creative and its technology partners think it is only fair to be compensated for goods and services. The difference in this case is that we own the rights to the materials that you are distributing. By enabling our technology and IP to run on sound cards for which it was not originally offered or intended, you are in effect, stealing our goods. When you solicit donations for providing packages like this, you are profiting from something that you do not own. If we choose to develop and provide host-based processing features with certain sound cards and not others, that is a business decision that only we have the right to make.

Although you say you have discontinued your practice of distributing unauthorized software packages for Creative sound cards we have seen evidence of them elsewhere along with donation requests from you. We also note in a recent post of yours on these forums, that you appear to be contemplating the release of further packages. To be clear, we are asking you to respect our legal rights in this matter and cease all further unauthorized distribution of our technology and IP. In addition we request that you observe our forum rules and respect our right to enforce those rules. If you are in any doubt as to what we would consider unacceptable then please request clarification through one of our forum moderators before posting.

Phil O'Shaughnessy
VP Corporate Communications
Creative Labs Inc.

Creative X-Fi for Notebooks [Notebook Review]