Posted by
timothy
on from the don't-miss-an-episode-of-%83hd1nzz dept.
karrde writes "CNet (and others) is reporting that: 'Microsoft has bowed to consumer pressure and pulled back from a controversial plan that would have encrypted TV shows recorded on forthcoming digital media PCs.' One could hope that this will be the first many decisions in this direction."
Microsoft Security Ha!
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I bet they pulled back on encryption because they wanted to make money for it by selling it later. What is next, ms offering security packages for microsoft keyboard and mouse?
Re:Interesting.
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Interesting. When will MS ever learn that people *will* actually vote with their spending power.
They will learn when people vote with their spending power.
Make up the damn minds
by
ThundaGaiden
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
MS has quiet a big dillema on their hands now:P
1. Make a product that the RIAA (Retarded Institute of Anti Anything) will be proud of or
2. Make a product that no one will want to buy...
btw. What happens when it blue screens and you have to re-install (MS-Product , it's gauranteed) will you still be able to watch the movies you've already recorded ?
Re:Make up the damn minds
by
swschrad
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
it's the original DIVX loser philosophy popping up in another hole. circuit city almost had to be run into the ground economically before they got the hint. does that mean we have to take M$ to chapter 7 before somebody picks up the clue that we don't eat this shit up? that could take a while.
-- if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
We can't put too much stock in this
by
bsharitt
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
As much as we would like to see this as a step in the right direction, it's probably not time to bet the farm on it.
In the past MS has appeared to be moving towards consumer rights, only to to take a couple step back in their next move.
Now all we need is for MS to back off and rewrite their EULAs so they don't have the power to just mosey in, make changes to your system, and never tell you a thing.
For DRM reasons, I wasn't planning on getting a digital TV. The more steps backward that MS takes, the more inclined I'll be to improve my TV viewing experience. Now all that we as consumers have to do is keep up the pressure and let Gates and Company know that we're not about to just give in to their ideals. See? If consumers just speak up, we can get companies to listen. It's not fiction, and this is just a small snippet of proof. I'm looking forward to more stories like this one...
Re:Hallelujia
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
The more steps backward that MS takes, the more inclined I'll be to improve my TV viewing experience.
The best way to improve your TV viewing experience is...to stop watching.
MS bows to *HP* pressure
by
kawika
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Read the article. Sony already has a competing product that doesn't strip our fair use rights. HP probably pressured Microsoft on this point pretty heavily. If it comes down to a contest over what the well-funded geek buys for the holidays, HP knew that Sony would win. I'm sure that MS still wants to kiss up to Hollywood, but they can't ignore their customer and they didn't want to take the blame for poor sales if they held firm.
Re:MS bows to *HP* pressure
by
Eccles
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
It's hard to believe Sony, of all companies, would make a product that didn't strip your fair use rights, or at least make the format proprietary.
Remember it was Sony that fought for VCR time-shifting rights in the 80's. As both an electronics and a content company -- and I think they're more the former than the latter -- they can be rather two-faced depending on which part of the company you're hearing from.
-- Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
You know how this is going to work...
by
mhesseltine
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
MS bows to public pressure against encrypted recording
MS releases recording software
Public finds huge gaping security hole / bug in software
MS releases SP1 containing, you guessed it, encryption software for recording
Public is left with three options
Patch up to the encrypted version
Leave their system open
Find some new software
Knowing what we know about the general public, which do you think is going to happen?
DON'T BE FOOLED!
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Sorry for the caps. but don't be fooled. it still need media player 9. they're going to seed the world with media player 9, then all they have to do is turn on the DRM.
Also, just as it is, all the broadcasters have to do is turn on recording restricitons on their side.
So don't be fooled. the dangers to our fair use rights (or priveledges as some would call it) are very real.
You're mistaken
by
burgburgburg
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Microsoft did something in the best interests of Microsoft. Helping consumers was an unfortunate, inadvertent side effect that they'll be sure to rectify as soon as they've sold enough of them. Probably with a "security" patch.Read those EULAs
Yeah, right
by
Wes+Janson
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
The public doesn't care about it's rights (the ones they don't know they have in particular). Unless someone educates them, they will be perfectly fine with DRM and anything Microsoft pulls. Being as how they represent the majority of the market, Microsoft has no reason to care about the opinions of the few.
The public doesn't care about it's rights (the ones they don't know they have in particular).
The public will get a crash course in caring about their rights when they press the record button on their brand new toy and it says "Permission denied". The citizens may not care much when the government steps on various rights and starts wars, but there will be bloody revolution in the air if anything happens to television.
I almost wish Microsoft had gone ahead with this plan. It would further prove how stupid their business model is and it might even convince a couple people to switch operating systems. (RedHat, OS X or something):)
Consumers were just too stupid to "understand" it.
by
Black+Copter+Control
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
"Let me get this straight: You want me to pay more money for software that gives me less functionality? why?
When Microsoft realized that consumers couldn't "understand" their logic behind crippling the capabilities of our home computers, they gave up trying to sell people on the lack of functionality.
They didn't do this because it was good for consumers, they did it because their crippleware was effectively unsellable. Anybody who got a box with this software would simply install something that worked and thus lessen Microsoft's market share in this area. Something that comsumers don't buy is bad for Microsoft. That's all that really matters to Microsoft.
-- OS Software is like love: The best way to make it grow is to give it away.
Keep It Simple, Stupid?
by
sssmashy
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Microsoft sees Media Center PCs as ideal for college students or young urbanites living in cramped spaces where a combination computing and entertainment system might be more appealing than separate devices.
The fact that MSFT backed down on this issue is just another sign of desperation. They must be wondering whether there's any demand at all for Media Center PCs... because there sure as hell isn't demand for recording shows that can only be played back on your crappy monitor.
Microsoft's obsession with "convergence" is ridiculous. Apparently their target market consists of "young urbanites" and starving students who live in living spaces so cramped that they couldn't possibly squeeze in a separate VHR or DVR... so they're willing to put up with the hassle of recording shows on their hard drive, bogging down their PCs as they pound out a late night term paper. Don't forget the logistical nightmare of bringing their recorded shows over to Bob's house so they can watch it with buddies and beer (remember, their living quarters are too crowded to allow visitors). Someone's going to be burning a lot of DVDs.
What a strange reality those Microsoft folks are living in. The true market segment for Media Center PCs are lonely techno-hermits, 15 y.o. media pirates and some geeks who like toys. Nothing more, nothing less.
The week in review, so far
by
jhines
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Beginning of the week, MS says "security costs $"
Mid week, MS says "No need for encryption" in our video recorder.
Why do I have this feeling that Friday's story will be how the movie companies are throwing money Microsoft's way, and that MS now thinks that encrypting the video isn't so bad after all.
Call me cynical, but this sounds like MS trying to get leverage on the movie industry, rather than helping the consumer.
Re:The week in review, so far
by
geekee
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
MS's main goal is to protect their monopoly. If they feel that there is any chance they will be supplanted if they provide copy protection that makes users go to Linux or Apple, they won't do it. Whatever the MPAA/RIAA is throwing their way is pocket change compared to what they're making selling Windows. In the end, they'll pick the route that sells the most copies of Windows. Before their attitude may have been that they need copy protection to avoid losing market share to other systems endorsed by the RIAA/MPAA. Hopefully the consumer voice will continue to be heard.
-- Vote for Pedro
Re:The week in review, so far
by
Reziac
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
I agree, but that means for M$ the IDEAL situation is that to play your lawfully-recorded content, you'll need to upgrade to the DRM-enabled next-version of Windows. Your old Windows will no longer cut it.
IOW, it looks to me like M$'s view is: getting in bed with the **AA looks like a great way to sell *everyone* the next version of Windows.
And as someone else noted, seeding it thru DRM in WMPn is likely to be how it achieves market penetration. At some point WMPn will be updated to stop working with old Windows, and then.. see my first paragraph.
Ugly scenario even if only part of it works:(
-- ~REZ~
#43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
Re:This can't be good.
by
Jason+Earl
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
MS has just realized that they aren't a media company, and that people buying new computers to copy music, movies, and television to share with their friends is good for their business.
Microsoft will revive their encryption work when Hollywood gives Microsoft and Windows exclusive access their content. In other words Microsoft won't lift a finger to encrypt Hollywood's content until Hollywood promises to lock out all of Microsoft's competitors. Hollywood is opposing Microsoft in their bid to become the "one ring to rule them all," because they know that if they let Microsoft become the gatekeeper then Microsoft will rig the rig the deck so that Microsoft is the future keystone of broadcasting and distribution. And we all know that the toll-gate keeper makes all the money on a new road.
It's basically a choice between the lesser of two evils. Right now the folks pirating content seem like the lesser evil. Microsoft has enough clout so that they could force the market into using their DRM solution, but Hollywood doesn't trust Microsoft with that kind of power. Hollywood is hoping that they can get Congress to legislate DRM. That would allow them to get an industry standard instead of a proprietary Microsoft solution. Personally I don't see that happening, but Hollywood lives in a land of make believe.
you DO know that WinXP
by
cybercomm
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Has an auto-update feature that is by DEFAULT always on and it continiously patches through to M$ servers sending them all the dirt on you and then for legal reasons, requesting and downloading any new patches. Now, i dont think that the average Joe Blow will know how to turn that feature off, and judging by how M$ worded it, i dont think that he will want to turn it off. So as long as your computer has a connection to the net as do 88 milion US households and a countless number of US and worldwide corporations it will update itself. So lets face it, blow joe will get ticked off when his "glorified digital VCR" wouldn't allow him to transfer files, but when his computer tells him that it is updating itself "for it's own good"...you get the picture... Our only hope is to convert everyone to Mac or Unix users =P
-- Live for the present,
learn from the past,
and dream of the future!
Market Penetration and Consumer Fashion
by
Anonamused+Cow-herd
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Before everyone goes and finds an optimistic thought about MS, let's consider the motivation of this newfound benign giant. As we've seen before [slashdot.org], the set-top box has everything going against it:
1) Price (around $2k)
2) No real benefits over conventional PCs
3) Loss of conventional computer features.
4) Wacko copy protection
Obviously, a product like this is not going to sell well.
This news TEMPORARILY (they can always re-add it after market is successful) removes #4 from the list of problems. Therefore, one would assume that less problems for sales = higher sales.
Like most actions that seem altruistic, this can be passed away in the Evil Empire paradigm yet again.
Heil Gates.
Cheers,
-- -----[0_o]-----
We are not amused.
Public pressure... bah humbug!
by
Cervantes
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Lets face it, how much do non-geeks understand "digital encryption"? To answer that question, look at how many people have DRM still turned on in Media Player... heck, how many people know it turns itself back on with patches? How many people care? As much as we geeks would like to believe that the majority of the consumer base is techno-savy, the truth is they're still a bunch of AOL using, Compaq buying, Windows-only cow-sumers.
I wish it weren't so, but it is... so the question becomes, why did MS decide to do this? Answers:
- Creates more media coverage for the launch of a new XP version and HP machine. How much of the cNet article covered the issue, and how much talked about the new machine?
- Converts a few wanna-be geeks to the MS side (almost typed "dark side"... oopsie). They browse around, see the link, think MS is on their side, and decide that the MicroSerfs can't be all *that* bad.
- Offsets flashback from Palladium and Media Player DRM. "Hey, look, we aren't kowtowing, we fought back for YOU!". It also provides ammo for people who are going to go pro-MS when the next argument about DRM comes to town.
- Gives the geeks at 1 Microsoft Way (yes, there still are a few) some small sense of victory over the Corporate Drones (tm)
- Lets MS test the leash on the **AA. They do this, then wait and see. If the AA's come after them, then MS gets to "fight for the little guy" in a court battle they'd likely win, gets lots of publicity, and gets a boost to their image. If the AA's don't do anything, MS gets to claim a small victory, and maybe in 6 months they take another small step forward towards opt-in instead of opt-out on DRM in Windows.
Lets face it, the decision is mostly win-win for MS, and the great news is that Joe Average, who didn't give a rats ass about DRM for this new PC, has only heard "Microsoft bows to consumers, does what they want", not "Microsoft plans to restrict digital recordings more than analog". He reads the ad...err...article, thinks how nice this lil toy would be... *and*, MS tests out the strength of it's bond with HPaq. This little "change of heart" should show PDQ whether MS can count on HPaq to be a friend or foe... and given the new "WalMart PC" and it's butt-ugly linuxesque interface, MS needs to know who it's friends are.
Game, set, match, MS. Bill may have a bad haircut, but he doesn't hire idiots.
On a related note, have you seen the new WalMart PC's? If Linus had a grave, he'd be rolling in it!
-- If I knew the wedgies I gave you back in 6th grade would have resulted in this . . . I might have taken a moments pause.
Re:The follow-up question: Will Palladium fail?
by
kcbrown
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
How will Palladium suddenly change this philosophy of the manufacters? Won't they be tempted to go the "dirty" path (of course not officially; they'll just "not include Palladium support") by looking into the enormous public interest that will arise in hardware not supporting hardware copy protections?
They will, initially, but the reason is that people need to be able to run the currently available operating systems on new hardware. So hardware manufacturers will implement Palladium in their hardware but will make it possible to disable it.
For now.
Once most people are running Palladium-capable operating systems (Microsoft will see to that), hardware manufacturers can get away with removing the ability to turn Palladium off. Only the fringe will care, and those people don't represent a large enough population to make the difference.
Understand this: the hardware manufacturers only care about their bottom line. If they can force people to upgrade their hardware, thereby generating more business than they would have had otherwise, they'll do it, and it doesn't matter how bad for the customer the method they use is.
If other interests (the MPAA, the RIAA) pay them more than enough to offset the loss in business, they'll do it.
But my bet is that Palladium-required hardware will come at exactly the same time that legislation requiring its use is passed. Since the large corporations control our government, this will happen.
-- Use 'slashdot stuff' in the subject line in any email you send me if you want to get past the spam filter.
Who would buy one of these "Digital Media PCs" ?
by
ellisDtrails
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Probably the same people who bought those Gateway TV / PC combo things that were good at neither computing nor home entertainment. Besides, most people who are inclined to use a PC to record television and use a PC as a DVR probably build their own anyway.
Re:MS didn't back down all the way
by
zentigger
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
THIS IS DONE by making the Media Center software cognizant of a television standard called Copy Generation Management System for Analog (CGMS-A). If a couple of bits in a program's CGMS-A settings are switched on, Media Center PCs will encrypt the program, making it unplayable on anything but the recording PC
How long before someone figures out how to "flip off" these couple of bits either by intercepting the data stream in software and stripping them out, or hacking the CPU. I can envision a whole lot of web-sites devoted to this, much like the little kits of conductive eopxy that you can use to overclock you AMD...
--
the above is my personal opinion and does not necessarily reflect that of the little voices in my head
Re:New imporved FP version 14.0
by
arkane1234
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
/. is not a real "news" site as much as it a collaboration point, a portal. Any "relevant" news is posted from multiple sites.
That's the difference.
-- --
This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
They're holding out
by
Jason+Earl
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Microsoft simply knows which side their bread is buttered on. As the article states Sony already has a non-DRM version of the same gizmo, and Microsoft isn't a content company. People buying new computers to copy and share television shows is good for them.
Microsoft is waiting for Hollywood to become desperate, and then they will promise to secure digital media from one end to the other. Microsoft will promise to deliver Hollywood content directly from their ultra-secure servers in Redmond to the XBox2 on the customer's television. The agreements, of course, will be very exclusionary. Alternative formats, operating systems, or software will not be tolerated. If you want to see "Leave it to Beaver" then you will have to own an XBox2, and you will have to subscribe to MSN.
Microsoft figures that if they wait until Hollywood is desperate that there is some chance that they will turn their entire distribution and broadcast businesses over to Microsoft and MSN. Microsoft will become the new keystone of Entertainment, and we all know that the gate-keeper at the toll booth is the one that makes all the money on a new road.
Right now the media companies see Microsoft as a greater threat than the folks copying content. They know that if they give Microsoft control that they will all become subsidiaries of MSFT.
Re:They're holding out
by
Jason+Earl
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Does that mean they'll take away your tin-foil hat as well?
In all seriousness, however, the problem is that the current systems, whether you are talking about cable, satellite, or worst of all broadcast television, can all be tapped quite easily. And once they can be tapped skipping commercials and sharing become ridiculously easy. Microsoft's solution to this problem is replacing these open standards and networks with their own proprietary closed system. It's attractive to Hollywood because it is the only system that is likely to actually have any chance of being accepted by consumers, and it would almost certainly be well beyond the average person's ability to "hack." Even better the DMCA should make people attempting to break the system into criminals.
Of course, this isn't going to happen. If Hollywood is stupid enough to put Microsoft in that sort of a position of power then they enjoying the raping that they would get once this system became widespread. Making Microsoft the cornerstone of your business is like putting a cannibal in charge of babysitting your children.
In other words, I don't think that this is going to work, but you can bet that Microsoft thinks it is going to work.
Re:The follow-up question: Will Palladium fail?
by
Alsee
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Which manufacturer wish to be the first to have a huge disadvantage by supplying the initial Palladium-supporting hardware?
You underestimate the threat.
Palladium has NO inherent disadvantage. There is no reason to buy (or sell) a non-Palladium machine. The "Palladium enhanced" computer can do everything a normal computer can do, and in addition it can run Palladium programs. This will give access to Palladium content, movies, music, whatever. If you don't buy Palladium content then you lose nothing by having the Palladium chip in your computer.
The only disadvantage to Palladium is if we can make it a public relations nightmare. Microsoft and friends have a very workable plan to get it out there. Do not underestimate them.
-
-- - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
Re:MS didn't back down all the way
by
captaineo
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
I don't think these "copy flag bits" are going to work. All broadcasters will simply hard-code the flags to "no copy" all the time. And then we are back to square one...
In order for this to work, Congress must pass a law that enshrines "fair use" as a guaranteed right that must be allowed by any copy-prevention system.
Also, any stream that contains "copy flag bits" must be required to include the expiration date of the copyright. Copy-prevention systems must be required to freely decrypt material that has entered the public domain.
A "copy flag bit" that doesn't also include an expiration date clearly violates the "limited Times" clause of the US Constitution.
Does anyone know if CSS-scrambled DVDs or WMA-scrambled audio streams include a copyright expiration date? I don't think so...
Pulled or just disabled?
by
SgtChaireBourne
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Did they actually pull the code or is this just one of the check boxes you will find checked for you after installing the next service pack?
Microsoft and the others know that the public won't go for DRM, so it has to be brought in gradually -- spread DRM software and hardware with DRM turned off, then when it's reached critical marketshare, flip the switch either on the servers or both the servers and workstations.
-- Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
Re:The follow-up question: Will Palladium fail?
by
debest
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I'll agree with most of your points, but one in incorrect: there is no incentive on the part of hardware manufacturers to remove the ability to turn Palladium off. Sure, they'll build in the ability to have it on (so you can run Windows XXXp), but why would they voluntarily isolate their market for non-DRM enabled products? That seems to be rather foolish.
Your last paragraph is the accurate one: the ability to turn it off will be removed only with legislation.
Still, with the intent to turn all computers into sealed boxes, you've got to know that lots of hardware makers will follow the lead of Apex and start including "secret" menus that "weren't supposed to be there." Also, the volume of identical but "DRM disabled" hardware shipped to Canada will grow tremendously.
It will take a long time for the CBDTPA to pass into law. It will take longer still for a "standard" to be agreed upon and implemented. The optimist in me says that by the time all this happens, the current crop of "legal" uses for computers will be commonplace, and any attempt to remove them will be resisted by *everyone*, not just geeks. Then the law will be quietly shuffled to the side, unenforced until it is finally struck down as unconsitutional.
-- Look at the tomato! Isn't it sad? He can't dance! Poor tomato!
Slashdot Mirror
I bet they pulled back on encryption because they wanted to make money for it by selling it later. What is next, ms offering security packages for microsoft keyboard and mouse?
Interesting. When will MS ever learn that people *will* actually vote with their spending power.
They will learn when people vote with their spending power.
MS has quiet a big dillema on their hands now :P
1. Make a product that the RIAA (Retarded Institute of Anti Anything) will be proud of or
2. Make a product that no one will want to buy...
btw. What happens when it blue screens and you have to re-install (MS-Product , it's gauranteed) will you still be able to watch the movies you've already recorded ?
As much as we would like to see this as a step in the right direction, it's probably not time to bet the farm on it.
In the past MS has appeared to be moving towards consumer rights, only to to take a couple step back in their next move.
Now all we need is for MS to back off and rewrite their EULAs so they don't have the power to just mosey in, make changes to your system, and never tell you a thing.
For DRM reasons, I wasn't planning on getting a digital TV. The more steps backward that MS takes, the more inclined I'll be to improve my TV viewing experience. Now all that we as consumers have to do is keep up the pressure and let Gates and Company know that we're not about to just give in to their ideals. See? If consumers just speak up, we can get companies to listen. It's not fiction, and this is just a small snippet of proof. I'm looking forward to more stories like this one...
Blog Prophyts - Right On, Man
Read the article. Sony already has a competing product that doesn't strip our fair use rights. HP probably pressured Microsoft on this point pretty heavily. If it comes down to a contest over what the well-funded geek buys for the holidays, HP knew that Sony would win. I'm sure that MS still wants to kiss up to Hollywood, but they can't ignore their customer and they didn't want to take the blame for poor sales if they held firm.
Knowing what we know about the general public, which do you think is going to happen?
Overrated / Underrated : Moderation
Microsoft did something in the best interests of the consumer. Isn't that a sign of the apocalypse?
No, it's a sign that:
a.) the consumer was wrong
b.) MS has found another way to do the same thing without the consumer finding out
c.) all of the above
Seriously, though, this has happened before. Just keep an eye out in the future.
moto411.com
Sorry for the caps. but don't be fooled. it still need media player 9. they're going to seed the world with media player 9, then all they have to do is turn on the DRM.
Also, just as it is, all the broadcasters have to do is turn on recording restricitons on their side.
So don't be fooled. the dangers to our fair use rights (or priveledges as some would call it) are very real.
Microsoft did something in the best interests of Microsoft. Helping consumers was an unfortunate, inadvertent side effect that they'll be sure to rectify as soon as they've sold enough of them. Probably with a "security" patch.Read those EULAs
The public doesn't care about it's rights (the ones they don't know they have in particular). Unless someone educates them, they will be perfectly fine with DRM and anything Microsoft pulls. Being as how they represent the majority of the market, Microsoft has no reason to care about the opinions of the few.
I almost wish Microsoft had gone ahead with this plan. It would further prove how stupid their business model is and it might even convince a couple people to switch operating systems. (RedHat, OS X or something) :)
When Microsoft realized that consumers couldn't "understand" their logic behind crippling the capabilities of our home computers, they gave up trying to sell people on the lack of functionality.
They didn't do this because it was good for consumers, they did it because their crippleware was effectively unsellable. Anybody who got a box with this software would simply install something that worked and thus lessen Microsoft's market share in this area. Something that comsumers don't buy is bad for Microsoft. That's all that really matters to Microsoft.
OS Software is like love: The best way to make it grow is to give it away.
The fact that MSFT backed down on this issue is just another sign of desperation. They must be wondering whether there's any demand at all for Media Center PCs... because there sure as hell isn't demand for recording shows that can only be played back on your crappy monitor.
Microsoft's obsession with "convergence" is ridiculous. Apparently their target market consists of "young urbanites" and starving students who live in living spaces so cramped that they couldn't possibly squeeze in a separate VHR or DVR... so they're willing to put up with the hassle of recording shows on their hard drive, bogging down their PCs as they pound out a late night term paper. Don't forget the logistical nightmare of bringing their recorded shows over to Bob's house so they can watch it with buddies and beer (remember, their living quarters are too crowded to allow visitors). Someone's going to be burning a lot of DVDs.
What a strange reality those Microsoft folks are living in. The true market segment for Media Center PCs are lonely techno-hermits, 15 y.o. media pirates and some geeks who like toys. Nothing more, nothing less.
Beginning of the week, MS says "security costs $"
Mid week, MS says "No need for encryption" in our video recorder.
Why do I have this feeling that Friday's story will be how the movie companies are throwing money Microsoft's way, and that MS now thinks that encrypting the video isn't so bad after all.
Call me cynical, but this sounds like MS trying to get leverage on the movie industry, rather than helping the consumer.
MS has just realized that they aren't a media company, and that people buying new computers to copy music, movies, and television to share with their friends is good for their business.
Microsoft will revive their encryption work when Hollywood gives Microsoft and Windows exclusive access their content. In other words Microsoft won't lift a finger to encrypt Hollywood's content until Hollywood promises to lock out all of Microsoft's competitors. Hollywood is opposing Microsoft in their bid to become the "one ring to rule them all," because they know that if they let Microsoft become the gatekeeper then Microsoft will rig the rig the deck so that Microsoft is the future keystone of broadcasting and distribution. And we all know that the toll-gate keeper makes all the money on a new road.
It's basically a choice between the lesser of two evils. Right now the folks pirating content seem like the lesser evil. Microsoft has enough clout so that they could force the market into using their DRM solution, but Hollywood doesn't trust Microsoft with that kind of power. Hollywood is hoping that they can get Congress to legislate DRM. That would allow them to get an industry standard instead of a proprietary Microsoft solution. Personally I don't see that happening, but Hollywood lives in a land of make believe.
Has an auto-update feature that is by DEFAULT always on and it continiously patches through to M$ servers sending them all the dirt on you and then for legal reasons, requesting and downloading any new patches. Now, i dont think that the average Joe Blow will know how to turn that feature off, and judging by how M$ worded it, i dont think that he will want to turn it off. So as long as your computer has a connection to the net as do 88 milion US households and a countless number of US and worldwide corporations it will update itself. So lets face it, blow joe will get ticked off when his "glorified digital VCR" wouldn't allow him to transfer files, but when his computer tells him that it is updating itself "for it's own good"...you get the picture... Our only hope is to convert everyone to Mac or Unix users =P
Live for the present, learn from the past, and dream of the future!
Before everyone goes and finds an optimistic thought about MS, let's consider the motivation of this newfound benign giant. As we've seen before [slashdot.org], the set-top box has everything going against it:
1) Price (around $2k)
2) No real benefits over conventional PCs
3) Loss of conventional computer features.
4) Wacko copy protection
Obviously, a product like this is not going to sell well.
This news TEMPORARILY (they can always re-add it after market is successful) removes #4 from the list of problems. Therefore, one would assume that less problems for sales = higher sales.
Like most actions that seem altruistic, this can be passed away in the Evil Empire paradigm yet again.
Heil Gates.
Cheers,
-----[0_o]-----
We are not amused.
Lets face it, how much do non-geeks understand "digital encryption"? To answer that question, look at how many people have DRM still turned on in Media Player... heck, how many people know it turns itself back on with patches? How many people care? As much as we geeks would like to believe that the majority of the consumer base is techno-savy, the truth is they're still a bunch of AOL using, Compaq buying, Windows-only cow-sumers.
I wish it weren't so, but it is... so the question becomes, why did MS decide to do this? Answers:
- Creates more media coverage for the launch of a new XP version and HP machine. How much of the cNet article covered the issue, and how much talked about the new machine?
- Converts a few wanna-be geeks to the MS side (almost typed "dark side"... oopsie). They browse around, see the link, think MS is on their side, and decide that the MicroSerfs can't be all *that* bad.
- Offsets flashback from Palladium and Media Player DRM. "Hey, look, we aren't kowtowing, we fought back for YOU!". It also provides ammo for people who are going to go pro-MS when the next argument about DRM comes to town.
- Gives the geeks at 1 Microsoft Way (yes, there still are a few) some small sense of victory over the Corporate Drones (tm)
- Lets MS test the leash on the **AA. They do this, then wait and see. If the AA's come after them, then MS gets to "fight for the little guy" in a court battle they'd likely win, gets lots of publicity, and gets a boost to their image. If the AA's don't do anything, MS gets to claim a small victory, and maybe in 6 months they take another small step forward towards opt-in instead of opt-out on DRM in Windows.
Lets face it, the decision is mostly win-win for MS, and the great news is that Joe Average, who didn't give a rats ass about DRM for this new PC, has only heard "Microsoft bows to consumers, does what they want", not "Microsoft plans to restrict digital recordings more than analog". He reads the ad...err...article, thinks how nice this lil toy would be... *and*, MS tests out the strength of it's bond with HPaq. This little "change of heart" should show PDQ whether MS can count on HPaq to be a friend or foe... and given the new "WalMart PC" and it's butt-ugly linuxesque interface, MS needs to know who it's friends are.
Game, set, match, MS. Bill may have a bad haircut, but he doesn't hire idiots.
On a related note, have you seen the new WalMart PC's? If Linus had a grave, he'd be rolling in it!
If I knew the wedgies I gave you back in 6th grade would have resulted in this . . . I might have taken a moments pause.
They will, initially, but the reason is that people need to be able to run the currently available operating systems on new hardware. So hardware manufacturers will implement Palladium in their hardware but will make it possible to disable it.
For now.
Once most people are running Palladium-capable operating systems (Microsoft will see to that), hardware manufacturers can get away with removing the ability to turn Palladium off. Only the fringe will care, and those people don't represent a large enough population to make the difference.
Understand this: the hardware manufacturers only care about their bottom line. If they can force people to upgrade their hardware, thereby generating more business than they would have had otherwise, they'll do it, and it doesn't matter how bad for the customer the method they use is. If other interests (the MPAA, the RIAA) pay them more than enough to offset the loss in business, they'll do it.
But my bet is that Palladium-required hardware will come at exactly the same time that legislation requiring its use is passed. Since the large corporations control our government, this will happen.
Use 'slashdot stuff' in the subject line in any email you send me if you want to get past the spam filter.
Probably the same people who bought those Gateway TV / PC combo things that were good at neither computing nor home entertainment. Besides, most people who are inclined to use a PC to record television and use a PC as a DVR probably build their own anyway.
From 1996: Gateway Dimension, or "more crap they try to sell you"
GetTheJob.com : Nothing but Real Jobs.
How long before someone figures out how to "flip off" these couple of bits either by intercepting the data stream in software and stripping them out, or hacking the CPU. I can envision a whole lot of web-sites devoted to this, much like the little kits of conductive eopxy that you can use to overclock you AMD...
the above is my personal opinion and does not necessarily reflect that of the little voices in my head
/. is not a real "news" site as much as it a collaboration point, a portal. Any "relevant" news is posted from multiple sites.
That's the difference.
-- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
Microsoft simply knows which side their bread is buttered on. As the article states Sony already has a non-DRM version of the same gizmo, and Microsoft isn't a content company. People buying new computers to copy and share television shows is good for them.
Microsoft is waiting for Hollywood to become desperate, and then they will promise to secure digital media from one end to the other. Microsoft will promise to deliver Hollywood content directly from their ultra-secure servers in Redmond to the XBox2 on the customer's television. The agreements, of course, will be very exclusionary. Alternative formats, operating systems, or software will not be tolerated. If you want to see "Leave it to Beaver" then you will have to own an XBox2, and you will have to subscribe to MSN.
Microsoft figures that if they wait until Hollywood is desperate that there is some chance that they will turn their entire distribution and broadcast businesses over to Microsoft and MSN. Microsoft will become the new keystone of Entertainment, and we all know that the gate-keeper at the toll booth is the one that makes all the money on a new road.
Right now the media companies see Microsoft as a greater threat than the folks copying content. They know that if they give Microsoft control that they will all become subsidiaries of MSFT.
Which manufacturer wish to be the first to have a huge disadvantage by supplying the initial Palladium-supporting hardware?
You underestimate the threat.
Palladium has NO inherent disadvantage. There is no reason to buy (or sell) a non-Palladium machine. The "Palladium enhanced" computer can do everything a normal computer can do, and in addition it can run Palladium programs. This will give access to Palladium content, movies, music, whatever. If you don't buy Palladium content then you lose nothing by having the Palladium chip in your computer.
The only disadvantage to Palladium is if we can make it a public relations nightmare. Microsoft and friends have a very workable plan to get it out there. Do not underestimate them.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
I don't think these "copy flag bits" are going to work. All broadcasters will simply hard-code the flags to "no copy" all the time. And then we are back to square one...
In order for this to work, Congress must pass a law that enshrines "fair use" as a guaranteed right that must be allowed by any copy-prevention system.
Also, any stream that contains "copy flag bits" must be required to include the expiration date of the copyright. Copy-prevention systems must be required to freely decrypt material that has entered the public domain.
A "copy flag bit" that doesn't also include an expiration date clearly violates the "limited Times" clause of the US Constitution.
Does anyone know if CSS-scrambled DVDs or WMA-scrambled audio streams include a copyright expiration date? I don't think so...
Microsoft and the others know that the public won't go for DRM, so it has to be brought in gradually -- spread DRM software and hardware with DRM turned off, then when it's reached critical marketshare, flip the switch either on the servers or both the servers and workstations.
Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
I'll agree with most of your points, but one in incorrect: there is no incentive on the part of hardware manufacturers to remove the ability to turn Palladium off. Sure, they'll build in the ability to have it on (so you can run Windows XXXp), but why would they voluntarily isolate their market for non-DRM enabled products? That seems to be rather foolish.
Your last paragraph is the accurate one: the ability to turn it off will be removed only with legislation.
Still, with the intent to turn all computers into sealed boxes, you've got to know that lots of hardware makers will follow the lead of Apex and start including "secret" menus that "weren't supposed to be there." Also, the volume of identical but "DRM disabled" hardware shipped to Canada will grow tremendously.
It will take a long time for the CBDTPA to pass into law. It will take longer still for a "standard" to be agreed upon and implemented. The optimist in me says that by the time all this happens, the current crop of "legal" uses for computers will be commonplace, and any attempt to remove them will be resisted by *everyone*, not just geeks. Then the law will be quietly shuffled to the side, unenforced until it is finally struck down as unconsitutional.
Look at the tomato! Isn't it sad? He can't dance! Poor tomato!