whya Posted November 26, 2008 Share Posted November 26, 2008 I would ask at the netkas forum, but registration over there is currently disabled so maybe someone over here could explain this to me . . . The EFI tutorial over there states that you need to get sound working before switching to EFI strings, but if I already have sound working by using the AppleHDA patcher, is there then any advantage to using EFI strings for audio? Does it allow using the unmodified AppleHDA.kext? Does it result in audio showing up as "built-in" or something? Otherwise, I don't really understand the benefit here, because it's not getting rid of any extra "injector" kext like it does for video. I don't mean to sound critical in any way, but I'm just trying to understand this better. Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/138334-what-is-the-advantage-of-using-efi-strings-for-audio/ Share on other sites More sharing options...
dies Posted November 26, 2008 Share Posted November 26, 2008 because it's not getting rid of any extra "injector" kext like it does for video. You sure you're not using HDAEnabler? In any case, if you're happy with your current setup then... why bother? Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/138334-what-is-the-advantage-of-using-efi-strings-for-audio/#findComment-978926 Share on other sites More sharing options...
whya Posted November 27, 2008 Author Share Posted November 27, 2008 I just want to be doing it the best way And I don't think I'm using HDAEnabler. I used the HDA Patcher method... Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/138334-what-is-the-advantage-of-using-efi-strings-for-audio/#findComment-979332 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts