Vista - this review, its promise and DRM

[Zorg]

I give up

Frustrating isn't... now don't go out and spend $399 on Vista just yet! My wife informed me yesterday that she does NOT want a Mac, but to continue with M$... at least she said to keep XP as long as possible. She wants our daughter to have the same tools as the majority of users. Linux is fine but... Understandable

I have grown fond of hating Vista. Hopefully Vista will fadeout like 'Mistake Edition' and M$ will produce a super snappy, streamlined, configure as you wish OS we all want.

Who knows, Maybe M$ will release Vista "lite edition" with DX10, and without HDCP, but I doubt it.

 

[exisnet]

Who knows, Maybe M$ will release Vista "lite edition" with DX10, and without HDCP, but I doubt it.

Vista "Gaming Edition" DX10 no DRM, and Visa "Media Center Edition" with DRM and DX10 and Vista "Business Edition" with whatever, and Vista "Ultimate Edition" which has everything.

Good Idea...

 

[ScottyDog]

If this is not painfully clear to you, then I guess you will never understand. I can't rephrase it in any clearer terms.

Are you saying it is "painfully clear to you"? Then please explain. There should be no problem for you to explain to me, if it is that clear. I mean I am not an idiot, and I was quite capable to understand things to get my Ph.D. in physics, so I should be able to understand "painfully clear" thing.

So, what will force me, as a user, to buy premium content from MS, and not, for example, from Sony? Even if DRM is implemented as it should be according to what we know about it in Vista? Should Vista play Blu Rays manufactured by Sony as well as whatever premium content MS will be trying to sell? Or how can MS control Sony distribution channel?

MXM
Maybe this article will help you understand what is going on with DRM.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070115-8616.html
*************************************************
Privately, Hollywood admits DRM isn't about piracy

1/15/2007 9:59:18 AM, by Ken Fisher

For almost ten years now I have argued that digital rights management has little to do with piracy, but that is instead a carefully plotted ruse to undercut fair use and then create new revenue streams where there were previously none. I will briefly repeat my argument here before relating a prime example of it in the wild.
The theory

Access control technologies such as DRM create "scarcity" where there is immeasurable abundance, that is, in a world of digital reproduction. The early years saw tech such as CSS tapped to prevent the copying of DVDs, but DRM has become much more than that. It's now a behavioral modification scheme that permits this, prohibits that, monitors you, and auto-expires when. Oh, and sometimes you can to watch a video or listen to some music.

The basic point is that access control technologies are becoming more and more refined. To create new, desirable product markets (e.g., movies for portable digital devices), the studios have turned to DRM (and the law) to create the scarcity (illegality of ripping DVDs) needed to both create the need for it and sustain it. Rather than admit that this is what they're doing, they trot out bogus studies claiming that this is all caused by piracy. It's the classic nannying scheme: "Because some of you can't be trusted, everyone has to be treated this way." But everybody knows that this nanny is in it for her own interests.

Like all lies, there comes a point when the gig is up; the ruse is busted. For the movie studios, it's the moment they have to admit that it's not the piracy that worries them, but business models which don't squeeze every last cent out of customers.

In a nutshell: DRM's sole purpose is to maximize revenues by minimizing your rights so that they can sell them back to you.
The history

History repeats itself, especially the bad parts. What I find most puzzling, however, is how history hasn't taught the movie industry this lesson yet.

In 1982, then-MPAA head Jack Valenti testified before the House of Representatives on the emerging phenomenon of VCR ownership. He famously said, "I say to you that the VCR is to the American film producer and the American public as the Boston Strangler is to the woman home alone." Valenti said this in response to a claim that the VCR would be the greatest friend the American film producer ever had. Valenti was vehement in his opposition to the idea that the VCR could be a good thing. He, and many in the industry, believed that it was fundamentally wrong to allow the public to make decisions for themselves about how to use a VCR. They even expressed worry that multiple people could watch the same movie on a VCR, but not all of them would have to pay. The idea of Joe User buying a movie for a fixed price and then inviting friends over to see it was anathema to the industry.

Yet by the late 1990s, sales of VHS movies were generating more revenue than movie ticket sales. DVD, the successor to VHS and Betamax, greatly widened the gap thanks to outstanding profit margins. The "Boston Strangler" was nowhere in sight. Of course, Hollywood lost the battle over the VCR, and its enemy became the best friend it ever had... that is, until behavior-modifying DRM was born, and Hollywood saw another chance to take a crack at the holy grail.
The practice

As a quick aside, let's put this piracy excuse to rest. You can easily find almost any DVD online, for free, because CSS has long been cracked and the movies uploaded. All of these new DRM schemes can't change that one simple fact: at least for the DVD market, a pirate's lifestyle is a matter of downloading some easily obtainable software. There is simply no evidence whatsoever that DRM slows piracy. In fact, all of the evidence suggests the opposite, and arguments that DRM "keeps honest people honest" are frankly insulting. If they're already honest, they don't need DRM.

So given the windfall generated by the VCR, which was followed by an even greater explosion in revenue thanks to DVD, why aren't popular services like the iTunes Store being embraced? At a time when TV networks are seeing ratings boosts and fattened profits thanks to downloadable video, how come Disney is still the only movie studio to sell new releases on iTunes?

If we believe Ronald Grover's sources in his BusinessWeek article of last week, the problem is liberal DRM and not piracy, and this is a startling admission. According to him, an unnamed studio executive said that a major reason why studios weren't jumping on board with the iTunes Store and other similar services is that their DRM is too lax. "[Apple's] user rules just scare the heck out of us." It's not piracy that's the concern, it's their ability to control how you use the content you purchase.

As it turns out, five devices authorized for playback is too many, and the studios apparently believe that this is "just as bad" as piracy. Hollywood believes that iTunes Store customers will add their buddies' devices to their authorization list, and like evil communists, they'll share what they have purchased. This makes little sense, because the way iTunes works, you can only issue so many device authorizations at a time. You could share with a friend, but then your friend would have to be authorized to play all of your purchased content, taking up an authorization. Inconvenient, huh? But is it a big problem?

I can walk in to Best Buy right now, buy a DVD, and lend it to every person I know. Who hasn't lent a DVD to a friend or colleague? This is perfectly legal behavior, but you can see that Hollywood hopes to stop this kind of thing via DRM. Thanks to the DMCA, once copyrighted contents have been encrypted, your rights fly right out the window.

It sounds like a bad Hollywood tale: "In a world... where DRM is liberal... there's only one fowl that's not foul... Chicken Little. And the Sky. Is. Falling."</movievoice>

 

[MxM]

If this is not painfully clear to you, then I guess you will never understand. I can't rephrase it in any clearer terms.

Are you saying it is "painfully clear to you"? Then please explain. There should be no problem for you to explain to me, if it is that clear. I mean I am not an idiot, and I was quite capable to understand things to get my Ph.D. in physics, so I should be able to understand "painfully clear" thing.

So, what will force me, as a user, to buy premium content from MS, and not, for example, from Sony? Even if DRM is implemented as it should be according to what we know about it in Vista? Should Vista play Blu Rays manufactured by Sony as well as whatever premium content MS will be trying to sell? Or how can MS control Sony distribution channel?

MXM
Maybe this article will help you understand what is going on with DRM.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070115-8616.html
*************************************************
Privately, Hollywood admits DRM isn't about piracy...

I actually agree with this article. DRM is not against hard core piracy, but against casual piracy and is aimed "to squeeze last cent out of the customer". My points though, related to this discussion are the following:

1) Lots of stuff about DRM already has the force of law, because our congress passed those acts. MS is not to blame here. It is media companies who are pushing it, and congress who agrees with it.
2) DRM is here to stay, because it is pushed by media companies. iTunes way of distribution is here to stay, but unless we have UNIFIED and SINGLE DRM in Windows implemented by MS in Vista, we will end up with multiple formats of DRM from multiple vendors. The situation will be similar as it is right now in music industry, where Zune can not play what iPod can and vice verse.
3) I still do not see the reason for MS to implement DRM other than to be complaint to the laws, regulations, and may be to MS wants to avoid future law suits and be generally more complaint to the movie industry requirements, because of XBox360 and downloadable content through XBox Live. But this is very far from "controlling the distribution channel"

 

[exisnet]

MXM
Maybe this article will help you understand what is going on with DRM.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070115-8616.html
*************************************************
Privately, Hollywood admits DRM isn't about piracy...

I actually agree with this article. DRM is not against hard core piracy, but against casual piracy and is aimed "to squeeze last cent out of the customer". My points though, related to this discussion are the following:

1) Lots of stuff about DRM already has the force of law, because our congress passed those acts. MS is not to blame here. It is media companies who are pushing it, and congress who agrees with it.
2) DRM is here to stay, because it is pushed by media companies. iTunes way of distribution is here to stay, but unless we have UNIFIED and SINGLE DRM in Windows implemented by MS in Vista, we will end up with multiple formats of DRM from multiple vendors. The situation will be similar as it is right now in music industry, where Zune can not play what iPod can and vice verse.
3) I still do not see the reason for MS to implement DRM other than to be complaint to the laws, regulations, and may be to MS wants to avoid future law suits and be generally more complaint to the movie industry requirements, because of XBox360 and downloadable content through XBox Live. But this is very far from "controlling the distribution channel"

The best argument rationalizing DRM I've heard since I took interest of what is going on with M$, Vista and DRM. I admit that I may have jump the gun in retaliation against M$ and DMA; I still do not like it and believe M$ should release a non DRM Vista for the rest of us.

After reading about the Analog Hole and the DMCA, I'm pressed to agree that M$ stepped up to the plate to defined the DRM standard thus potentially saving the consumer money and headache in the long run with a nice profit and firm hold on the consumer; Colleges might study this bold move M$ did in the years ahead. Keep an eye on MSFT imo.

One of the benefits as a forum reader is learning and corresponding to individuals like you.

 

[lfe2211]

Zorg.

This thread has been very painful to read, particularly your futile attempts to get MxM to see the obvious consequences of MS's insidious "Master Plan" to control what computer users can and can not do by embedding DRM in the Vista Kernel.

What is even more painful as of this writing, is the failure of the main stream Windows computer media/press (e,g, PC Mag or people like Paul Thurrott), the financial media/press (e.g. CNBC and Bloomberg), the Wall Street press (e.g. The WSJ and IBD) et al, to see through MS's charade re DRM. While I would expect this to be low-keyed by some perspicacious Wall Street money managers or Hedge fund managers since there is so much money to be made by recognizing it, it's very disappointing that not one of the other entities mentioned above have understood it enough to bring this to the "masses of lambs heading off to the slaughter" (see MxM) by installing Vista on their computers. Once a critical mass of Vista is installed, it will probably be too late for the public to do anything about it.

I suggest that each of us try, in our own way, to get one influential public person to understand Guttmann and the consequences of the MS Master Plan.

 

[Zoron]

Kinda like the consequences of Apple's master plan... but no one seems to care about them. Either you are againsgt all of it, or none of it. You can't choose your targets selectively. Perhaps if more people had spoken out against Apple, MS would have been less likely to integrate DRM.

You guys had your chance and you blew it. You ignored all the warnings and this is the result. Now that MS has finally done it, everyone is jumping all over them.

 

[Digitalfiends]

Well put. Microsoft isn't the first company to implement DRM.

My take on the whole DRM issue is that it is a necessary evil but the current path will give too much power and control to the wrong people. The greedy media barons are not responsible enough to be handed the keys to the consumer's viewing/listening rights; they do not have the customer's best interests in mind.

Normally I consider myself an early adopter of technology but I have lately been very turned off by current DRM schemes, from charging a tax on recordable backup media "just in case", to limiting the number of devices a song can play on. I'm sorry but if you are purchasing songs online, you probably aren't selling or giving them to your friends when you could just as easily have downloaded them. This makes me, an "honest" consumer, not want to buy their products; why should I give greedy companies money when they assume that I'm a pirate? How about treating me as a paying customer.

Copy protection simply doesn't work. Every scheme invented has been cracked in some way. Furthermore, the quality of our media has gone down drastically. I remember back in the 80s games used to come with rich, well written manuals, and sometimes little silly tokens (e.g. a glow in the dark stone came with Infocom's Wishbringer.) I wanted to buy those games because of the packaging and contents - it added something tangible to an otherwise intangible product. Nowadays the only paper you find in a game box is additional ads, offers, and coupons. That is ridiculous in my opinion. I bought Oblivion and was extremely impressed with the package's contents - to me it was worth the $50 or $60 that I paid for it. Most companies are all about maximizing profit now and give little thought to what was once "standard" content for games (like a rich manual instead of a PDF, etc). This is painfully obvious to the consumer. Factor in militant DRM schemes and at some point customers just say "fu".

In order for DRM to be successful and useful, the media empires need to start thinking about the consumer again. Give us rich DVD packages and content, which is not easily copied, and we as consumers will be more than happy to buy them. Lower the prices of CDs (which typically only have one or two good songs anyhow) and loosen the restriction on music. These huge media companies certainly don't seem like they are hurting to me...

 

[Digitalfiends]

By the way, the only people that type "M$" are little kids. Perhaps that amuses 12-year olds but it just comes across as unintelligent and really weakens any real arguments you might have.

 

[lfe2211]

Kinda like the consequences of Apple's master plan... but no one seems to care about them. Either you are againsgt all of it, or none of it. You can't choose your targets selectively. Perhaps if more people had spoken out against Apple, MS would have been less likely to integrate DRM.

You guys had your chance and you blew it. You ignored all the warnings and this is the result. Now that MS has finally done it, everyone is jumping all over them.

Not well put. Your post is confusing at best. Your words seem to imply that you're an Apple basher but I can't tell whether your a "closet" MS supporter, which is OK if that's your choice, but just say so

As to point one, what Apple did with regard to musical content and the creation of the near monoploy with iTunes is ancient history which none of us can now revise. Did it inspire in MS the idea of creating a DRM embedded Vista kernel which would ultimately enable them to completely control the video distribution channel (and the rest of the computer as well) ? Probably. MS has been known to copy a lot of Apple's ideas. So what are you saying in your post? Since we didn't try to stop Apple from creating their musical content monoploy, we should not try to stop MS from creating its video monopoly especially at this nascent stage of its implimentation. This seems like pretty fractured logic to me.

As to point two, just who are "you guys"? Are you not including yourself in this group as well or are you for the impending monopoly described ad nauseun in this thread? If you are, just say so, don't weasel word. This a free and open forum where each of us can say what we want on the topic.

Further to point two, it's still not too late to prevent the MS Master Plan. There is not yet a critical mass of installed Vista installations. Gutmann is still speaking eloquently and widely on the issues. While you made no positive suggestions in your post, I suggested each of us try to get various mass media, computer and financial outlets educated before it's too late. Ultimately, I want the consumer to understand what's going on so that they can accept or reject the MS Master plan.

 

[Zoron]

I guess I wasn't clear enough.

You are either against DRM in all it's forms or not at all. You can't condemn MS without doing so with Apple. That's called hypocrisy... and I suggest you look it up. If you didn't speak out against Apple then, why are you now speaking out against MS?

I didn't speak out against either one... so you can't call me a hypocrite. However, you can't continually bash MS and give Apple a free pass. Like I said, if people spoke up more loudly when Apple started DRM, MS would have been a lot less likely to implement it. If Apple had been forced to backpedal, then MS might also be inclined to do the same.

 

[lfe2211]

Uncle! No Mas! I give up.

You give new meaning to the word obtuse.

 

[xrodney]

My concern is less about what Vista will require directly, since I can choose to keep XP installed on the HTPC or use another OS. My problem is that MS is requiring hardware manufacturers to change their products to enable what could be a simple function such as HD content playback.

What I mean is, in a year's time, will I be able to buy a blue-ray or dual-format optical drive for my computer, run Ubuntu, and expect to play HD movies? If MS is re-writing the rules so that the ONLY way to use the new media contents is through their OS, then this is so incredibly anti-competitive that the authorities should be stepping in protecting the industry. It seems that MS is using their current market position to close down hardware supporting open-source projects.

What I expect I will be forced to do is to use some semi-legal software to rip the content of a movie from the HD disk so that I can play the show with the quality I want. I believe this will technically be illegal, since I will be subverting the encryption built into the media. It seems I'm being forced to either give up free choice as a consumer or break the law.

Your starting to get the picture. Don't miss the fact that hardware and drivers will need to be redesigned to accommodate this insanity. We will pay for this with higher prices. Not to mention the fact that M$ will be able to disable or cripple hardware and drivers that do not comply eg., hacked, or for any reason they deem acceptable. RESISTANCE IS FUTILE, YOU MUST COMPLY.

I think 1st day M$ disable some funstionality on some HW, it will break his neck. If someon pay about 3000$ to get hw and then get it screwed by M$, it will bring more sues on their head then anything else ever did before.

 

[xrodney]

I guess I wasn't clear enough.

You are either against DRM in all it's forms or not at all. You can't condemn MS without doing so with Apple. That's called hypocrisy... and I suggest you look it up. If you didn't speak out against Apple then, why are you now speaking out against MS?

I didn't speak out against either one... so you can't call me a hypocrite. However, you can't continually bash MS and give Apple a free pass. Like I said, if people spoke up more loudly when Apple started DRM, MS would have been a lot less likely to implement it. If Apple had been forced to backpedal, then MS might also be inclined to do the same.

I though aple developed their DRM bcause "Big Four" required it for online selling of music and also Aple is trying get rid of DRM now. EMI is 1st of Big Four whitch will run for it probably and i hope this will change DRM forever.

 

[lfe2211]

Zorg.

This thread has been very painful to read, particularly your futile attempts to get MxM to see the obvious consequences of MS's insidious "Master Plan" to control what computer users can and can not do by embedding DRM in the Vista Kernel.

What is even more painful as of this writing, is the failure of the main stream Windows computer media/press (e,g, PC Mag or people like Paul Thurrott), the financial media/press (e.g. CNBC and Bloomberg), the Wall Street press (e.g. The WSJ and IBD) et al, to see through MS's charade re DRM. While I would expect this to be low-keyed by some perspicacious Wall Street money managers or Hedge fund managers since there is so much money to be made by recognizing it, it's very disappointing that not one of the other entities mentioned above have understood it enough to bring this to the "masses of lambs heading off to the slaughter" (see MxM) by installing Vista on their computers. Once a critical mass of Vista is installed, it will probably be too late for the public to do anything about it.

I suggest that each of us try, in our own way, to get one influential public person to understand Guttmann and the consequences of the MS Master Plan.

Well folks, I am trying to follow my own suggestion. I posted the following comment to David Pogue's column in today's sunday New York Times. Mr. Pogue is the Technology editor for the New York Times and author of many "Missing Manual" books for the PC and Mac. Note that he is currently on a "MS Vista" cruise sponsored by PC World.

17.
February 11th,
2007
9:51 am
Hi David,

Geek Cruisin’ around the Med. Sheesh, life’s a beach.

More importantly, since you’re with a lot of MS folks, has there been any discussion about the controversial Peter Gutmann paper on MS embedding DRM in the Vista Kernel ?

That paper,”A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection” can be found here
http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.h tml

The consequences for those choosing to install Vista on their computers are frightening. Here’s an excerpt from the Final Thoughts section of that paper:

“In July 2006, Cory Doctorow published an analysis of the anti-competitive nature of Apple’s iTunes copy-restriction system which looked at the benefits of restrictive DRM for the company that controls the DRM. The only reason I can imagine why Microsoft would put its programmers, device vendors, third-party developers, and ultimately its customers, through this much pain is because once this copy protection is entrenched, Microsoft will completely own the distribution channel. In the same way that Apple has managed to acquire a monopolistic lock-in on their music distribution channel (an example being the Motorola ROKR fiasco, which was so crippled by restrictions that a Fortune magazine senior editor reviewed it as the STNKER), so Microsoft will totally control the premium-content distribution channel. In fact examples of this Windows content lock-in are already becoming apparent as people move to Vista and find that their legally-purchased content won’t play any more under Vista (the example given in the link is particularly scary because the content actually includes a self-destruct after which it won’t play any more, so not only do you need to re-purchase your content when you switch from XP to Vista, but you also need to re-purchase it periodically when it expires. In addition and since the media rights can’t be backed up, if you experience a disk crash you get another opportunity to re- purchase the content then). It’s obvious why this type of business model makes the pain of pushing content protection onto consumers so worthwhile for Microsoft since it practically constitutes a license to print money.”

I think you should do a column about Gutmann. He’s very well respected in the Windows security field and has already appeared on main stream outlets like TWiT with Leo Laporte.

Here's the direct NY Times link for those interested. See Comment #17

New York Times David Pogue Comment

To Zorg and others who have worked so hard on getting the message out, maybe there is some small chance we can get a dialog going in the mainstream media outlets before Vista reaches critical mass. If David Pogue interviews Peter Gutmann, there will be a large audience to hear what Gutmann has to say and that can only be in every consumer's best interest.

 

[exisnet]

Zorg.

This thread has been very painful to read, particularly your futile attempts to get MxM to see the obvious consequences of MS's insidious "Master Plan" to control what computer users can and can not do by embedding DRM in the Vista Kernel.

What is even more painful as of this writing, is the failure of the main stream Windows computer media/press (e,g, PC Mag or people like Paul Thurrott), the financial media/press (e.g. CNBC and Bloomberg), the Wall Street press (e.g. The WSJ and IBD) et al, to see through MS's charade re DRM. While I would expect this to be low-keyed by some perspicacious Wall Street money managers or Hedge fund managers since there is so much money to be made by recognizing it, it's very disappointing that not one of the other entities mentioned above have understood it enough to bring this to the "masses of lambs heading off to the slaughter" (see MxM) by installing Vista on their computers. Once a critical mass of Vista is installed, it will probably be too late for the public to do anything about it.

I suggest that each of us try, in our own way, to get one influential public person to understand Guttmann and the consequences of the MS Master Plan.

Well folks, I am trying to follow my own suggestion. I posted the following comment to David Pogue's column in today's sunday New York Times. Mr. Pogue is the Technology editor for the New York Times and author of many "Missing Manual" books for the PC and Mac. Note that he is currently on a "MS Vista" cruise sponsored by PC World.

17.
February 11th,
2007
9:51 am
Hi David,

Geek Cruisin’ around the Med. Sheesh, life’s a beach.

More importantly, since you’re with a lot of MS folks, has there been any discussion about the controversial Peter Gutmann paper on MS embedding DRM in the Vista Kernel ?

That paper,”A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection” can be found here
http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.h tml

The consequences for those choosing to install Vista on their computers are frightening. Here’s an excerpt from the Final Thoughts section of that paper:

“In July 2006, Cory Doctorow published an analysis of the anti-competitive nature of Apple’s iTunes copy-restriction system which looked at the benefits of restrictive DRM for the company that controls the DRM. The only reason I can imagine why Microsoft would put its programmers, device vendors, third-party developers, and ultimately its customers, through this much pain is because once this copy protection is entrenched, Microsoft will completely own the distribution channel. In the same way that Apple has managed to acquire a monopolistic lock-in on their music distribution channel (an example being the Motorola ROKR fiasco, which was so crippled by restrictions that a Fortune magazine senior editor reviewed it as the STNKER), so Microsoft will totally control the premium-content distribution channel. In fact examples of this Windows content lock-in are already becoming apparent as people move to Vista and find that their legally-purchased content won’t play any more under Vista (the example given in the link is particularly scary because the content actually includes a self-destruct after which it won’t play any more, so not only do you need to re-purchase your content when you switch from XP to Vista, but you also need to re-purchase it periodically when it expires. In addition and since the media rights can’t be backed up, if you experience a disk crash you get another opportunity to re- purchase the content then). It’s obvious why this type of business model makes the pain of pushing content protection onto consumers so worthwhile for Microsoft since it practically constitutes a license to print money.”

I think you should do a column about Gutmann. He’s very well respected in the Windows security field and has already appeared on main stream outlets like TWiT with Leo Laporte.

Here's the direct NY Times link for those interested. See Comment #17

New York Times David Pogue Comment

To Zorg and others who have worked so hard on getting the message out, maybe there is some small chance we can get a dialog going in the mainstream media outlets before Vista reaches critical mass. If David Pogue interviews Peter Gutmann, there will be a large audience to hear what Gutmann has to say and that can only be in every consumer's best interest.

Thank you,

Check out this story that may explain where DRM is heading click here.

Also, ReactOS is in the making. ReactOS is a free and open-sourced operating system based on the Windows architecture, providing support for existing applications and drivers, and an alternative to the current dominant consumer operating system. Alex Ionescu is involved in the making... Check it out.

 

[lfe2211]

Exisnet,

ReactOS looks like a great project but still far from use in the consumer community. Best of luck with the project. I will try to keep up with its progress. Perhaps down the road, it will be a viable alternative to the current crisis.

 

[Digitalfiends]

Also, ReactOS is in the making. ReactOS is a free and open-sourced operating system based on the Windows architecture, providing support for existing applications and drivers, and an alternative to the current dominant consumer operating system. Alex Ionescu is involved in the making... Check it out.

While I disagree with a lot of what you are writing in this forum about Vista, I've got to thank you for that link. I've never heard anything about that OS before (though I've never really looked.) It interests me from a developer's perspective because I'm a code monkey at heart; I'll be downloading that code and sifting through it in my "spare" time.

Thanks again.

 

[exisnet]

Also, ReactOS is in the making. ReactOS is a free and open-sourced operating system based on the Windows architecture, providing support for existing applications and drivers, and an alternative to the current dominant consumer operating system. Alex Ionescu is involved in the making... Check it out.

While I disagree with a lot of what you are writing in this forum about Vista, I've got to thank you for that link. I've never heard anything about that OS before (though I've never really looked.) It interests me from a developer's perspective because I'm a code monkey at heart; I'll be downloading that code and sifting through it in my "spare" time.

Thanks again.

ReactOS is cool...

Although I understand your point of view with MS, it's very difficult to except what is happening with the PC community. I would like to hear from MS and their stance with DRM and Hollywood.

MS, Premium Content Providers, Government, and the Consumers need to come to some reasonable 'fair use' policy that is acceptable for all.

 

[heinekenn]

so lets say i threw away vista and used linux, could i still use blue ray and hd dvds? are there even drivers/programs for it on linux?

 

[MxM]

Zorg.

This thread has been very painful to read, particularly your futile attempts to get MxM to see the obvious consequences of MS's insidious "Master Plan" to control what computer users can and can not do by embedding DRM in the Vista Kernel.

Well, it is easy to criticize the others , but may be you can explain how MS can control the distribution channel? Because that is what you call the "Master Plan", right? If not then what?

I think that if indeed they are trying to do it, then the moment when it become obvious Walmart or Apple or Sony will sue MS.

There are negatives and there are positives in this decision to implement DRM in Vista. For the positives I think they actually open the distribution channel for movie studios to let the product to be purchased freely on internet in a standard and all-compatible way, without studios' paranoia about illegal copying. Whether it outweighs the negatives (hardware price increase) it is difficult to judge for me, but it is so with MANY other technologies.

Yes, it suck to be an early adopter. Yes it sucks that movie studios have this paranoia (BTW they are the course of the DRM requirement, no MS), but I really do not see MS fault in it.

Of cause the moment MS will try the squeeze out competition, I will be one of the first to say that NOW MS does something wrong (quite wrong). But I am kind of not worried about it, because MS will be sued to hell in this case by everyone and their dog.

 

[MxM]

You are either against DRM in all it's forms or not at all. You can't condemn MS without doing so with Apple. That's called hypocrisy... and I suggest you look it up. If you didn't speak out against Apple then, why are you now speaking out against MS?

I think that issue goes deeper. If you are either for or against copyright and IP enforcement or not.

If you think that piracy of any form of copyrighted IP (books, inventions, pictures, videos, whatever) should be controlled, then you agree with DRM in principle, because DRM is the particular way to control parity in digital domain, i.e. a technicality.

 

[exisnet]

You are either against DRM in all it's forms or not at all. You can't condemn MS without doing so with Apple. That's called hypocrisy... and I suggest you look it up. If you didn't speak out against Apple then, why are you now speaking out against MS?

I think that issue goes deeper. If you are either for or against copyright and IP enforcement or not.

If you think that piracy of any form of copyrighted IP (books, inventions, pictures, videos, whatever) should be controlled, then you agree with DRM in principle, because DRM is the particular way to control parity in digital domain, i.e. a technicality.

The issue is deep, if anything interesting, I'll sit on the sideline watching history in the making. Hopefully something positive comes out of this.
openSUSE is a nice OS check it out.

 

[Zorg]

By the way, the only people that type "M$" are little kids. Perhaps that amuses 12-year olds but it just comes across as unintelligent and really weakens any real arguments you might have.

Ouch, that really hurts....not. You must be a really sensitive individual.

 

[Zorg]

Zorg.

This thread has been very painful to read, particularly your futile attempts to get MxM to see the obvious consequences of MS's insidious "Master Plan" to control what computer users can and can not do by embedding DRM in the Vista Kernel.

What is even more painful as of this writing, is the failure of the main stream Windows computer media/press (e,g, PC Mag or people like Paul Thurrott), the financial media/press (e.g. CNBC and Bloomberg), the Wall Street press (e.g. The WSJ and IBD) et al, to see through MS's charade re DRM. While I would expect this to be low-keyed by some perspicacious Wall Street money managers or Hedge fund managers since there is so much money to be made by recognizing it, it's very disappointing that not one of the other entities mentioned above have understood it enough to bring this to the "masses of lambs heading off to the slaughter" (see MxM) by installing Vista on their computers. Once a critical mass of Vista is installed, it will probably be too late for the public to do anything about it.

I suggest that each of us try, in our own way, to get one influential public person to understand Guttmann and the consequences of the MS Master Plan.

Amen to that.