Slashdot Mirror
Windows XP to Target MP3 Files
blown.penguin writes: "Reuters UK reports that Microsoft and RealNetworks plan to "wean customers way from MP3 files" and "limit the quality" of MP3 files that can be recorded on a computer running Windows XP. You can read all about it here." The entire Wall Street Journal story is here. Read it and weep. Dave Farber (who, incidentally, does understand the issues and isn't making this comment in a "get used to it" sense) has a great quote: "The consumer is going to eat what he's given."
Who the hell uses Windows' built-in applications anyway?
- A.P.
--
Forget Napster. Why not really break the law?
"Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
I'd love to know how this is going to be accomplished. Prevent Windows Media Player from playing mp3s / recording over a certain bitrate? Sure. Prevent another mp3 player from doing this? How, exactly?
I don't think they need to; most people will use what they're given, and if the Microsoft Spiffy Audio Format sounds better, they'll use that.
Daniel
Hurry up and jump on the individualist bandwagon!
The same could easily be said for Windows XP. Believe it or not Microsoft has got to sell Windows XP. If Windows XP is chuck full of stupid "features" that are actually disincentives to the upgrade then people will stick with what they have. This is nearly as dangerous for Microsoft as if the user had switched to Linux. Remember, Microsoft's biggest competitor isn't Corel, or Oracle, or IBM, or even the amorphous "Linux," Micrsoft's biggest competitor is previous versions of their own software.
Even worse issues like games and compatibility with work also make it more likely that people will stick with what they have. I don't know of any businesses that have rolled out Windows XP (nor do I know of any that have done a serious desktop rollout of Windows 2000, for that matter). They should be making their operating system as attractive to buyers as they possibly can. Instead they are lining up an initiative to treat their customers as copyright breaking thieves. Things like WMA and the new copy protection scheme aren't likely to entire current Windows users to this new OS.
Meanwhile Linux will continue to grow. naysayers have been predicting its imminent demise since it's first arrival on the scene, and they have always been spectacularly wrong. The reason for this is simple, Linux is too darned useful. It's price tag is a siren song for hackers and entrepreneurs everywhere, and the cost of maintaining the infrastructure that keeps Linux alive is negligible. Microsoft can't bankrupt Linux, it can't buy Linux, and it can't intimidate enough Linuxers to make a difference.
This doesn't make Linux better than Windows. I personally don't think that Linux is ready for the desktop, for example. But it does guarantee that Linux will keep growing, and that it will continue to become a more viable alternative every day. If Microsoft continues to misuse their customers they will someday find that most of them are jumping ship.
The mass media is not culture. Culture is not something made by the beautiful freaks of Hollywood and an army of marketroids and handed down from the megacorps to the hungry, bored consumer masses below; culture is something people create and interact and participate in. And buying consumer goods product-placed in TV shows doesn't count as participation in culture.
If you want to see culture, go to a band venue and see some live bands, or to an art exhibition, or read a book. But if you don't make the effort to participate, it is not culture. Purchased experiences don't count.
There is little difference between a sedentary, passive couch potato and the most benighted barbarian; in fact, it is arguable that most "primitive" societies, with their rituals and oral traditions, have infinitely more culture per capita than contemporary Western consumerist society.
I say never let facts get in the way of a good Microsoft bashing article on /. For the very, very few of you using beta 2, the following registry key is of interest.
Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\MediaPlaye r\ Settings\MP3Encoding]
"LowRate"=dword:0001f400
Just change it. The above will change it 128k (from 56k). The UI shows this and reflects it.
Also Media Player 8 will allow you to encode .wma files without setting the license keys. I'm not sure that this will make it to the final release, or even WMP9, but ...
Andrew van der Stock
/. ... Microsoft ... FUD... where to begin? Let's start with some facts from a beta tester.
In beta 2, the supplied MP3 encoder gets its Low Rate setting from the registry. This is set at the factory to 56k. You can go into the registry and change 56k to 128k or whatever. And it works, but 64k .wma files sound better than 128k mp3 files, and use less than half the space. And, so far, you can continue to turn off licensing your .wma files.
There are no NTFS or other deliberate data corruption ploys. I have existing MP3 files that play just fine in WMP and in WinAmp (which also continues to work).
CuteRip, my favorite ripper before WMP, continues to work, and continues to encode at whatever setting I set it to. WMP 8 plays these files just fine. But compared to WMP8, CuteRip is feature poor and slow. WMP8 not only goes and grabs the titles without paying for it, it retrieves album art work and orders it properly for you in your media library. As soon as you start ripping in WMP8, it starts playing the encoded files, and it encodes both .wma or .mp3 on my PIII/700 laptop about 3x real time. It's flawless. There seems to be no penalty for playing whilst ripping. It has digital and analog error correction if your CDs have a few scratches like mine do.
Microsoft may or may not ship a MP3 encoder with WMP 8, but it is in beta 2. Microsoft may or may not ship WMP 8 with the ability to turn off licensing .wma files, but it is in beta 2.
Sorry for the barrage of facts. I'm now returing you to your regularly scheduled fact-free Microsoft bash.
Andrew van der Stock
WinXP will be leased, not bought. It will contact a server at Microsoft headquarters every n days to confirm whether it needs "system updates" or not. And if your net connection is down for more than k days, your system will refuse to run, so don't think you can just pull the ethernet jack and use a (crippled) system.
If a program to use your .FMS extension ever gets more than 1,000 users, Microsoft will patch the operating system to exclude it, and within a few days your workaround will stop working.
This will happen back and forth a few times until 99% of the userbase gets thoroughly sick of it and uses whatever format Microsoft makes it easy to use. Ease-of-use, slow and steady, wins the race.
Don't think Microsoft will zap out your program from Redmond? Think DirecTV. They own the operating system from boot to shutdown. No matter how clever you are, they will take your program down remotely.
That's the short-term fix. In the long-term, 5 to 10 years, you will find that Microsoft and the hardware manufacturers will team up to create an audio standard which requires you to know a secret key to put data to your computer's speakers. If you don't apply to Microsoft for a special license, your program will be unable to make noise -- without going through Microsoft's API, of course, which will make only noises guaranteed not to infringe copyright, like boops, beeps, or files stored in whatever format Microsoft makes it easy to use.
Enterprising hackers will of course find and steal secret keys, so that they can release freeware MP3 players that run on Windows. But again, as soon as these programs get popular enough to show up on Microsoft's radar, the operating system will download the new patches which specifically forbid these programs from working.
Try to understand. Microsoft's eventual plan is that you will not own your computer anymore. They will own your computer, and lease its use to you on very specific licensing terms. Their long-term goal is that people who try to use their computers like Turing machines, thinking they can make them do anything they want, will go to jail.
Jamie McCarthy
Jamie McCarthy
jamie.mccarthy.vg
It's here already. It's called Secure Audio Path. Windows ME can do it, and XP will ship with it built in. See this, among other items.
The idea is that with compliant audio hardware--presumably all audio hardware within a year or two--an encrypted stream will be handed to "smart" audio hardware. If it's a secured media format, it needs to be decrypted, upon authorization, by the hardware. If it's unencrypted, it will only play if it's not watermarked. Similar work has been done on video hardware that would refuse to display cracked, watermarked video streams.
Even if you have Linux drivers for this hardware, and even if you can get to your BIOS settings, which Microsoft now demands be undocumented onscreen as a condition to granting hardware certification, and somehow manage to install Linux on this new hardware, the audio hardware is doing rights management for you.
Air supply thus cut off. Checkmate.
What, exactly, is the value for me the consumer in buying this POS operating system anyway?
My apps won't work, the interface is dumbed down and therefore aggravating, backwards compatibility is questionable, and let's not forget the damn thing won't even be servicable for two more service packs!
What? What the fsck is the POINT?
Honestly, I'm glad I've been looking into Linux, because I'm going to FORCED onto Linux!
Jon Acheson
All opinions expressed herein are my own, and not those of my employers, who are appalled.
I wonder if the customers asked for Microsoft to downgrade the quality of MP3 recording capabilities? I wonder if customers asked for a non-standard Java implementation? I wonder if customers asked for a booting systems which makes it really hard to boot other OS's?
This is another Microsoft Embrace/Extend/Extinguish tacktic which gives them the right to dictate the contend on CUSTOMERS computers. What's next html, XML, smtp, or any open standard? Would Quicktime, Real, or other proprietary technology also get downgraded by Microsoft Pre-Installed applications?
I think THAT is why people are upset about this. IMHO.
LoB
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
What is happening, and what will continue to happen, is that the corporate interests will come together to limit the consumer's IP rights not through legislation (though they are trying that route very successfully as well) but through the coercive force of product lines. By making it very inconvinient for the average consumer (and face it folks, /. readers aren't average consumers of computer gear!) to excercise their rights under current copyright law, the manufacturers can errode those rights.
If you can't make a recording for fair use without hacking hardware and software, then you won't be making that recording, if you are the average consumer. And after a few years of virtually no-one excercising their rights to fair-use, the notion that those rights exist will slowly be eroded and THEN it will be far easier to pass legislation outright stripping those rights from the public.
The problem with this, and similar stories, is that no effective public information campaign will be fought against it. Anyone who stands up and yells "foul" will be shot down as either an evil napster-esque hacker/cracker or an anti-Microsoft bigot. In either case you will be considered safe to ignore by the average consumer - adn the result will be that teh sheople will do what the corporations want them to do.
The only real way to counter this trend is to get congress to pass legislation that mandates that any consumer recording/playback device include the ability for people to excercise their fair use rights on all media forms that are handled in recording/playback -- either in the product or in an optional add-on. This will stop the trend of making products that are "broken" with regards to fair-use by design. Unfortunately, it will have the side-effect of increasing cost of consumer goods, as the corporate entities will use that sort of law as an excuse to raise prices.
Of course, such a law will never happen, congress is far to beholden to the big corporations to ever do anything to actually protect the people from bad corporate policies. So those of us who are clued can watch in frustration as our ability to excercise our first amendment rights are slowly and meticulously stripped from us by the refusal of corporations to provide the consumers the means to excercise those rights. But we'll all be happy 'cuase we'll have such nice cheap products to entertain us!
Most folks out there don't know how to rip MP3s. They either need to get help from a friend, or they need apps bundled with Windows. Otherwise they're just left wondering "what is a ripper?" For them, shit vs. cake is going to be a question of crippled MP3 or full-quality WMA. With the scales so tipped, MP3 is not the cake!
All the more reason to agressively push for the adoption and penetration of Ogg Vorbis.
By know, everyone in the know should have checked out the Xiphophorus company homepage, and taken a look at Ogg and Vorbis.
If we can create a Napster-like groundswell for an open audio codec such as Vorbis, then it will not matter if Windows XP ships with only Windows Media Audio and the Windows Media Player. The fact is, while WMA is good, it isn't open or free, and and the Windows player isn't as strong as WinAmp or XMMS.
Free is good. That is why Napster did so well. If the downloadable audio market is saturated by ".ogg" files and flooded with high quality and free audio players, then Ogg Vorbis has a chance of beating those nasty little ".wma"'s.
- "Microsoft, for example, plans to severely limit the quality of music that can be recorded as an MP3 file using software built into the next version of its personal-computer operating system, Windows XP, according to the report.""Under Microsoft's new restrictions -- which prevent its built-in software from recording MP3 files at fidelity rates higher than 56 kilobits per second -- MP3 music "sounds like somebody in a phone booth underwater," says P.J. McNealy, an analyst who researches Internet audio issues for Gartner Inc. in Stamford, Conn. (Existing versions of Microsoft's audio software don't allow consumers to record music as MP3 files of any quality.)"
This part sounds like an easy thing to overcome. The problem is...- "if MS somehow disabled or crippled the ability of other MP3 encoders to work under XP."
This sounds more like Microsoft's past practices. (1) Microsoft has in the past, for the benefit of its customers, crippled their OS in ways the caused odd failures with their windows product line. Those targeted were DR DOS, Novell DOS, and Borland, to name a few. (2) With Microsoft's current mode of updating, they do not need to ship a crippled XP, they can progressively over time reduce the ability of other MP3 encoders functionality. This would be done as part of their BUG fixes. Try to name a MS patch which has not broken something new. This set of patches will just happen to have a target.In a place beyond time and space, in a land far better than this, look for me there...
It seems like Microsoft, not the customer is the one trying to slip out of a license :).
I've never used MS products to record or play MP3's, so I could care less about MS's lack of support.
Compare all of this to Apple, who just released the best MP3 encoder/ripper/song manager/cd burner program I've ever used, iTunes. Oh yeah, Apple makes their product free to everyone, too. With OSX running both MS Office, apple apps and all of my favorite unix tools, why would I upgrade to Win XP instead of throwing out my PC and getting a G4? Maybe even a Titanium G4 with a GeForce3... :)
-m
Yesterday's interview with Mr. Young. People don't want to run an operating system. They want applications. Keep it up M$. Linux, BSD, et.al. continues to grow daily.
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
This is obvious bait, Michael, so I'll take it. A statement, such as the one above, is exactly the kind of thing you'd expect from a monopoly. The customer is going to have to settle with whatever we want? What kind of business practice is that in a normal market?
The correct answer, Microsoft, is that the consumer will get whatever he demands. This, and the active registration, is further proof that what the consumer wants does not matter to Microsoft. It is what THEY want.
The article does NOT say that the rent-a-center version of Windows will not play MP3 files. Neither does it say that it will be fundamentally crippled when it comes to the creation of MP3 files.
.DOC format is any indication, I wouldn't touch WMA with a ten foot pole. Why give M$ yet another way to create incompatibilities and headaches when you try to use someone else's products?
What it does say is that Microsoft will limit the ability of the built-in media creation tools to create MP3 files in favor of their own MWA format.
In other words it doesn't matter. Anyone wanting to create MP3s will simply use something else.
But to read the responses that people post, you'd think that XP had an anti-MP3 layer built in to the OS itself preventing both the playback of existing MP3's, as well as causing applications that can create them to crash.
A conclusion is a foolish thing to jump to.
If the word
In the big picture open standards are best, even if the standards are not as good as other standards that are proprietary.
Lee Reynolds
Muslim community leaders warn of backlash from tomorrow morning's terrorist attack.
It's not unbelievable, either. What applications need lots of fast, raw, error-corrected access to CD-ROMs? CD rippers, and that's about it. The games market, Real Media, etc, can be coerced into "optimizing" for XP.
And despite the "gee, whiz, this shoar will help lee-nux" posts, the only people who can rejoice over this are 1) Fraunhofer and 2) Real Media. I bet that 50% of the CDs out there are Real-Jukebox-ripped. Although proprietary and enshitted formats are the default, most people seem to figger it out and get mp3s (which goes to show how much computer illiteracy goes out the window when "free stuff" is the reward).
Boss of nothin. Big deal.
Son, go get daddy's hard plastic eyes.
Expanding a vast wasteland since 1996.
Makes me think of a future Linux advert:
Linux - because you are innocent until proven guilty. (with imagery os happy families watching their holiday videos or whatever)
Windows - because you are a low life cheating thieving scumball. (with images of business people not being able to copy essential data, "I need this movie NOW! Why won't this machine let me have it?", then images of families not being able to see the home movies with a requestor saying "You are not allowed to copy digital content" "But its OUR content!")
If anyone would care to take a look at the last few paragraphs of the WSJ article, they'd see that this only applies to the MS software. Any other software, while still needing to be optimized for Windows XP, still has the ability to record at whatever bitrate it wants to.
They are simply trying to make WMA the standard by bundling in recording software that won't record MP3's over a 56K sampling rate.
If MS really manages to "unsupport" MP3 into oblivion it may turn out to be not a good thing at all since the Media Industry will happily go along with this scheme (they want content protection at all costs, even if it means to depend on Microsofts proprietary standard, anyone remember the GIF story?). At first everything will be fine and dandy, until most windows people forgot about MP3 players. So: less/crappy MP3-players -> less MP3 -> less music under Linux (you don't think MS will release a player for Linux, do you?). Then the Media Industry will happily screw the consumers until "fair use" is a fairy tale. Next Microsoft will screw Media Industry and Consumers by demanding license fees for their proprietary standard (see Marcovision) Or just make recording software expensive to rent (why sell it at all ...). Maybe they even sell the players (yeah, they come for free ... you only need to purchase Windows).
The obvious way to thwart this plan is reverse engineering the Microsoft codec. Then it will be DeCSS all over again. The other way is not to use that new standard. But microsoft doing everything to make it look bad and just stopping short of having it's new OS erase them off the HD on sight is really making it hard to convince Joe User to go on with MP3.
"By the way if anyone here is in advertising or marketing... kill yourself." -- Bill Hicks
Look at it people, it's not as if MS was going to make sure that no MP3 are going to be able to play on the Windows XP.
All they're doing is give a low-quality MP3 encoder with it (as compared to none), and have it be able to encode in their own proprietary format with high quality.
The current encoders might not work all that well right now with it, but they'll be updated so that they can run with it pretty quickly I think.
Lazy people who just want to use what is built-in might want to start using the Windows Audio format, but there's not much preventing you from keeping your MP3 around.
Sure MS wants to push against MP3s, but so far they haven't planned anything drastic with it like banning them from their new OS. Yes, they're using their clout to encourage people not to use it and they'll be pretty successful I think, but people will still have a choice.
A registry setting allowing one to go over 56k doesn't exactly comfort me. Once content controls are built and integrated into Microsoft products, the controls are no longer in my hands but in Microsoft's.
Microsoft can easily, once the basic mechanism is coded and in place, at any time and with any "Windows Update" patch (now automated?) change the underlying DLLs or OS code to reject registry settings above, say, 56k if its in their interest to do so.
--LP
If they push the format to WMV, then they are DEFINATELY NOT weakening their monopoly. MS has no investment in MP3. They can't control the format, they don't get any revenue from it, and they don't don't own a patent on it.
-- You can't idiot-proof anything, because they're always coming out with better idiots.
-----
crazy dynamite monkey
*sigh*... no. Windows XP will be adopted for the same reason Windows ME is being adopted: OEM bundling. No one buys OSs on purpose, they buy a computer, and it needs an OS. What they get will be whatever Microsoft wants to give them.
And, given that XP is NT-based and ME is still basically a DOS patch, maybe old windows users will be essentially forced to upgrade -- if all the new programs come out "WinXP/2000 compatible," then you are stuck if you don't have an NT-based windows.
I think they've got this one in the bag. D'oh.
How does this crap get moderated up?
Those specs are for the "Easy PC" - a version of PCs sold to people who don't want to deal with a lot of the stuff a lot of PCs make you deal with today - you know, those same people who like buying fruit-colored cars and computers? There was an article about this on Slashdot a few days ago too. I won't go into the details of why anyone would want to buy a computer like that - this crowd is obviously too narrow-minded to get it - but rest assured that that won't be the only kind of XP Box sold.
Mmmm.. Donuts
They talked about it last week, and all they are going to do is not ship Windows Media Player 8 with an MP3 encoding codec. HOWEVER, it is entirely possible to both play MP3s and install someone else's codec.
.NETish database that brings cover art and lyrics down for the CDs you rip (into wma, of course) and the new wma codec sounds v.good indeed at 56k.
Actually I have a copy of WMP8 and it rocks. Built in CD burning, nice interface, a link to a
Now, I have a nice mp3 player that supports wma, and by ripping with WMP8 at 56k I can get twice the music in my pocket and it sounds better.
that's such an evil ploy.
--- Nothing clever here: move along now...
Please read Cornell Law School's Antitrust Primer. It will explain that it is illegal to use dominance in one market, like the PC OS dominance of Microsoft, inorder to influence another market, like the recording and distribution of music. Start posting the *DAMAGES* to consumer choice so we can talk about the monetary value of what they are taking away. Then we can sue them.
--- Nothing clever here: move along now...
MP3 is effectively an open standard. It is not truly free in the sense of Ogg Vorbis, but in practice people make encoders and decoders without paying a cent to Fraunhaufer. It is, or will become, the GIF of music.
If in fact MP3 is under fire from The Man, we don't need more fragmentation in the scene. Concentrate on strengthening the MP3 format. IMO, the risk of (effectively) losing freedom regarding the distribution of music is not worth the small gain in freedom from using a free format.
Ummm, did anyone consider that perhaps MSFT may cut off direct hardware access thereby not allowing any rippers direct access to the CDROM drive. Perhaps not possible with 9x, but it would be with an NT kernel. After all, why does the end user need raw access to the CDROM?
You would then be forced to go through an API to access a CD. The API itself will do the encoding and then pass on the result. The API would only support those codecs that MSFT allows to be plugged into the architecture. No MP3, no OGG.
This would fit in very nicely with the plans to have end-to-end encryption in all media devices. It would probably be enough to stop the average end user.
Of course it may be possible to hack, but I wouldn't want to be doing that in MSFT's house of cards. I'm sure they could set it up so that your system becomes very unstable if you install a hacked API. Oh wait, perhaps they are already doing that ... :)
All an mp3 ripper does is convert one set of data (uncompressed audio) to another kind of data (compressed audio). I can't see how they can detect this.
The answer is that Microsoft are saying that they'll limit the quality of recordings made using the built in software, not those made on Windows XP. Use something else to encode / your mp3s, and you're fine.
I'd mention the fact that this story could have been written more carefully, but that's getting cliched. ;)
The article states you will not be able to use the *built in Microsoft Utility* to record higher than 56k. When was the last time you used any of MS's built in utilities past dialup connection and solitaire?
They mention many third party apps don't seem to work properly on the current betas/RC's. Again, I expect this to be remedied once XP hits the shelves and a little bit of time passes.
I think the article is right in that many mainstream users *don't* care which format or utility they use, but I don't think its mainstream users who are going to be ripping/encoding CD's.
So, basically this article says Microsoft will, in their own applications, favor their own format over a third party format. Wow, I know that surprises the hell out of *me*.
-- if(game-theory) moderate++;
This looks like the software built into XP (Windows Media Player) will suck for ripping MP3s, but will rock for recording Windows Media Format files. This does NOT affect third party programs like MusicMatch, etc. except for the fact that people may not want to buy or download another music program if XP already has one (think I.E. vs Netscape).
However if people are already used to the MP3 scene and have invested lots of time creating a collection (and buying portable mp3 players) then this tactic may not work as expected. If Microsoft did start messing with third party software then I would expect that antitrust lawyers would have a field day.
How does this make money for Microsoft? I'm not a direct shareholder anymore, but if I were, I would definitely want to hear from the honchos an answer as to why they are weakening their monopoly to fight somone else's war.
If I had MS stock, I'd sell it now.
sulli
RTFJ.
Read the WSJ article, emphasis and comments added:
Under Microsoft's new restrictions -- which prevent its built-in software from recording MP3 files at fidelity rates higher than 56 kilobits per second -- MP3 music "sounds like somebody in a phone booth underwater," says P.J. McNealy, an analyst who researches Internet audio issues for Gartner Inc. in Stamford, Conn.
(Existing versions of Microsoft's audio software don't allow consumers to record music as MP3 files of any quality.)
[And so nobody uses them!]
The new restrictions in Windows XP won't prevent other vendors' software applications from recording MP3 music at a higher fidelity, but early testers of beta versions of Windows XP already complain that the most popular MP3 recording applications -- which compete with Microsoft's format -- don't seem to function properly
[Maybe because MS is using its typical anticompetitive dirty tricks?]
apparently because of changes Microsoft made to how data are written on CD-ROMs under Windows XP. Microsoft says that while other software vendors' products may not be "optimized" to run with Windows XP, those products should run acceptably with the operating system.
Whoever at MS thinks Joe User will stick to 56kbp is smoking crack. Everyone will simply use Winamp or one of the hundreds of other MP3 tools. If MS wants to make sure nobody uses its software, this is a great way to do it!
(Compare Apple, whose excellent iTunes is user-friendly and MP3 only.)
sulli
RTFJ.
If Fraunhofer were a US National company, then I'm sure that the anti-trust laws would prevent this type of behavior. Especially if MS somehow disabled or crippled the ability of other MP3 encoders to work under XP.
Keeping
The only new information in this Reuter's article is that the audio recorder built in to XP will only allow the recording of low-quality MP3s. You can still use whatever you want to rip your CDs.
True, Microsoft is trying to guide users away from the MP3 format, which is despicable, but this isn't some heavy-handed move to ban MP3s from XP altogether.
By the way, here's another story from StreamingMedia.com that reports things very differently . . . according to this one, Microsoft has not yet decided (as of March 28) whether to include MP3 encoding abilities in Media Player.
Putting crappy encoding rates into Windows is a bad thing. It'll also probably work. Why? Because most users don't download alternatives. Whats the most used telnet client in the world? Windows Telnet. Its crap. Whats the most used web browser? Internet Explorer. It used to be crap. Why? Because they were in with the windows package from the beginning.
I remember when IE sucked, but people still used it over Netscape because downloading and installing Netscape was a hassle. People didn't want to do it. People didn't know they could do it.
Its all very well running around and saying "Well I'll just download a better program". Great, but the majority of people won't. They'll use what they have and if they are gently persuaded to use something else then they will.
So yes, this is going to be a problem. The savvy people will download and use something else. Those that aren't so savvy (of which there are a hell of a lot more) will use what they are given.
If what they are given encourages them to use something else that gives a better result, then they'll do that.
--
Avantslash - View Slashdot cleanly on your mobile phone.
So what you are saying is: If the company that controls 90% of the desktop computers wants to team up with the RIAA and make it impossible to copy songs the the comsumer buys, thereby making it impossible in the future to buy new albums that can't be copied for legimate fair uses, thats okay cause its "market forces".
Hogwash, utter hogwash. Market forces are about the consumer. That is the whole point of a free economy. That is why monolopies should NOT exist. When we allow one company to control 90% of home computers, it thinks bullshit like this is okay, and consumers just have to eat that dog food if they want to buy music (which eventually, they will if this goes unchecked). I'm sorry. I don't like monolopies. I especially don't like monolopies destroying fair-use in concert with record companies.
Burn Hollywood Burn
1. They don't work in MacOS X
2. They don't work in BeOS (x86)
3. They obviously encode very slowly ("PIII/700 laptop about 3x real time", geesh kinda slow, my 266 encodes mp3s (160) at 2.5X).
4. What happens when someone cracks the "copy protection" in the WMA format? Is MS gonna change it without regard to compatibility?
5. Even if I could use those files (meaning had Windows), I couldn't share them with anyone in my family, much less listen to them on any portable player.
6. Last but not least, from what I have seen of WMP (as limited as that is) in WinME, it blows nutz UI wise, is slow on anything other than a 400P2, and wastes LOTS of valueable screen space by default.
Burn Hollywood Burn
You are a troll, but thats okay. Trolling can be a fun experience. Let me give it a try. ;)
"I can't enjoy certain anime because I don't read nor understand Japanese.
You don't have a right to it.
Nor did I say I did. Don't read into a statement what is not there, makes you look like a reactionary fool.
"You post sounds like 'I want it all now! And I blame MS for it and not market forces or technology'."
"Market forces", I damn near cracked a rib reading this. Do you honestly think consumers WANT copy protections? Do you honestly think consumers want old formats to be "updated" as often as possible so people with new computers have more trouble sending files to people with older computers? You sound like the type of person who would say IE is more popular than Netscape because it is "better' (which, btw, runs totally against what MS planners thought). I really just don't understand how people can honest believe MS is where it is at because it is the "best". I really don't understand what "market forces" are at play other than "monolopistic bundling" when MS uses its ownership of Windows to try to kill a file format. People use what came with Windows. Most don't trust or even understand downloading enough to seek alternate players.
The ONLY reason MS wants to add copy protection to Windows is so they can get part of the theoritcal money people will pay to download music. The software industry has gone unchecked for too long. Most of the industry is consumer unfriendly, writes buggy code, and is trying to redifine what fair use is. I don't want to tell my children about the good ole days when we were actually able to buy music in a unencrypted form, make a copy for the car, a copy for the office, and loan it to friends to listen to. But, at this rate I will, because everything will be "encrypted" (even if its only ROT 26), the DCMA will stop people from breaking that encryption even if they want to merely want to play their files in their car. Not only that, if in the highly likely event that WindowsXPv12 (2010 release,build 5million) dies and you have to reinstall, your computer might suddenly think all those files you have backed up are pirated and refuse to use them (cause Windows is fucking STUPID and requires a FORMAT to reinstall). If the OS can identify your computer uniquely and .NET plays out, every time you visit goatse.cx, MS knows.
Sounds like a shitty idea, if you ask me. I'll stick to formats that don't have any level of prevention in them. XP might look harmless now, but don't think this is nothing more than a baby step towards destroying fair use.
Burn Hollywood Burn
> Relavent quote: The new restrictions in Windows
> XP won't prevent other vendors' software
> applications from recording MP3 music at a
> higher fidelity.
Well, another relevant quote:
> The new restrictions in Windows XP won't prevent
> other vendors' software applications from recording
> MP3 music at a higher fidelity, but early testers
> of beta versions of Windows XP already complain that the
> most popular MP3 recording applications -- which compete
> with Microsoft's format -- don't seem to function
> properly, apparently because of changes Microsoft
> made to how data are written on CD-ROMs under Windows XP.
Telling, no?
Virg
Uh...anyone heard of this little standard for audio?
.NET? All their data will be protected from loss, corruption and theft - Microsoft servers are very secure and reliable. Who doesn't have broadband access these days?"
I must say, I'm not surprised. Not at all. USB 2, MP3...what's next? Hard drives?
Mr. Gates: "Well, people will just have to learn to live without HD support in Windows 2010. Why don't they use
*chill running down spine*
Absolutley. Windows XP is going to be an even bigger flop than 2000 was. Napster had some 70 Million plus users. The fact that these people had at least the know how to and understanding of MP3 files to realize how cool they are. Who is MS targetting with XP? Servers...No. Regular users who at least have a clue...No. Power users...No. The only people left are those who dont know a lot about computers and are just getting into them. I guess. But this group gets smaller and smaller daily. Soon, MS wont have anyone left to buy their OS's. I mean Gamers dont use ME, they use 98SE which came out more than 2 years ago. Linux and the BSD's are gaining the server market, and the power user market.
The best thing about computers is the freedom to do anything you please with them. Building copyrights into the OS will quickly make people turn to something else. Microsoft's days are being quickly numbered.
Arathres
I love my iBook. I use it to run Linux!
stainless steel
That's right, only giant coporations are allowed to distribute culture.
Back off Napster, or Billy Gates will eat your children.
______
jeff13
I don't think there's been more obvious and open challenge to the Open Source community. MP3 should disappear; it's proprietary. But if Microsoft is allowed to control the standard format for digital audio playback then that's it: the world of commercial music is going to end up looking like the world of commercial software and that's an ugly, ugly picture. Two words: Fair Use. Do you know what this means? Of course, but for those who just fell off the truck, you have a legal, constitutionally guarenteed, Supreme-Court approved right to make copies of copyrighted materials YOU ALREADY OWN for personal use. If I own the CD I have the right to tape it, burn it to a new CD, to rip it to my hard drive, to make MP3s from that, all for my personal convenience. I have the right to stream it on the intertnet so I can listen to it at work. I can't legally trade, distribute or sell it. But I can use that copyrighted information any way I want to, once I buy an original. The publishing community doesn't have the political juice to overturn fair use so they're joining forced with M$ to simply make it technologically impossible. The big lie is that we need any more laws due to the digital revolution. Napster proves that: the average consumer will always need some sort of easy, accessible method to get their product. As soon as any illegal distribution network becomes big enough to make a dent in the publishing/recording industry's massive coffers, they'll get shut down. Piracy and bootlegs will always exist: fighting those who illegally (and despicably, from my point of view as a writer and songwriter) make personal profit from piracy is part of maintaining intellectual property laws. What is really the issue is the desire of the publishing/recording industry to change the paradigm from a pay for rights (you buy copyrighted material and receive all attendant fair use rights - essentially unlimited personal playback rights) to a pay to play model where you end up paying EVERY SINGLE TIME YOU LISTEN/READ/VIEW. It's a shaft job on the consumer. A total greed power play. And this is the beginning. I've said it once, twice, I'll say it a thousand times if I have to: There is only one way out and that is by artists cooperating with the open source community to forge a new model of distribution. We don't NEED the publishing/recording industry any more: If you have what it takes you will get 10X as rich selling yourself even if you take no steps to avoid piracy. Yeah, Yeah, I'm crazy (and long winded too). Interested? Get in on the ground floor - write at the e-mail above or to PO 3171 Minneapolis MN 55403 and find out what the REAL score is.
It Is the Nature of Information to Transgress Artificial Boundaries