“Windows Vista includes an array of ‘features’ that you don’t want. These features will make your computer less reliable and less secure. They’ll make your computer less stable and run slower. They will cause technical support problems. They may even require you to upgrade some of your peripheral hardware and existing software. And these features won’t do anything useful. In fact, they’re working against you. They’re digital rights management features built into Vista at the behest of the entertainment industry. And you don’t get to refuse them.”
No shit?
I hate DRM. More, and more people don’t give a rats *&9 about the consumer. HDMI is another freaking DRM conspiracy. To get off topic blu-ray vs HD-DVD pisses me off to. They can’t settle on a god damn standard, because each side wants more money, and I have to decide whether I want to be able watch King Kong in HD, or Star Wars in HD. DRM/copyrights/software patents are all BS
HDMI is great stuff, it’s just HDCP that sucks.
No they both suck.
VGA for the win! Heh.. I refuse to get involved in the current format war, and I strongly suspect after the corporate idiots burn everyone a few times they’ll discover their customers are no longer as willing to buy into new standards as they used to be….
–bornagainpenguin
Interestingly, I believe somewhere in a paper they said that if you were to use other interfaces/technologies, you could get even higher quality then HDMI and *without* the DRM. Any truth to that?
Of course you can refuse them. Don’t purchase content that can be limited by Vista. Or don’t purchase Vista. To be honest, if I was a shareholder of an RIAA or MPAA affiliate, I would be deeply concerned about their disregard of the consumer.
I don’t for one second beleive that the DRM helps the artists. It sure as heck doesn’t prevent the unauthorized distribution of thier content.
vimh says:
I don’t for one second believe that the DRM helps the artists. It sure as heck doesn’t prevent the unauthorized distribution of thier content.
Correct. DRM’s main purpose in life is about control. It has, and always been.
Its just been marketed as “beneficial for the consumer”. (A very big lie).
What gives them to right to allow them to control what I can do on my PC? I paid for it! I built the darn thing! I set the thing up! I even paid for the content to watch at my leisure!
The fact is, both the RIAA and MPAA have no idea what to do about the Internet. The web has changed the way how content can be distributed. The problem is, MPAA/RIAA don’t know how to profit from it. They really have no clue! This is because they don’t want to change their business model!
This is why they implement a draconian campaign.
(1) Anything P2P is evil. It doesn’t matter if P2P can be used to transfer legal content.
(2) DRM on hardware and software.
(3) Use political influence to get the Law changed (as well as affect other countries with similar laws…Such as Australia via Free-Trade Agreement. Search for “Copyright Amendment Act 2006”).
(4) Make public examples out of P2P sites and folks with legal cases. (Notice how the folks they sue have very little knowledge of computers? And notice how eager they were with a Press Release about The Pirate Bay raid?)
I don’t think Microsoft is the only one guilty of DRM implementation. Apple does it as well. With their iTunes as well as the EFI in their current Macs. (Notice how no other company has implemented EFI in a consumer available motherboard or system?)
Although, its not the same as a DRM framework for HD content!
Notice how they don’t advertise it? If word spreads out that DRM is really bad, no one would buy anything to do with it!
I’ve made sure:
(1) I don’t purchase a video card or monitor that has HDCP.
(Which will get harder in the future as HDCP completely saturates those products).
(2) I’m using Linux and BSD, with no plans to spend a dime on Vista. (Only using Win2k if I need specific Windows apps).
(3) I have no intention on buying HD content. (Yes, I have viewed HD content before, but I find DVD quality good enough for me. If it shows the movie and tells the story, why do I care that I can see the freckles of the actors/actresses?)
Maybe we should start hardware companies that provide DRM-free solutions?
(Just to stick it to companies who are siding with content providers)…Would anyone buy such products? (Assuming DRM-free solutions perform just as well as DRM’ed ones)
And you don’t get to refuse them.
I have every intention of voting with my wallet and not buying Vista. I may go with Linux or I may go with MacOS (depending on whether or not I get a laptop or not) but I will not be bothering with Vista. I can build my own machine from parts thank you very much and I can always use HaikuSkyOSSyllableReactOSRISC OS*BSD instead of Vista.
Or I can simply stick with my copy of XP. I have two licenses for that OS anyway, along with the copy of XP Corporate I use because I got tired of the Mother may I procedure every time I reinstalled. If worse comes to worse I think I can rustle up a copy of 2000 or even NT4.x to hold me over. If I really feel the need to stick with Windows that is…. And I don’t.
So really, I have every option to refuse to use Microsoft’s Vista or giver up the right to know what is happening on my own machine.
–bornagainpenguin
The problem is that Microsoft is not really all that vulnerable to a boycott. Their most important customers are PC builders, and the most common way to get it is with a new PC. There are also a lot of other uses for a PC other than playing music and film.
Microsoft also have a lot of money and can stand a boycott for a while.
The ones that are really vulnerable are the content providers. They have no alternative market or alternative products. If you are willing to accept some collateral damage you could go after your local record store if they sell contents from record labels that also sells protected material.
Other suitable targets would be companies selling home electronics. After all most CDs, DVDs are not played in computers but in ordinary home appliances. If you can convince them (as in you sell a blue ray player here, we buy our TV elsewhere) not to sell DRM related technology it will be harder for content providers to find markets for their products.
Edited 2007-02-15 19:11
Here are the marketable aspects of Vista’s DRM:
* You can actually watch the DRM protected movies that you really want to watch.
* you can listen actually listen to the DRM protected music that you really want to listen to.
People will give up their freedom for pretty much anything.
Still, if enough customers say no to Vista, the company might actually listen.
Please, stop dreaming. Not only do the vast majority of consumers not read Forbes, but they’ll just take whatever is on the computer that they buy at the store or online. They’d have to be really persistant in order to refuse Vista (in future computers). The only way to break the monopoly would be to force OEMs to give consumers a choice of OS when purchasing a computer (including various Linux distros). Purchasing a computer should be: Step 1, choose your hardware (faster?, storage space?, frills, etc.) Step 2, choose your OS (according to your needs and what you want to pay).
But given Microsoft’s leverage with hardware manufacturers, that’s not going to happen anytime soon.
Plus, while it’s possible for online purchases, it would realistically be difficult to implement at the retail level. Large corporations and businesses are the only ones who might be able to make a difference as they’re more conscious of the options available (or maybe I’m dreaming too).
So we’re stuck with Microsoft’s bidding.
The only way to break the monopoly would be to force OEMs to give consumers a choice of OS when purchasing a computer
When I bought my old Athlon around 2000 (from ABS), I was given a choice of OSs. I happily chose Windows 98se over Windows ME. I’d be very surprised if at least some companies don’t offer a choice of Vista or XP. Some people just want the old standby.
Now, a choice between Windows versions isn’t entirely ideal, but it’s better than nothing. If only more manufacturers would offer the choice of no OS as well.. a conundrum I avoided by building my new machine from parts.
Lenovo, at least, does this. I just ordered a new Lenovo ThinkPad on Monday and opted to get XP instead of Vista. Dell and HP, on the other hand, are solely pushing Vista for laptops at this time (at least based on their web site ordering methods).
and both are from Microsoft
The only way to break the monopoly would be to force OEMs to give consumers a choice of OS when purchasing a computer (including various Linux distros). Purchasing a computer should be: Step 1, choose your hardware (faster?, storage space?, frills, etc.) Step 2, choose your OS (according to your needs and what you want to pay).
This would not work. The very large majority of people who would choose Linux would be those that already know about it– and even then, most of those people would probably prefer to install/configure it themselves rather than having it preloaded.
Breaking the monopoly requires a lot more than choice. From the perspective of Linux, it requires a standardized and coherent system, ISV/IHV support, and user education in that order. But, most of all, it requires time.
with my wallet by choosing an XP loaded laptop over Vista loaded one. Now all that remains to be done is load FC as the second OS and I’m all set
with my wallet by choosing an XP loaded laptop over Vista loaded one. Now all that remains to be done is load FC as the second OS and I’m all set
You’re all set until XP becomes a legacy OS, updates are no longer available, and the latest hardware only has Vista drivers.
I’m sticking with XP for now (it’s not my primary OS, but I keep it around for Games), but I know if I don’t succeed in weaning myself toatlly off Windows, I’ll have to upgrade in a year or two.
XP will be supported for 5-7 years. The problem will be most of the new hardware and MS software will be Vista only. MS is going to do everything it can to push as many people as possible onto Vista. This is where the money is and it will lock people even more firmly into the Windows world. MS will be able to dictate to the hardware manufacturers that new hardware will only be compatible with Vista because Vista will not allow unsigned drivers. New digital cameras, digital video cameras, printers, scanners, etc. will very rapidly force the Vista upgrade.
Even “bad” publicity will get more people to use Vista.
Here’s a good piece on Steve Jobs’ reply
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=6012
Even “bad” publicity will get more people to use Vista.
So says one of about 3 Vista-pushers on this site.
Seriously, go to MycrosoftPnzM33.com or something and push your bull there. It’d be less wasteful of your time.
You need to get out more. And do something about that anger problem.
You need to get out more. And do something about that anger problem.
Oh, I will. When you do something about that bullshitting problem.
Care to point me to an independent site that doesn’t make Vista sound like a laughing stock (we’ll forget about the DRM part for the minute, ok?)?
No bullshitting here. It’s only you and your hallucinations.
Use a search engine. I’m not going to do your work.
No bullshitting here. It’s only you and your hallucinations.
Right…
Use a search engine. I’m not going to do your work.
So are you saying that if I google “ronaldst” and “OO.org” or “MS Office” I’ll find stuff on what YOU need that isn’t in OO.o? That’s what i asked you to tell me.
This article needs to be a cover story in the magazine. To me this article is a big deal since the author is Bruce Schneier and he covers this from such a lay standpoint: You can give this to family and friends to explain why they shouldn’t buy Vista. Or at least to explain a little something about DRM.
And if they ask if this is just a bitter anti-MS pundit you can explain who Schneier is.
I just hope they do the exact same story for OSX 10.5 which will implement the very same DRM.
And the author is very much mistaken if he thinks that Microsoft can order the entertainment industry around. If Microsoft had refused to implement DRM the following would have happened:
1. The entertainment industry says, “Screw you”, and issues no DRM keys to Windows software players. The entertainment industry wouldn’t care because dedicated hardware players take up 99.99999% of total number of movie disc playback hours.
2. Apple would implement the DRM (Apple is a member of BDA (blu-ray Disc Association) in OSX 10.5 and would make ads showing that Macs can play BR and HD-DVDs while Windows could not.
Microsoft is doing just fine without owning the media medium industry… Apple’s ads would get the same reception they get now: “That’s neat, but I don’t like computers so why would I buy a Mac? Would I really hate it less than my PC?”
Besides that, some might argue that Microsoft, and Apple, has an ethical obligation to stick up for the people who made them: That’s right guys, we bought, and we had a choice.
You’re also failing to mention that the film industry is currently sinking… Theaters are holding on for dear life while box office sales barely pay for the films. The big blockbuster is about half dead from where it was 10 years ago. And they can’t seem to figure out how to add DVD sales in while they pay their lawyers millions of dollars to seek legal methods against people who barely pay anything out.
I think Microsoft sees the sinking ship and it’s hoping to be the company to bring the entertainment industry into the digital age. Of course, by doing this they’re left as the proprietor of the medium, a pretty powerful position even when you’re dealing with Sony (are they doing well with anything right now?), Warner and Disney.
Will OS X be including kernel level DRM for HD playback? I haven’t heard about this: And neither have you. I’m not in disbelief, it’s a more logical reason for closing the kernel off than “but you’ll be able to run it on cheap PC hardware if we let you hack it!”
As if $100 a pop from thousands of enthusiasts would hurt Apple’s bottom line just because they’re not buying Apple hardware (which isn’t nearly as overpriced as it used to be, so they aren’t making nearly as much profit there).
I do believe there’s still a, mostly, DRM free platform. Or at least, it can be configured to be: Linux or BSD. I suppose Solaris as well now, and a few other little guys.
In each and every Vista/DRM related sotry I hear the same false argument:
“Microsoft had to implement DRM in-order to please the entertainment industry”
Which is fine and dandy… but has nothing to do with the actual facts.
Microsoft’s own “trusted computing initiative” (look it up) preceded DRM by at least ~3 years.
First rumors about it began surfacing shortly before XP went RTM and well before DMCA.
– Gilboa
Edited 2007-02-16 13:56
No.
Microsoft had two choices:
1. Not implement what is neccesary to play DRM content.
– Pros: Uh, we would hear less bitching from people?
– Cons: Vista not able to play DRM content for the average user; Microsoft has to face backlash for Vista not being able to play common media, users have no say in boycott of DRM
2. Implement it
– Pros: Users can view their DRM content, it is their choice to boycott the DRM content or not.
– Cons: Consumers of course have to suffer the limitations of the DRM.
Face it, Microsoft telling hollywood “no” would not only hurt them, but wouldn’t hurt hollywood. The consumers have to be the ones to say no.
No “what”
“No” Microsoft didn’t start the Trusted Computing initiative well before DRM/DCMA took form, or “No” Microsoft doesn’t want DRM and was forced to implement it.
Face it, Microsoft telling hollywood “no” would not only hurt them, but wouldn’t hurt hollywood. The consumers have to be the ones to say no.
You don’t strike as me as being naive nor as being stupid.
In the last couple of years the computers (PC, Apple), computer-like (Xbox, PSn) and mini-machines (Set-top boxes, VIVO) have been slowly, but constantly replacing the DVD/VCR’s place in the living room.
Are you seriously arguing that Hollywood would rather lose 50% (!!!) of their clients – just because Microsoft refused to implement DRM? Are you kidding me?
I’m willing to bet my next paycheck that Microsoft is doing the EEE [1] all over
again.
1. Implement a non-proprietary DRM.
2. Extend non-proprietary DRM with proprietary DRM technology.
3. Protect proprietary DRM technology with patents.
4. Slowly break non-proprietary DRM – replacing it proprietary DRM technology.
4′. Slowly force Hollywood to switch -only- to proprietary DRM technology.
5. Force non-MS players out of the market.
Microsoft choose to implement DRM because it gives it better control on what goes into people’s living room – and in the long run, the ability to gain the same control over the “Home Media Center” it has in the OS world.
– Gilboa
[1] Embrace, Extend, Extinguish
Where the hell did you get 50%??
I -didn’t- say 50% now.
I meant 50% down the line.
Do you argue that PC-like devices are not slowly taking over the living room?
– Gilboa
I ask again — where the hell did you get 50%? You can’t just make up a number and say the market will be at 50% “down the line.”
I can. You may or may not agree with me – given the lack of -valid- empirical numbers on subject. (E.g. On how many people use a computer to see videos and hear music)
Even the numbers you do see on the Internet are pure statistical guess work and nothing more.
Be there as it may, my original argument stands – and given your repeated attempts to sidetrack the debate to “how many people their PC as a media center” further proves my point.
More-ever, you seem to be contradicting yourself:
If the PC is insignificant in the home entrainment market – why on earth would Microsoft spend so much effort (and money) to make each and every part of it DRM infested?
Spending so much money and time on DRM is -only- logical if Microsoft -believes- that Windows Vista has a shot at taking the home entertainment market by a storm.
– Gilboa
Side tracking because I called you out for pulling a number out of your ass? Ok then.
The PC market is NOT insignificant in the home entertainment market. But it is not enough for hollywood to be hurt by it if Vista wouldn’t play DRMed content. Something else would come along that *would* play it instead.
… And I again I point you to the built in contradiction in your argument. (“Then Microsoft is spending so much resources on media PCs?”)
– Gilboa
P.S. Modded down due to use of offensive language.
Because they WANT to gain market share. Doesn’t mean they will.
Geez.
first the pre-release hype and reviews, for months if not YEARS this went on. most of them said bad but hopefully itl be fixed on release.
now hype and reviews over release,how long will this go on? most of them say bad but itll be fixed after SP1.
any body wanna make any BETS?!?
now hype and reviews over release,how long will this go on?
Are you new to the Geek news channels. This is what we do. Fox News talks about Anna Nicole, we talk about OS’s. Right now Vista is the Anna Nicole of the geek world!
[Feel free to make you’re own comparison jokes]
Why do you have to boycott Vista? It’s clearly not going to have an effect. Boycott DRMed content instead. If you do, Vista’s DRM will have no effect on you. Then agian, if you get the DRM content, you will need Vista or something else that can play it.
I think the article states *why* you should boycott Vista…not DRM content, and I’m not saying you shouldn’t boycott DRM content *as well*.
Read the article.
I read the article.
What I read:
– There is DRM technology in Vista to play Blu-Ray and HD-DVD — no crap, that’s the only way Vista could legally play them.
– Sometimes quality output is degragged “artificially” — I thought that was discussed recently and that there was nothing new in Vista in regards to that.
– “And Vista continuously spends CPU time monitoring itself, trying to figure out if you’re doing something that it thinks you shouldn’t. If it does, it limits functionality and in extreme cases restarts just the video subsystem.” — vague. Does he have any examples?
And as far is “It’s all complete nonsense. Microsoft could have easily told the entertainment industry that it was not going to deliberately cripple its operating system, take it or leave it. With 95% of the operating system market, where else would Hollywood go? “ …
Answer: consumer electronic devices. They will play them.
I think MS admitted that the DRM crap does take more CPU time. Whether that’s all the time or just when “premium content” is playing is anyone’s guess.
I read the article and i didnt find reason why i should boycott Vista. Vista DRM is only going to affect your life when you use DRM content, other statements seem to be good ol Internet FUD.
“It’s all complete nonsense. Microsoft could have easily told the entertainment industry that it was not going to deliberately cripple its operating system, take it or leave it.”
Bullshit! Another person who is either too computer geek to realize that Microsoft isn’t ruling world or some idiot who read an article on internet and thinks now he knows everything.
I would think if Microsoft had said so Hollywood would just leave it and people would go with dedicated players. Only small percentage of people are watching movies on computer, most people just choose dedicated players(simply because they work better). Microsoft and whole IT industry is small player in HD and standard DVD market. Atleast now there is change to legally watch HDDVD/BlueRay material on PC, what would been the alternative?
Vista DRM is only going to affect your life when you use DRM content, other statements seem to be good ol Internet FUD.
True for the most part, but what does irritate me is that even though I won’t be watching Blu-ray/HD-DVD content on my computer, I still have to pay the price in terms of complexity and performance for these protected paths in both hardware and software.
I would be completely satisfied with the Vista DRM situation if Microsoft would just allow us to completely deactivate these “features” and force the OS to deny playing DRM video outright if we so choose.
In other words, the DRM system should be an add on for those who choose to use it and should not be forced on the majority of us that will never use our computers for that purpose.
Edited 2007-02-16 10:34
How about.. just not buying DRMed content? Then you won’t have to worry about DRM.
I’m certainly voting with my wallet, and encouraging everyone I know to do the same.
I will try and do the same.
Though it’s always tempting to use the iTunes music store. Just a click and I have the music. Argh.
How about.. actually reading my post? My point was that even though I won’t be buying DRMed content, the protected pathways that use a ridiculous amount of polling and can cause random subsystem resets to maintain the integrity of the DRM system will still be active.
Do you have a reliable source for that claim?
I found this to be a very interesting technical read: http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html
Particularly, the section titled “Unnecessary CPU Resource Consumption.”
If you know of any sources that can refute this, I would be more than happy to be proven wrong.
While that may be right, he doesn’t cite ANY sources. Not just for that section either. It looks like the whole paper is completely uncited.
Why do you have to boycott Vista? It’s clearly not going to have an effect. Boycott DRMed content instead. If you do, Vista’s DRM will have no effect on you
Dude, you’re trying to use common sense – stop that
Honestly, I wish MS would’ve just left out support for hi def video with DRM. It would’ve made absolutely no difference at all, but at least people wouldn’t be bitching about it. And I wonder how many people who are boycotting Vista will eventually rush out to by an HD-DVD or Blu-ray player (including the Playstation 3 and/or the Xbox 360 with the HD-DVD addon), essentially punishing the company who attempted to at least give you the option of playing the content on your computer, while at the same time putting money into the pockets of the entities who are actually responsible for the DRM in the first place.
But here’s the 2 million dollar question – assuming I WANTED to play this content on my PC, which operating system is going to give me the option to do that without the DRM or having to download a copy of the movie from Usenet or P2P? You guys act like every OS except Vista allows one to play the content without any restrictions.
I don’t own a DVD player—I always just put a DVD in my laptop, connected the laptop to my television and off I was watching a DVD. Now I “upgraded” to Vista, and tried to do the same thing, and Vista proceeded to PREVENT me from watching MY OWN LEGITIAMTELY PURCHASED DVD on my television with some error message to the effect that I needed to upgrade some hardware or driver or something before Vista would ALLOW me to output the video through an unsecured connection.
So, now I sadly run Vista and can only watch my DVDs on my laptop screen—not my television anymore.
Thank you Microsoft for treating paying customers like crooks.
After all the MS and DRM bashing I’m still finding little concrete information as to how, what and when DRM is limiting and crippling Win Vista.
If I don’t install a ‘premium content’ player on my computer is the OS still inhibited performance wise? I read one page that talked about this a little but didn’t exactly say exactly when the computer becomes less stable or performance limited.
If I use Vista I’d like to step around the whole DRM thing as much as possible.
It’s almost like they don’t trust me or something.
It’s almost like they don’t trust me or something.
If Microsoft trusted anything, they wouldn’t have to use proprietary formats and threaten people who use any other company’s products (except Novell’s). But clearly, since they do both those things, they trust neither their customers nor their own coding skills.
Not exactly a good advert for billionaires, is it?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1H7omJW4TI
“They [the computer industry] already made the decision for you.
And they already decided. Not. To trust. You.”
i don’t like DRM, since i got burned buying itunes music from apple. it’s hard for me to understand how can many people accept and OS that limits their usage via DRM over an OS, like, linux that offers total freedom.
Edited 2007-02-16 00:59
In what way is ‘not being able to play content’ freedom?
Unless some Linux expert can tell me how to play protected content on a Linux box.
Edited 2007-02-16 08:15
The Linux community referrs to GNU/Freedom, a set of four rules that they wish to make universal. It is not a freedom as in being able to do what you want.
There is no need to argue with them, because you are not talking about the same thing.
DG
Er .. so will I be able to play the content on Linux or not?
No, you will not.
DG
Well so much for being ‘consumer ready’ then.
That’s the problem here.
Because Linux looks like being left out in the cold when it comes to HD, the supporters have once again fallen into the same old familiar track; blame Microsoft, because that’s really all they know how to do.
A better strategy would be to turn all that bile on the content makers who insist on using DRM. They’re the real threat to Linux.
They are not the threat to Linux. To be honest, Linux is pretty good if one has some business to do, either as server, or as desktop. Linux is no good as entertainment OS. Not only HD content and DRM issues, but very limitted choice of games, too.
DG
In what way is ‘not being able to play content’ freedom?
It isn’t, but the likelihood is (and anecdotes already seem to indicate) that Vista DRM will work about as well as “Windows Genuine Advantage”. Which is to say, best described by the adverb “not”. Ergo, you probably won’t be able to play DVD’s at all anyway.
Besides, who says you have to buy High Definition content? I’ve not got any HD equipment, no plans to buy any, and I don’t see any news telling me that none-HD DVD’s will be going away any time soon.
HDDVD/BluRay are going to end up like DVDA and SACD – only purchased by “early adopters” incautious enough to buy stuff before the market has decided what to do with it – and other people with more money than sense.
Edited 2007-02-16 12:52
It isn’t, but the likelihood is (and anecdotes already seem to indicate) that Vista DRM will work about as well as “Windows Genuine Advantage”. Which is to say, best described by the adverb “not”. Ergo, you probably won’t be able to play DVD’s at all anyway.
So you’re saying that Vista won’t allow you to play any DVDs at all? Well, that’s odd, because I’m pretty sure I’ve seen DVDs playing in shops.
Besides, who says you have to buy High Definition content? I’ve not got any HD equipment, no plans to buy any, and I don’t see any news telling me that none-HD DVD’s will be going away any time soon.
Right, let me ask the question again, because I don’t appear to speaking clearly.
Will Linux allow me to play protected content? That’s what I want to do. I want to play all content. Protected and unprotected.
A simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’. That’s all I need.
Edited 2007-02-16 13:53
So you’re saying that Vista won’t allow you to play any DVDs at all? Well, that’s odd, because I’m pretty sure I’ve seen DVDs playing in shops.
Right, I should have said “some” or “many”.
Right, let me ask the question again, because I don’t appear to speaking clearly.
Will Linux allow me to play protected content? That’s what I want to do. I want to play all content. Protected and unprotected.
So, given a choice between two OS’s, one of which will allow you to play all unprotected content, and one of which *may* allow you to play most unprotected content and some protected, you’d choose the more limited option? WTF?
So, given a choice between two OS’s, one of which will allow you to play all unprotected content, and one of which *may* allow you to play most unprotected content and some protected, you’d choose the more limited option? WTF?
Well to begin with, you have not presented any evidence that I won’t be able to play *all* protected content on Vista. So there is no evidence that it is the ‘limited’ option. If you get a dodgy disk, then take it back. If there is a bug in the OS that makes the disk unplayable, then MS will break its neck to fix it.
We do have evidence that there is no way to play protected content on Linux, and the religion surrounding it, means that this will probably always be the case. So we can safely say that that is the ‘limited ‘content (but I admire your attempt for trying to dress it up otherwise)
What you meant to say was ‘no .. Linux will not support protected HD’; but saying that would be admitting a serious consumer-level deficiency in OS, and you wouldn’t do that would you?
But well done for not suggesting that I install some hack for breaking the DRM.
Well to begin with, you have not presented any evidence that I won’t be able to play *all* protected content on Vista. So there is no evidence that it is the ‘limited’ option.
Also remember that some people in the anti-MS camp (even on this site) were swearing that Vista would not let you rip an audio CD to an unprotected audio format. Truth always takes a backseat when religion is involved.
Unless some Linux expert can tell me how to play protected content on a Linux box.
a) wait for a closed-source, DRM-friendly player to be written (could take a while), or
b) wait until the new DRM schemes are cracked (should happen within the next couple of weeks).
DRM is a bad idea. It doesn’t respect fair use rights, and treats paying customers like criminals.
a) wait for a closed-source, DRM-friendly player to be written (could take a while), or
b) wait until the new DRM schemes are cracked (should happen within the next couple of weeks).
DRM is a bad idea. It doesn’t respect fair use rights, and treats paying customers like criminals
a) is probably the best bet
b) Sorry, don’t have time to constantly install and reinstall hacks to keep my stuff playing.
DRM is a bad idea. It doesn’t respect fair use rights, and treats paying customers like criminals.
Well fancy that; something we agree on.
Sorry, don’t have time to constantly install and reinstall hacks to keep my stuff playing.
I don’t see why you would have to. I’ve only had to install libdvdcss (to read DVDs) once, after that it’s updated normally.
Well fancy that; something we agree on.
Anything’s possible!
Just for the record, the argument is not quite correct. If MS didn’t comply with entertainment industry demands, they had an alternative to windows. The alternative are consoles like Playstation and others.
Everybody is complaining about DRM as if it stops the user doing something legal. But the fact is DRM stops the user from doing something illegal, i.e. play all those videos that where obtained illegally.
DRM would actually be good for the prices of movies, LPs and other media: if stuff can not be obtained illegally any more and there is no other way but to legally purchase those media, and if the prices are high, nobody will buy their stuff. Then they will be forced to drop their prices.
We are complaining about DRM because it will stop us from downloading movies and MP3s all day long, ripping off CDs and DVDs, etc. I will be one of DRM’s victims, as well. But the practices we are used to are illegal. We should remember that.
“ripping off CDs and DVDs”
There’s nothing illegal about ripping a CD or DVD for your own use.
Why rip them if you already own them?
Why rip them if you already own them?
Because it’s merely their weak canard to mask their true intentions: having the option of illegaly ripping off content.
“Because it’s merely their weak canard to mask their true intentions: having the option of illegaly ripping off content.”
I hope you never made a mixtape or cd compilation of your stuff, things like that is illegal.
“Why rip them if you already own them?”
To legally listen to them on my portable player, for example.
Everybody is complaining about DRM as if it stops the user doing something legal. But the fact is DRM stops the user from doing something illegal, i.e. play all those videos that where obtained illegally.
Actually, there’s plenty of anecdotal evidence to indicate that at least some legally-purchased DVD’s won’t work because of DRM. There are also suspicions that MS is trying to lock Linux at least out of the desktop market by effectively tying Windows to PC’s the way MacOS is tied to Macs. Then there’s the fact that DRM has already been cracked. Since when are (a) watching legally-purchased DVD’s and (b) using Linux on the desktop illegal, and what use is a copy-protection system that has been hacked?
Actually, there’s plenty of anecdotal evidence to indicate that at least some legally-purchased DVD’s won’t work because of DRM.
It’s not Vista’s fault if the DVDs are problematic.
There are also suspicions that MS is trying to lock Linux at least out of the desktop market by effectively tying Windows to PC’s the way MacOS is tied to Macs.
Microsoft is trying to do that at every opportunity for the last 25 years with every O/S competitive to Windows. It has nothing to do with DRM or Vista.
Then there’s the fact that DRM has already been cracked.
Perhaps, but if using the crack is going to be difficult for average Joe, then DRM is a success.
using Linux on the desktop illegal?
How does DRM makes Linux on the desktop illegal? it does not. You can happily continue to use Linux along Windows. Nobody takes away that freedom from you.
> It’s not Vista’s fault if the DVDs are problematic.
In fact it is. DVD is just DVD, a standard format. There is no executable code there. The problem is in the way it is interpreted, and that’s Vista.
> How does DRM makes Linux on the desktop illegal
I can have a PC with legal operating system, and a DVD that has been purchased legaly, and if I use DVDCSS library to watch it, that is illegal in some countries.
If I payed them what they asked for, how can they say that it is illegal ? Because I COULD capture the output and create a copy ? That is a bit like “Minority Report” movie, where people are prosecuted based on their future crimes that actually never happened.
As a matter of fact, DVDCSS was never challenged in court.
DG
Actually, there’s plenty of anecdotal evidence
Ah .. good! that’s the most reliable kind!
When I think about all those criminals rightly locked away based on anecdotal evidence!
Everybody is complaining about DRM as if it stops the user doing something legal.
It stops me from using analog outputs which are perfectly legal.
IMO telling me I have to upgrade to some crappy looking LCD or super expensive plasma instead of using my CRT is what should be illegal.
Edited 2007-02-18 04:50
I have not the slightest interest in the products of the movie industry. And if I like music I do buy it.
I don’t like DRM because
a) it does not let me have complete control over my computer. It is my computer. I paid for it, so I should be able to do whatever I want with it. If the media companies _give_ me a computer for playing their media, they are welcome to put as much DRM on it as they want.
b) it makes everything needlessly more complex and error-prone. Think about the millions of lines of code in vista that are only necessary because of DRM. I do not use any DRM media, yet I will suffer the crashes and stability problems caused by this code.
c) it requires hardware manufacturers to add unnecessary hardware for encryption. That also makes the hardware more complex and error-prone.
That said, I don’t see what the big fuss about vista is about. Mac OS X has DRM as well, yet nobody seems to complain about it. It seems that apple can get away with everything.
a) it does not let me have complete control over my computer. It is my computer. I paid for it, so I should be able to do whatever I want with it. If the media companies _give_ me a computer for playing their media, they are welcome to put as much DRM on it as they want.
What do you mean ‘complete control’? you do have complete control over your computer. Just as you do have complete control over your car. But I am not seeing anyone complaining about not being able to drive on sidewalks, or in parks, for example.
it makes everything needlessly more complex and error-prone.
Eventually all the bugs will be ironed out, just like with XP. Vista is a new product, and it is bound to have problems.
Think about the millions of lines of code in vista that are only necessary because of DRM.
Vista is about 50,000,000 lines of code. Therefore DRM can’t be millions of lines of code.
I do not use any DRM media, yet I will suffer the crashes and stability problems caused by this code.
If you do not use DRM media, then you will not use DRM. And if you do not use DRM, then what crashes and stability problems are you talking about?
it requires hardware manufacturers to add unnecessary hardware for encryption. That also makes the hardware more complex and error-prone.
If you purchased faulty hardware, return it and request compensation. DRM has nothing to do with it.
That said, I don’t see what the big fuss about vista is about.
Me too, but I don’t go around claiming to be an innocent victim. I download the stuff I want to watch from the internet, but I know what I do is illegal. As we all do.
Mac OS X has DRM as well, yet nobody seems to complain about it. It seems that apple can get away with everything.
It’s because everybody wants to watch their illegally obtained stuff on the most popular operating system.
it does not let me have complete control over my computer. It is my computer. I paid for it, so I should be able to do whatever I want with it.
What a joke. Do you have “complete control” over your DVD player? Your CD player? No, you don’t. They’re prepackaged components that don’t allow modification. The fact that you don’t like the way Vista is prepackaged is irrelevant. It’s exactly the same.
To break Microsoft’s hold on the OS market, you need to break their OEM pulling power.
To break Microsofts OEM pulling power, you need to provide a publicly hyped alternative to Windows (ie. as Firefox was for IE).
Once HP/Dell/Sony/Toshiba/Acer/Etc realize there is a large demand for an OS other than Windows, they will begin to offer that other OS as an alternative according to the laws of supply and demand.
So, in the end, it’s up to us to create/support/hype a new easy-to-use better-than-Windows alternative. Ubunutu was/is close, but it just doesn’t have the “Oomph” to begin pulling hardware manufacturers heads yet.
To break Microsoft’s hold on the OS market, you need to come up with a better strategy than …
‘Use Linux. ‘cos Microsoft sux!’
Usually the best way to generate public hype is for an already well known entity such as Google or Oracle to step in and compete with the existing “king” such as Microsoft.
I keep hoping this will happen, anything for more market diversity.
Once HP/Dell/Sony/Toshiba/Acer/Etc realize there is a large demand for an OS other than Windows
Uhhhhhh … but there isn’t “a large demand for an OS other than Windows”. That’s a pleasant fiction.
Uhhhhhh … but there isn’t “a large demand for an OS other than Windows”. That’s a pleasant fiction.
——————————————————–
Exactly, so nothing will change until there is.
Cheers!