However, the Karma code is all but finished. Further testing on the empeg wouldn't be useful.

Hmm, this makes me curious... Now that the Karma code has evolved so much, about how similar would you say the empeg player code and the Karma code is? If the main code trunk continues to advance without back-ports to the empeg, doesn't opening up at least portions of the player source code to hungry empeg developers become a legitimate topic?

Maybe my reasoning is a little convoluted, but it seems to me that the less the empeg platform resembles current products, the more it takes on an "abandonware" status that DNNA suits could feel comfortable about releasing portions of (with no warranties expressed or implied, of course.) One of the major reasons (as I understood it) behind keeping the player source closed is to protect trade secrets and intellectual property inside the code. Well, at some point, doesn't a lot of that stuff get rewritten to take advantage of the new platforms, or to add in newer functionality?

The way I see it, the Cambridge folks have always bent over backwards to address this community's concerns and wishes, and the community has done a lot in terms of providing feedback, alpha/beta testing, and unofficial support for Rio-branded products. It's been a good symbiotic relationship, and it'd be nice if that could eventually lead to an arrangement where the community could take some part in the development process of a fully functional empeg player app, even if some of the guts (visuals, WMA engine, anything that's licensed and/or contractually protected) are distributed as binary-only. I'm not saying your former employer owes us anything, but if there's any way it could be done, I think it could potentially benefit both parties. We could be free to make improvements to the player app, and DNNA would be free (with the right licensing in place) to use our improvements in future products.

This sort of thing has been talked about a lot in the past, and the response was always that the empeg too closely resembled current products for it to be feasible. Do you think this is this still the case?

I know you don't speak for empeg, DNNA, or anyone else now, so this question is also open to Rob, Peter, and anyone else who cares to comment...