Slashdot Mirror


Nvidia Drivers Enforce Macrovision's Rules

Ant writes "According to 'Nvidia Macrovision DVD-TV rules forced on consumers', Nvidia drivers 41.09 and onwards include 'stringent checks' to comply with Macrovision requirements. That could mean if you have a TV encoder that does not support Macrovision, you may well get an error message depending on what DVD software player you are using, the company has said."

306 comments

  1. This has been here for a while by PhrostyMcByte · · Score: 5, Informative

    For those of us with older nvidia cards, this means we can't watch dvds anymore! thankfully you can use DVD Idle to get around this.

    1. Re:This has been here for a while by Lord+Kano · · Score: 2, Informative

      I have used DVD Idle for almost two years now, it's fantastic. I was unable to watch DVDs without it ever since I upgraded to a Geforce 2 card with a TV out.

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    2. Re:This has been here for a while by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      thankfully you can use DVD Idle to get around this.

      Yes, thankfully we can spend money on software to re-enable functionality that was purposefully broken.

      I am really just so thankful.

    3. Re:This has been here for a while by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      For those of us with older nvidia cards, this means we can't watch dvds anymore!

      I was not aware that nvidia cards forced you to install every driver update.

    4. Re:This has been here for a while by Zalgon+26+McGee · · Score: 2, Informative

      Mind you, using REALLY old NVidia drivers lets you watch DVDs full-screen and have the Clone mode working on the TV - so you've got video out and audio out without Macrovision...

      Gee, a person could feed those signals into a VCR and tape DVDs if they wanted to... good thing that converting from one format to another for your personal viewing is Fair Use.

      --

      ---

      Book(n): Utensil used to pass time while waiting for the TV repairman

    5. Re:This has been here for a while by uncleFester · · Score: 1

      Why hasn't nVidia taken what seems to be a simple way out and provided an option disabling video-out on these cards? I've a GF3-Ti200 where I've finally run into this, and it seems so simple to deal with from both sides.. granted, you lose the functionality to watch/play dvd video via tvout but retain it on the vga/dvi.

      As I hardly plug my box into a tv monitor, this seems an easy/logical step.. but they don't take it. or i'm just flat missing something... ?

      -'f

      --
      -'fester
    6. Re:This has been here for a while by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I was not aware that nvidia cards forced you to install every driver update.

      This isn't insightful, just dickish. Driver updates do a lot more than just add copy protection - they increase performance and fix bugs, too.

      Yes, you could keep running your detonator 40s without upgrading, and that's probably a great solution for people running old, integrated chipset or underpowered cards. But for the majority of nvidia driver users it's not useful advice at all. Good luck playing Far Cry, or any other new game on pre-41.09 drivers. Hamstringing a video card that costs twice as much or more than your average game console, so that it can't ably play games anymore, is not an acceptable solution.

      There's no reason to play apologist here or to tell people to stop complaining. The complaint is just, and the situation fixable. If you don't have anything useful to contribute... don't contribute at all.

    7. Re:This has been here for a while by bluewarp · · Score: 0, Troll

      Thankfully I didn't want to spend the money on DVDIdle, so I purchased a new Radeon when I last attempted to play a DVD on my GeForce4.

    8. Re:This has been here for a while by uncleFester · · Score: 1

      ..........yes, you are missing something.

      pray tell, what is it? I dig through the rivatuner settings to disable tvout, no dice. i dig through control panel settings to disable tvout, no dice. i dig through my dvd players (realplayer builtin, wmp builtin, powerdvd5 prefs) to disable any use/access of tvout ports, no dice (more like no option). what am i missing?

      no-dvd-playback-via-tvout sucks but is better than nothing.. which is what I and most other nVidia users are stuck with. And the DVDRegionFree/tvTool option is not acceptable. Why should I have to pay to recover functionality? why should this be the penalty for keeping drivers current, improving 3d performance, etc?

      -'f

      --
      -'fester
    9. Re:This has been here for a while by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have an older nvidia card nd I could never watch DVD in the first place. DVDs work just fine on my computer monitor, but if I use video out and use the television instead, I get some copy protection screen isntead!

    10. Re:This has been here for a while by antdude · · Score: 1

      Yep, need to upgrade drivers for games mainly. :(

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    11. Re:This has been here for a while by DrXym · · Score: 4, Informative

      Or use VideoLan and never have to put up with Macrovision / regional encoding shit ever again.

    12. Re:This has been here for a while by ThisIsFred · · Score: 1

      I was not aware that nvidia cards forced you to install every driver update.

      I was not aware that "drivers" included DRM application software that cannot be separately uninstalled. There's not reason to dump this junk on consumers. It's "use protection", not "copy protection."

      --
      Fred

      "A fool and his freedom are soon parted"
      -RMS
    13. Re:This has been here for a while by bradasch · · Score: 1

      Well, you could always write a GPL application to do that. Isn't that the spirit?

    14. Re:This has been here for a while by francium+de+neobie · · Score: 1

      Insightful my ass. Many newer games (X2 - The Threat for example) don't work correctly unless you've installed the newer drivers. Thus driver updates are essentially forced, in perspective of gamers.

  2. Great move ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...for ATI.

    1. Re:Great move ! by mindstormpt · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah, it seems my last NVIDIA card is the one I have installed (A GF4 ti4220).

      From now on, bye nvidia, hello ATI :)

      Why do the great companies always end up like this?

    2. Re:Great move ! by gnu-generation-one · · Score: 5, Interesting

      ...and for the people using open-source drivers

      Let's see how the "nvidia are great, we trust their binary drivers" fanboys react to this one...

    3. Re:Great move ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well, I know ATI has supported macrovision in some of its products (Radeon all in Wonder 7000) for at least 3 years. That being the last time I upgraded my desktop system.

      Man, what a field day viruses would have on that box if I connect it to the net!

    4. Re:Great move ! by gnu-generation-one · · Score: 3, Funny

      3:00pm: "Let's see how the "nvidia are great, we trust their binary drivers" fanboys react to this one..."

      3:10pm: "Score:0, Flamebait"

      Guess that answers that question.

    5. Re:Great move ! by FooBarWidget · · Score: 1

      3:20pm: "Score: 1, Flamebait"
      3:30pm: "Score: 2, Flamebait"
      3:40pm: "Score: 3, Funny"

    6. Re:Great move ! by Apreche · · Score: 1

      Nvidia was great. Their binary drivers for linux installed easily and worked well. Until now. Now is the time to do the same thing we did with forcedeth. If mplayer doesn't play DVDs with NVidias binary driver, fudge 'em in the ass.

      --
      The GeekNights podcast is going strong. Listen!
    7. Re:Great move ! by zurab · · Score: 2, Insightful
      No, no, no:
      [Great move !] ...for ATI. (by AC, OK it may be funny)
      ...and for the people using open-source drivers

      Let's see how the "nvidia are great, we trust their binary drivers" fanboys react to this one...

      ATI and NVIDIA open source drivers do not have the same capabilities. ATI, like NVIDIA, also releases binary only drivers for their recent hardware and no longer provides useful technical data for them to anyone, including OSS developers.

      That said, yes, both NVIDIA and ATI have to be forced to release GPLed drivers. It's a GPL/copyright violation and I don't care what Linus says about it.
    8. Re:Great move ! by Skuld-Chan · · Score: 2, Informative

      I still respond to this the same way I always have about everything ATI.

      About a year ago I bought an ATI 9500 Pro because of rave reviews, and friends who liked them. I've actually only ever been able to use the card for a month - as I'm on card #4 now. Because of a manufacturing flaw in the card itself it tends to overheat and damage the card permanently. Check out this article to see what I'm talking about.

      Around card number 3 I bought a NVidia 5900 and I haven't looked back - its brutally fast, 100% reliable and it looks great. ATI will never get my business again. Card #4 btw I gave to my brother died less that 15 seconds after powering on the machine - didn't even get to install the drivers. Maybe card #5 will work - but I've basically written off the price of this worthless piece of junk.

      This isn't the only ATI video card though I've had quality control problems with - I had an 8500 that between the worthless drivers, and poor QA on the actual card itself was mostly unusable.

    9. Re:Great move ! by ctr2sprt · · Score: 1
      You apparently don't understand the position of people who use binary drivers, hence your inability to predict their actions. So here's a short explanation: We use what works best for us. The open source NVIDIA drivers just don't cut it at this time. If, in the future, they become roughly comparable in quality to the binary drivers, then we will consider switching. But until then, we require functionality which is either unavailable or incomplete in the open source versions.

      So the reaction of a "fanboy" here will be one of two things. In my case, as I don't watch DVDs on my computer, this doesn't affect me at all. So my reaction is disinterest, I guess. If this did affect me, I would consider alternatives. You see, this is why you got your "Flamebait" mod. It's not because your opinion is controversial, it's because you're deliberately mischaracterizing the position of your opponents to make their arguments seem weaker.

      If you're looking for an open source precedent, Stallman is pretty much the only "OSS" developer[1] who holds his position for philosophical and not pragmatic reasons.

      [1] I put it in quotes because RMS doesn't seem to like the term "Open Source Software." He prefers Free Software, so he wouldn't actually consider himself an OSS developer at all - for all that everyone else does, mostly because of an inability to tell the difference between RMS's philosophy and Linus Torvalds'.

    10. Re:Great move ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That said, yes, both NVIDIA and ATI have to be forced to release GPLed drivers. It's a GPL/copyright violation and I don't care what Linus says about it.

      If they are tried to be 'forced', they just won't produce drivers for Linux any more.

      You sir, are a fucking idiot.

    11. Re:Great move ! by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1


      OTOH, if IBM, HP, and a few others would lean on some of these manufacturers and "convince" them to release Linux drivers...

      I mean, an estimated eighteen million Linux users and these morons can't see a market that they COULD BE FIRST IN?

      Managers should be shot.

      --
      Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
    12. Re:Great move ! by zurab · · Score: 2, Insightful
      If they are tried to be 'forced', they just won't produce drivers for Linux any more.

      Breaks my heart! They too, like everyone else, have to obey copyrights and software licenses. That's what competition is all about. If they are willing to ditch 5-10% of their market, it's their choice. Someone like Matrox and other underdogs will pick it up from there.

      You sir, are a fucking idiot.

      AC + personal insults + cliches = you are not trying to argue or discuss. Good going, AC. Maybe I shouldn't have replied.
    13. Re:Great move ! by rpozz · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, Matrox's cards aren't anywhere near as good as ATI's/nVidia's. Most people who have Linux installed also have Windows installed, and will simply run games etc from Windows.

      Basically, for now, Linux needs ATI/nVidia more than they need Linux.

      Hardware development is almost always an insanely expensive process, and drivers - being the link between hardware and software contain many explicit details about the hardware they support - for this reason in many cases it is totally unviable to make them open-source, especially given the relatively small market share Linux has in the desktop.

      Although it's an unpopular idea, I think it would be best if an interface for closed-source binary drivers was created, which supported all patches of a given kernel (eg 2.6.0-2.6.5 etc). This would also solve the problems with trying to install 3rd party drivers from source.

    14. Re:Great move ! by Mycroft_VIII · · Score: 1

      The AIW Radeon 9600 also. I upgraded to the 9600 from the 7k version and it still doese the whole 'scramble cable channel' bit with Marcovisioned tapes. I'd really like to find some way to fix that.

      Mycroft

      --
      https://signup.leagueoflegends.com/?ref=4c3ed6600b6ea
    15. Re:Great move ! by zurab · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Unfortunately, Matrox's cards aren't anywhere near as good as ATI's/nVidia's. Most people who have Linux installed also have Windows installed, and will simply run games etc from Windows.

      That's more of an argument to purchase a system or a video card that will be fully supported on both OSes. As far as their cards, they don't have as large of an array to choose from but they are making a significant progress. I currently use NVIDIA, but next time I am in the market, I will definitely consider Matrox. And this is likely to happen a lot sooner if ATI and NVIDIA drivers crash X more often than they should, or they start shoving their DRM down my throat with their binary-only driver software.

      Hardware development is almost always an insanely expensive process, and drivers - being the link between hardware and software contain many explicit details about the hardware they support - for this reason in many cases it is totally unviable to make them open-source, especially given the relatively small market share Linux has in the desktop.

      Remember when ATI were underdogs playing catch-up not that long ago? It was perfectly feasible for them to try to gain every possible advantage they could, including "playing nice" to the OSS developers.

      Although it's an unpopular idea, I think it would be best if an interface for closed-source binary drivers was created, which supported all patches of a given kernel (eg 2.6.0-2.6.5 etc). This would also solve the problems with trying to install 3rd party drivers from source.

      And I think a common reply to this is - how far do you take this? Until you have a kernel with a GPLed binary module loader, and all of the hardware drivers in binary? The system loses the value of being open source then.
    16. Re:Great move ! by True+Grit · · Score: 1
      1. And I think a common reply to this is - how far do you take this? Until you have a kernel with a GPLed binary module loader, and all of the hardware drivers in binary? The system loses the value of being open source then.


      The Python language people have a saying I see a lot, something like: "Practicality beats purity". Linux's value is that the OS's *core* is open-source, I don't see how forcing all hardware *drivers* to be open source will help Linux any. In fact, doing so is probably the quickest way to kill Linux's future on the home desktop if thats what you really want. For roughly the same reasons that the Debian folk recently voted to keep "non-free", Linux should allow binary-only drivers. It doesn't mean condoning or agreeing with the reasoning behind them, its just a recognition of the current reality with some computer hardware, and a willingness to work with the rest of the world rather than turn this really neat OS into the primary weapon of a Jihad *against* the rest of the world.

      High-end video cards aren't a "commodity" yet, there is no industry "standard" for 3D graphics capabilities like there is a PCI, EISA, or SCSI, for mass storage peripherals, or even the early standards for 2D graphics like CGA, EGA, and VGA. Until they do become a commodity with a standardized interface to the system, we are simply not going to see the major card makers open source their drivers because too much of their proprietary hardware's inner workings are exposed by the driver.

      I don't like it, neither do you, but the point is that is the current reality. Now we can decide to "live and let live" and demonstrate FOSS's superiority by *example*, rather than through hostility, or we can politicise the Linux kernel and end up ensuring that Linux doesn't work with any hardware that doesn't have an open standard interface method. In the long run the former will succeed much better than the latter, IMO, because unlike MS, we do not have dictatorial power over the market and can't force people to play by our rules. The latter will simply mean that high-end specialty hardware will simply not be available to Linux, resulting in many people having to stick with a proprietary OS because those are the only ones with drivers for their hardware. Working with the existing reality, and with its current limitations, at least means Linux can spread, along with the message about the advantages of open-source'd code. Lets save the Jihad for when Linux is in a much stronger position.
    17. Re:Great move ! by evilviper · · Score: 1
      next time I am in the market, I will definitely consider Matrox.

      I hate to throw reality into this discussion, but after about the 500 series, Matrox closed their specs, and drivers were binary-only... So you'd just be switching to another company that's in the same boat. If they don't impliment macrovision protection, they'll get influenced into it in the near future.
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  3. Non free badness by James_Duncan8181 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    And this is why I only run stuff with free drivers...

    Time for thanks for the DRI team, methinks.

    --
    "To any truly impartial person, it would be obvious that I am right."
    1. Re:Non free badness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Unfortunately it seems there are no free drivers that support 3D acceleration for anything but the lowest end and older graphics cards. The "nv" driver for nvidia cards only supports 2d, and the "radeon" driver (from DRI) only supports 3d acceleration in the Radeon 9200 and below - not 9500/9600/9700/9800.

      What this means is if you want to play 3D games in Linux, you have to use non-free drivers. I *wish* there was some hardware out there that was mid-range and had free drivers!

      Having said all that, I believe the article is about Windows, rather than Linux, though the restrictions might also exist on the Linux binary-only nvidia drivers.

    2. Re:Non free badness by James_Duncan8181 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      >The "nv" driver for nvidia cards only supports >2d, and the "radeon" driver (from DRI) only >supports 3d acceleration in the Radeon 9200 and >below - not 9500/9600/9700/9800. This is true. The nv dirver is currently *very* limited. I know that the 9200 will run UT2004 fine though - what more do you need on a Linux box? Much as I wish it were otherwise, the only thing on the scene that may stretch this is Doom 3, and if you want that I would reccomend waiting till launch date to buy as I have heard rumours that specs may eventually come out of ATI for the higher end chipsets.

      --
      "To any truly impartial person, it would be obvious that I am right."
    3. Re:Non free badness by tomstdenis · · Score: 0

      I have a GeForce 3 [ti200] and I can certainly tell you that software GL and nv drivers do not make for good gaming. UT2k4 runs awesome with the latest nvidia drivers and I wouldn't imagine trying otherwise.

      Note that you could use the nv drivers and the software renderer [I think it has one for linux... I never tried since I'm fine ;-)].

      Tom

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    4. Re:Non free badness by ZorinLynx · · Score: 5, Interesting

      This makes me wonder how much NVidia got bribed to enforce this stuff.

      I mean, why would a company like NV bother with this unless there was a financial incentive?

      It seems rather silly, overall. Why would anyone want to copy a DVD to a VHS tape? It pretty much kills the picture quality and destroys any special features the DVD might have had. Especially when you can just copy the raw MPEG stream from the disc!

    5. Re:Non free badness by latroM · · Score: 1

      >What this means is if you want to play 3D games in Linux, you have to use non-free drivers. It is not like that. I play often quake3's mod rq3 with matrox g450 which has Free drivers. There are also Free drivers for ATI's new cards, see http://dri.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/moin.cgi/ATI?ac tion=highlight&value=CategoryHardware. Freedom is good.

    6. Re:Non free badness by mrscorpio · · Score: 1

      Well back in the day when I had a roommate that wasn't my wife, it was because he would rent DVD's from Netflix and copy them to VHS since DVD-R was either too expensive or not available, I can't remember which.

      Now with cheap DVD burners and $30 players, there's really no reason.

      Chris

    7. Re:Non free badness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know that the 9200 will run UT2004 fine though - what more do you need on a Linux box?

      This is going to sound stupid. But my main reason for installing the proprietary ATI drivers is so that the OpenGL XScreenSavers run decently. Moibius at 3 frames a seconds! GLMatrix at 7! Horray for software rendering. And this is on a 2.4ghz machine.

    8. Re:Non free badness by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I know that the 9200 will run UT2004 fine though - what more do you need on a Linux box?

      Try turning up the resolution a little bit and see what happens, with all lighting and detail options set. Wait, you say that not all lighting and detail settings will even work on a 9200? I guess we have a disqualification.

      Just because you don't use Linux for anything cutting edge doesn't mean no one else wants to. Playing UT2004 on a 9200 is not going to give you the full experience.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    9. Re:Non free badness by drinkypoo · · Score: 1
      Even in this day, not everyone has a DVD player. Further of those who do, many of them want to play a movie some place they don't have a DVD player (like all the old people who have a DVD player in their house because their kids got it for them for christmas, but the RV still only has VHS.)

      Of course, that use would be covered by fair use laws... Thank you, MPAA!

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    10. Re:Non free badness by ian+mills · · Score: 1

      Um considering this has only to do with windows drivers I don't see how this matters. You can still watch DVD's in linux and put them on a TV with Nvidia. Try doing that with an ATI card with free drivers, it is in most cases impossible because ati non-binary drivers don't support tv-out.

    11. Re:Non free badness by BillyBlaze · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Even if the Linux binary drivers have this restriction, it wouldn't really matter. The way it works is, in order to license DVD playback technology, software must comply with a bunch of restrictions - region locking, not skipping ads or warnings, and telling the graphics card to turn on Macrovision (so you can't record the TV-out on a VCR). And now these NVidia cards won't tell the software Macrovision is on when it really isn't, so the software will refuse to play the DVD.

      The upshot is, if you use an unlicensed DVD player, like MPlayer, Ogle, or VLC, it will never even try to turn on Macrovision, so the driver change will have no effect. Granted, this may be illegal, in the Land of the Free at least. (IANAL)

    12. Re:Non free badness by rsmith-mac · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This makes me wonder how much NVidia got bribed to enforce this stuff.

      The real question is if it was a bribe, or a threat? Certainly, Macrovision and the DVD-forum wouldn't be too happy about a product not supporting Macrovision, so how likely would it be that they could/would attack Nvidia over their cards not supporting Macrovision? There's certainly a decent case for claiming that non-compliant cards are copyright removal device, setting Nvidia up for a DMCA suit.

    13. Re:Non free badness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      VCRs are frequently used as signal switches. I'm routing 2 PCs through my set top VCR. Its a real PIA that macrovision tries to make viewing DVD's via the VCR impossible.

      Luckily my new SVHS deck is smart enough to ignore Macrovision when not recording but I shouldn't need to spend more on a VCR just to bypass inappropriate copy protection.

    14. Re:Non free badness by The+Vulture · · Score: 1

      Just to clarify...

      The 9200 is hardly a "new" card. While the designation/release of the card might be relatively new, the card is actually using a variant of the chipset used in the older 8500. Therefore, the drivers support it.

      "New" cards would refer to the 9600/9700/9800 - there are no open source 3D drivers for them (although I'm using the XFree86 "radeon" driver for 2D on my 9700 right now).

      If you look at http://dri.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/moin.cgi/ATIRad eon, you'll see the breakdown of the cards. The 9200 has a RV280 core, whereas the 9600/9700/9800 have RV350/R300/R350 cores. R(v)300 and higher don't have open-source drivers, although the GATOS team claims to be working on something.

      -- Joe

    15. Re:Non free badness by dnobel · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Which brings up the question, are there any such DVD players for windows that won't require such macrovision crap?

    16. Re:Non free badness by BlueStrat · · Score: 1

      I'm running an Nvidia Geforce 2 MX/MX400 64Mb, on MDK 9.2, Intel P4 2.0Ghz 256MbDDR D845EBG2 Intel mobo. My Nvidia driver is NVIDIA-Linux-x86-1.0-5336-pkg1.run. I use mplayer and totem to play DVDs. So far, I've not had any problems as described. I will say I run some PLF (Penguin Liberation Front) packages and libs, not sure if that would have any effect, tho I tend to think not. Not sure *why* I'm not having trouble, but certainly not asking for any :-P, just glad everything works! (Also grateful to PLF for making it possible to actually use what I paid for on the O.S. of my choice.)

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    17. Re:Non free badness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If TV's can decode macrovision encoded video and display it without violating the DMCA then Nvidia's cards certainly can.

      Hm... that leads to an interesting idea actually!

      1. Release commercial video encoded with macrovision.

      2. Sue TV manufacuterers for making a "circumvention device".

      3. Profit!
      (And force DMCA to be killed.)

    18. Re:Non free badness by riprjak · · Score: 4, Funny

      Because macrovision is so important on a computer; I know that there are hunders of pirates out there with videos plugged in to the macrovision disabled TV out on their pc's just recording high quality DVD's onto vhs, watching and intently pausing and skipping adverts and messages.

      Naturally none of these guys ever just decrypts the data on the dvd, strips out just the movie and audio track and re-encodes in onto a vcd or dvd4 with an automagic program, no, as this is clearly much more difficult;

      Face it, Macrovision is done, obsolete; It is no longer an impediment, or even reasonable barrier to copy protection; its only remaining function is to prevent FAIR USE.

      As with my CD's, I rip all of my DVDs into divx files which I store on the hard drive of my HTPC so I can choose the video/audio I want from the comfort of the sofa; this is perfectly legal in Australia, we call it "media shifting"; for those of you in the US, I believe this is called "Piracy". You see, we still have to comit a crime before we get punished for it down here ;)

      Once upon a time, there was a Land of the Free, called the United States of America, where such freedoms were protected by law; but then an evil fairy by the name of Bono came along and stole all of those freedoms in the name of keeping a mouse eared tool of Nazi Propaganda in the hands of a large corporation (lets not think about why you would want to continue to own such a thing)long after the death of its misguided creator; now those who love freedom must run to hallowed sanctuaries like Australia or New Zealand, where we are still free... thought the dark evil stain of North American Copyright Law has leapt the big pond and now begins to tarnish our beautiful Australia; man, New Zealand is going to be crowded soon :)

      wow, where did that soapbox come from???
      sorry guys :)
      err!
      jak

    19. Re:Non free badness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > if you want to play 3D games in Linux,
      > you have to use non-free drivers.

      Well, I played 3D games just fine with a G400Max from Matrox and with the open DRI/kernel driver. I know, the G400Max is old now and never was a speed daemon anyway, but it was just fine for Quake3, Tuxracer and the whole bunch of Loki games even on a Pentium II. Newer machines *may* pick up some of the card shortcomings with more RAM (increased AGP Aperture!) and faster processors.

    20. Re:Non free badness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Video lan works on windows (and just about any other OS).

    21. Re:Non free badness by meringuoid · · Score: 1
      The "nv" driver for nvidia cards only supports 2d

      Who cares, if you want to watch DVDs? Use nv for watching DVDs on a noncompliant output, and use nvidia for gaming. So you need to restart the X server. How long does that take?

      And you're probably using mplayer anyway. You think mplayer honours Macrovision to begin with? As far as the nvidia driver knows it's just displaying ordinary video - the copyprotection crap was cracked long ago.

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    22. Re:Non free badness by evilviper · · Score: 2, Interesting
      this is perfectly legal in Australia, we call it "media shifting"; for those of you in the US, I believe this is called "Piracy".

      No, it's not called piracy at all. In fact, you couldn't find a single person ever getting in trouble for doing it.

      In fact, the only law it MIGHT run afoul of is the DMCA, but that's never been tested in court. So, it's legal until a judge says otherwise.
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    23. Re:Non free badness by evilviper · · Score: 1
      I know that the 9200 will run UT2004 fine though - what more do you need on a Linux box?

      TV-out! Or haven't you been paying attention?

      Last I checked, the open source drivers didn't support TV-out at all, so macrovision issues are a moot point anyhow.
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    24. Re:Non free badness by riprjak · · Score: 1

      guess you missed the sarcasm then :)

      perhaps it would be more correct to say "In the US this was originally called media shifting and held as legal for cassettes many year ago but the way things are rapidly heading in your country, it appears it will soon be illegal because MPAA and RIAA appear to have the ticket to write, rewrite and then freely interpret copyright law without fear of reprimand".

      I thought my way was funnier... I've been wrong before.

    25. Re:Non free badness by evilviper · · Score: 1
      I thought my way was funnier... I've been wrong before.

      From the moderation on your post, as far as I can tell, one person got the joke... The rest of us didn't.

      It happens, humor isn't an exact science.
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    26. Re:Non free badness by riprjak · · Score: 1

      Hmmmm, humor as an exact science... Now *that* would be an interesting thesis to write.

      err!
      jak.

  4. Restrictions on playing DVDs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Does this only apply to using some sort of MPEG decoding hardware on the NVIDIA card? If you're decoding in software them there's no way the driver would know that you are playing a DVD, is there?

    1. Re:Restrictions on playing DVDs by Malc · · Score: 3, Informative

      Recent versions of WinDVD choke frequently choke on my system with Macrovision errors. They don't seem to happen every time though. This also affects any product that ends up using WinDVD's DShow filters. A rather old Mediamatics DVMatics player works fine every time though. Their DShow filters still work really well after all these years too. Great little player. I have a GeForce DDR 256 in my system. I used TVTool 8 to toggle the TV out on and off, which got the WinDVD stuff working at one point.

    2. Re:Restrictions on playing DVDs by gabebear · · Score: 1
      If you're decoding in software them there's no way the driver would know that you are playing a DVD, is there?

      That seems to be the case, I doubt this will effect Linux people since we have been using illegal software(DeCSS) to watch DVDs anyway, I bet this mainly pertains to Windows apps like WinDVD. It's all silly anyway since you can still use an external VGA->TV converter. NVIDIA's TV-encoders aren't even all that good.

    3. Re:Restrictions on playing DVDs by Feanturi · · Score: 1

      The way I can get around macrovision if I want to duplicate a DVD is to simply capture it from my Playstation 2 onto my nvidia GeForce4 Ti 4600. There is of course some additional loss of quality from the recording method, it's not as sharp as it could be, but it's way way faster than decrypting and re-encoding. The PS/2 is indeed putting out macrovision, as can be seen if I run the signal through my Sony VHS. But the TV input on my GeForce card doesn't seem to be affected. An older capture card that I have in another computer IS affected by macrovision however, an ADS Channel Surfer from 1998 makes ribbons of colour across the input when macrovision is present.

    4. Re:Restrictions on playing DVDs by gabebear · · Score: 1
      That's a simple setup, but it only takes care of the decrypting and decoding parts of ripping a DVD to file, you are still re-encoding it, I wouldn't doubt you could actually do the decoding and decrypting parts faster than real-time on you computer, and the quality will be MUCH better.

      If you are copying from DVD to DVD-R then you usually don't need to do much more than copy the files from one to the other, the DVD format isn't all that complex.

    5. Re:Restrictions on playing DVDs by Feanturi · · Score: 1

      Well no, what I've found with ripping a DVD (to DivX, to go on an ordinary CD) in fully digital fashion is that it takes often many many hours. Maybe I've just tried crummy software.. By just capturing it, I lose some quality but can get the job done in the time it takes to watch the movie. If there is software that can do this faster without the analog loss I'd be interested in knowing its name, because I'm used to a digital DVD-rip taking well over 10 hours.

    6. Re:Restrictions on playing DVDs by gabebear · · Score: 1
      I've only actually ever ripped a DVD with mencoder and it went a bit slower than real-time on my OLD G3-400Mhz running OSX, I don't have any clue what settings I had, but some of those DIVX compression options are amazingly CPU intensive. I mainly make DVDs out of my own video.

      If your computer can play a DVD and also record live video, then a straight DVD -> DIVX shouldn't take more than 2X real-time. How long a video takes to encode depends a lot on the optimizations being done.

  5. Long live... by Lord+of+Ironhand · · Score: 3, Funny

    ... binary drivers!

    1. Re:Long live... by evilviper · · Score: 1
      Long live... ... binary drivers!

      Who cares? This pretty much only applies to Windows drivers, so you're already willing to put up with that, having an open-source driver isn't going to magically change everything.

      Besides, this is just typical /. over reaction. Without binary-only video-players, there's nothing to tell the driver it should be macrovision paranoid in the first place.

      I'll be the first to admit that it sucks to have binary drivers, but I think it sucks even more to buy hardware that you can't use for a couple years until a driver comes out. Find me a good videocard, with high-quality TV-out, hardware MPEG1/2 playback, and open source drivers, and I won't buy from NVidia anymore. Unfortunately, all the alternatives I've found are worse, not better.
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    2. Re:Long live... by Lord+of+Ironhand · · Score: 1
      • Who cares? This pretty much only applies to Windows drivers, so you're already willing to put up with that,
      The official Nvidia Linux driver is also closed-source. The fact that they haven't tried to implement weird restrictions in this doesn't say they won't.
      • having an open-source driver isn't going to magically change everything.
      Why not? Probably not magically, but if the driver source had been freely available this wouldn't have occured since someone would have hacked the Macrovision code out in a fraction of the time it took to hack Nvidia to hack it in. Are you trolling or just plain ignorant?
      • Besides, this is just typical /. over reaction. Without binary-only video-players, there's nothing to tell the driver it should be macrovision paranoid in the first place.
      I'm not sure I get your point here. You state yourself that without binary-only drivers the driver wouldn't be macrovision paranoid. Then why is my post "typical /. over reaction"? We both still agree that Macrovision == bad, right?
      • I'll be the first to admit that it sucks to have binary drivers, but I think it sucks even more to buy hardware that you can't use for a couple years until a driver comes out.
      Ofcourse it's better than nothing. I never said otherwise. I was merely pointing out that this article is confirming exactly what opensource proponents have been warning about all along. If everyone simply uses the binary driver and never even thinks about creating an opensource alternative, it will remain all there is.
      • Find me a good videocard, with high-quality TV-out, hardware MPEG1/2 playback, and open source drivers, and I won't buy from NVidia anymore. Unfortunately, all the alternatives I've found are worse, not better.
      If you don't need VGA-out in addition to the things you mention, you should try the PVR-250/PVR-350 cards from Hauppage; their TV-out quality it better than the TV-out from Nvidia cards. If you also want VGA-out you're indeed pretty much stuck with Nvidia, which is exactly why it's so important that we avoid being completely locked into the binary driver.
    3. Re:Long live... by evilviper · · Score: 1
      The official Nvidia Linux driver is also closed-source. The fact that they haven't tried to implement weird restrictions in this doesn't say they won't.

      As I said, there's no way a similar restriction can exist in the linux world, because the players are open-source.

      if the driver source had been freely available this wouldn't have occured

      My point was that having open source drivers on a closed-source OS will only just begin to solve the problems. Chances are, in a near-future version of windows, it won't accept unsigned drivers anyhow, so open source drivers won't even be an option. Hence the point that just drivers won't solve the problem. Windows IS the problem.

      Are you trolling or just plain ignorant?

      Don't bother calling me ignorant just because you don't understand something.

      I'm not sure I get your point here.

      You may not be able to tell the driver NOT to enable macrovision once the player tells it to do so, but you CAN use a player that won't tell the driver to enable macrovision in the first place. Clear enough?

      Then why is my post "typical /. over reaction"? We both still agree that Macrovision == bad, right?

      I called it typical /. over-reaction because this isn't removing some inherent right, it's just putting the NVidia driver on-par with all the other videocard drivers, and people aren't exactly boycotting those videocards (eg. ATI).

      you should try the PVR-250/PVR-350 cards from Hauppage;

      First off, I don't believe the driver is open-source at all. You are still stuck with using some firmware you need to take from the Hauppauge driver CD.

      Second, and perhaps more important, I want MPEG1/2 playback, but I don't want to be limited to only that. I also want to be able to display the desktop, and videos in other formats (MPEG4, Theora/VP3, Quicktime, etc), and I don't believe the PVR-350 supports that. (The newer 250s don't have TV-out, I have one myself)

      which is exactly why it's so important that we avoid being completely locked into the binary driver.

      This is one of the things I hate most... Complaining about problems without solutions. If you think the binary-only driver is bad, why aren't you doing something about it?
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    4. Re:Long live... by Lord+of+Ironhand · · Score: 1
      • As I said, there's no way a similar restriction can exist in the linux world, because the players are open-source.
      First off, similar restrictions could always be implemented using watermarking technology. Though that's not the point here. The point is that if a manufacturer releases closed-source drivers, any restrictions it can implement are very hard for the user to work around.
      • My point was that having open source drivers on a closed-source OS will only just begin to solve the problems. Chances are, in a near-future version of windows, it won't accept unsigned drivers anyhow, so open source drivers won't even be an option. Hence the point that just drivers won't solve the problem. Windows IS the problem.
      Okay, agreed. Seems like I misunderstood your first post.
      • Don't bother calling me ignorant just because you don't understand something.
      You're right, that was a slight overreaction on my part. Sorry.
      • First off, I don't believe the driver is open-source at all. You are still stuck with using some firmware you need to take from the Hauppauge driver CD.
      The Windows driver is ofcourse closed-source, but the Linux driver is not. Also, firmware != driver; in fact most devices (even those with perfect Linux support) use closed-source firmware. This is no real problem as long as the protocol for the driver to interface with the firmware is known.
      • Second, and perhaps more important, I want MPEG1/2 playback, but I don't want to be limited to only that. I also want to be able to display the desktop, and videos in other formats (MPEG4, Theora/VP3, Quicktime, etc), and I don't believe the PVR-350 supports that. (The newer 250s don't have TV-out, I have one myself)
      The PVR-350 output can be used as output from the MPEG decoder as well as framebuffer, as explained in this Howto. (disclaimer: I haven't tried this myself since I don't have the card (yet), but the Howto clearly implies it is possible)
      • This is one of the things I hate most... Complaining about problems without solutions. If you think the binary-only driver is bad, why aren't you doing something about it?
      If I understand it correctly, you think only developers, not users, are allowed to discuss this subject? I strongly disagree. Many (most?) open source projects rely on users to report problems. Users expressing a preference for something are usually a strong motivation for developers, and I don't see how this would be different.
    5. Re:Long live... by evilviper · · Score: 1
      This is no real problem as long as the protocol for the driver to interface with the firmware is known.

      It is a problem if a manufacturer decides to put some sort of copy protection measure in the firmware.

      you think only developers, not users, are allowed to discuss this subject?

      No, no. There are many ways non-developers can help an open source driver come about. Financial support is one. Perhaps convincing NVidia to release some documentation would be another in this case. Complaining on /. is not one of them.

      Users expressing a preference for something are usually a strong motivation for developers

      I completely disagree with you there. That rarely ever happens (except maybe with small fixes or features). There aren't hordes of programmers out there with lots of free time that are just looking for a huge project to take on...

      Developers make something because they need it, (or their employer needs it) and even 200,000 users begging for an open source driver on /. isn't going to convince anyone to develop one.
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  6. Alternatives... by hermeshome.se · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    There are alternatives to Nvidia. No one is forcing you to use Nvidia hardware. And I'm not only thinking about ATI. If you want TV-out, there are XGI and even Matrox.
    The question is if Nvidia enforce the same on the Linux-drivers?

    1. Re:Alternatives... by Egekrusher2K · · Score: 1

      That's great and all... if you don't plan on doing any gaming. Have you ever tried to game with a Matrox or XGI card? It doesn't work the greatest. Matrox's FASTEST video card pales in comparison to even a Geforce 2 Ultra in 3d performance, and I won't even start on XGI.

      --
      Listen to my experimental-industrial-techno!
    2. Re:Alternatives... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There are alternatives to Nvidia. No one is forcing you to use Nvidia hardware.

      WTF? Who needs this kind of preaching, guy? I doubt many that bought an Nvidia card were aware that this would happen, and I don't see anyone defending nvidia's specific decision here.

      I won't be buying an nvidia card again but I'm not about to just throw away the $300 one I have and buy a new one because of shitty drivers. Your message was totally unhelpful and borderline trolling.

    3. Re:Alternatives... by AKnightCowboy · · Score: 5, Insightful
      There are alternatives to Nvidia. No one is forcing you to use Nvidia hardware.

      That sounds like the excuse people get when they protest about Bush taking away their freedoms. Nobody's forcing you to live here you know, you could move to Canada hippie. The fact of the matter is, in the desktop graphics world Nvidia and ATI cards are the only viable options. The rest of the stuff out there is crap hardware-wise. Unfortunately both of these platforms are encumbered with binary-only drivers.

      Sure, there was a day when Matrox ruled the roost, but the days of 2D-only use are long gone by most people. Anyone hoping to play games will need to purchase an Nvidia or ATI card. Matrox is only good for spreadsheets, word processing, and CAD.

    4. Re:Alternatives... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And I'll be damned if it isn't my right to have smokin'-fast 3D graphics on my computer. We oughta replace that pesky second amendment with something guaranteeing our right to killer frame rates under DirectX.

    5. Re:Alternatives... by zurab · · Score: 0, Flamebait
      That sounds like the excuse people get when they protest about Bush taking away their freedoms. Nobody's forcing you to live here you know, you could move to Canada hippie.

      I don't see the analogy. Feel free to move yourself to any country where governments jail and execute people who express disagreements with them. You may feel much "safer" there, hippie.

      This has nothing to do with video cards and users complaints about added restrictions. NVIDIA probably had some commercial incentives to add extra Macrovision stuff in their drivers. Will it work out for the future? Who knows. Will it make other video cards more popular? Maybe - ATI was once an underdog trying to catch up too, you know.
    6. Re:Alternatives... by dave1212 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      No, Matrox cards are also used in the digital video and film industry, with their Parhelia cards ruling the roost. Their stuff works great with Final Cut Pro, AfterEffects, and Shake, but then you would be paying a lot more for your video card ($800 and up) than for any 'gaming' card.

    7. Re:Alternatives... by Wormholio · · Score: 2, Interesting
      There are alternatives to Nvidia. No one is forcing you to use Nvidia hardware.

      Actually, I didn't have much choice. I bought a laptop that I otherwise liked and only later found out it had an Nvidia chip. Next time I'll check the chip more closely, but for a laptop you have fewer choices than if you roll your own desktop machine.

      --
      "Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire." -- William Butler Yeats
  7. Then I guess... by freidog · · Score: 4, Informative

    it's a good thing, older Nvidia drivers are so easily found.

    1. Re:Then I guess... by Uncle+Gropey · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I keep a copy of the 1.08 WDM drivers locally just in case they ever start trying to cleanse the web of them. For some reason, that particular version doesn't seem to be aware of Macrovision at all, and I keep it for, er, driver historian interests.

    2. Re:Then I guess... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah, cuz they're reall hard to find on the nvidia site.

      http://www.nvidia.com/object/winxp-2k_archive.html

    3. Re:Then I guess... by antdude · · Score: 1

      True, but what if you need the updated drivers for games?

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
  8. Never had a problem like this... by thrill12 · · Score: 4, Informative

    ...using 44.09 drivers under 2000.
    Then again, I am using TVTool to get my Nvidia card to go TV-out in full-screen and without macrovision. Not that I need the last one, never interested in copying DVD to VHS anyway.

    --
    Slashdot: stuff for news, nerds that matter, matter for news, stuff that nerd
    1. Re:Never had a problem like this... by Qzukk · · Score: 2, Informative

      Not that copying dvds to vhs (why?!) is the only reason to disable macrovision out there. My family has a 15+ year old TV that still works perfectly fine, and was a giant screen for that day and age. Only problem is that it only has a coax input. So we have to plug everything into a VCR we bought. And to keep it all from looking like crap thanks to macrovision, we managed to find a vcr that was good enough to not pick up the signal. (Pretty nice deal, multiple RCA inputs, front inputs, probably a professional model.) Now our directv and dvds look just fine. (Directv has a coax out, which we used until we got the DVD player.)

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    2. Re:Never had a problem like this... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Did you mean to say "is not the only reason to disable macrovision out there"? I read the first line of your comment and got ready to disagree with it, but then the rest of your comment contained the rebuttal. Are you schizophrenic, or just typing too fast (or too slow?)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:Never had a problem like this... by thebigmacd · · Score: 1

      Reading comprehension problem anyone?
      The poster said "Not that copying dvds to vhs (why?!) is the only reason to disable macrovision out there."

    4. Re:Never had a problem like this... by antdude · · Score: 1

      TVTool isn't free, is it? Are there any free tools that is free to allow to view DVDs on TV?

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
  9. Just wait by Killjoy_NL · · Score: 5, Informative

    Somebody will keep hacking the reference drivers and put them online.

    Right now I'm using a different tool to circumvent various dvd protections.
    DVDIdle, no regions, no Macrovision, no nothing and it even lets me skip those annoying warnings "Thou shalt not reproduce this disc"

    --
    This is the sig that says NI (again)
    1. Re:Just wait by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      I simply use DVD shrink and REMOVE all that crud including the stupid and useless macrovision. put in disc, movie starts at beginning credits...

      I really dont want to bring my origional DVD's on a trip anyways and ANYONE can afford aset top DVD player for home.. ($29.00 for a cheapie that I DARE you to see a visual difference on a regular NTSC television from a $5000.00 Denon Dvd player.)

      for travel I only carry ripped dvd's if any, Mostly I carry divx's I made of the movie on the hard drive... and those all avoid the insanely stupid and useless restrictions that DVD's have on them. it blows my mind that macrovision is still even in business cince it is really easy to defeat even with a simple $39.00 "video stabilizer" from best buy that a normal non-thinking consumer can easily use.

      in fact macrovision has not produced an effective product the entire time the company existed.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    2. Re:Just wait by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Macrovision's product is highly effective. It is not 100% effective, but nothing with moving parts or which runs on electricity is, there's always some flaw in implementation or the reality of the situation. It serves to dissuade the majority of people from copying macrovision-"protected" (restricted) content, and that is good enough. You can't ever stop everyone, clearly, because if you can get the data out and put it on a TV, you can find a way to get the data out and put it on another tape.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:Just wait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Macrovision's product is highly effective.

      How have you determined that?

      It serves to dissuade the majority of people from copying macrovision-"protected" (restricted) content, and that is good enough.

      Again, how do you know this? Was there research? Are there statistics? Or is it just your guess cloaked as a factual assertion?

      At college I saw a lot of $2 bike locks chaining bikes to the rack at my dorm. There were virtually no bike thefts in my 4 years there. May I then conclude that the $2 bike locks are highly effective at dissuading the majority of people from taking bikes illicitly?

    4. Re:Just wait by antdude · · Score: 1

      DVDIdle isn't free though. Same TVTools AFAIK. Is there a freeware alternative?

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    5. Re:Just wait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It doesn't work as 99% of the people can buy a cheap device to disable it.

      It also stops a large portion of the public that WOULDN'T copy anything anyways... it simply serves to piss off most people.

  10. This is news? by Jarnis · · Score: 5, Informative

    The article is over an year old. (March 20, *2003*)

    Current nVidia drivers are 56.xx series.

    'News' indeed...

    1. Re:This is news? by ob1knob777 · · Score: 2, Informative

      And I was wondering why it took everyone so long to find out about this - I ran into this problem about a year ago and just reverted to older drivers. Not sure how much my 3D performance is slowed by using the older drivers, though,

    2. Re:This is news? by borgdows · · Score: 5, Funny

      Slashdot new motto: Oldies for Nerds. Stuff that doesn't matter anymore!

    3. Re:This is news? by EpsCylonB · · Score: 1

      You won't notice much difference with the 50.xx drivers unless you have a 5xxx card, if you have a geforce 4 or lower then you might as well use an old driver.

    4. Re:This is news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the White House, FBI and CIA all knew about 9-11 in 2000.

      Some people only upgrade their vidcards every few years at best, and a lot of people only upgrade drivers when necessary. So yes, this story is news to a lot of people. In fact, it's probably new information to more people than it's old hat to. So what's your problem? Just look at the comments - obviously a lot of people learned about this today because of this "rehashing".

      So a handful of people got annoyed - big deal. The positive effects are worth it. This is critical information both in terms of a warning and in terms of activism.

    5. Re:This is news? by ob1knob777 · · Score: 1

      Cool! I knew I stuck with my GF4 Ti-4200 for a reason. Well, that plus the fact that the 5xxx series cards require a huge noisy fan to keep them cool.

  11. The marketplace is robust by heironymouscoward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And resists such attempts to regulate its behaviour.

    By the same token, producers will continue to try to force their consumers into certain directions.

    It's just part of the grand evolutionary struggle between producers and consumers that has resulted in such wonderful things as P2P and the DCMA.

    --
    Ceci n'est pas une signature
    1. Re:The marketplace is robust by dustmite · · Score: 1

      Hmm ... I'm not convinced that the 'marketplace' will always be able to 'resist' ... can anyone think of some obvious examples where producers have historically been successful in enforcing some sort of regulation/restriction on (say, say, greater than 90% of) some market?

  12. I vote with my wallet. by Dark+Lord+Seth · · Score: 0

    Hello Ati, you seem to have a new customer. Meet... Me!

    1. Re:I vote with my wallet. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What makes you think that ATI doesn't enforce Macrovision rules?

    2. Re:I vote with my wallet. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      ATI has had this feature enforced for the past 11 years. Nice try, trollman.

    3. Re:I vote with my wallet. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are an idiot. This story is over a year old. New customer indeed!

  13. Competition by preposterity · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Isn't this what competition is all about? I'm sure ATI will appreciate the extra business they gain from a gaffe by their main competitor.

    1. Re:Competition by rock_climbing_guy · · Score: 1
      Isn't this what competition is all about? I'm sure ATI will appreciate the extra business they gain from a gaffe by their main competitor.

      I hate to be fatalistic, but honestly, how many NVidia customers do you think will even notice this story?

      --
      Wh47 d1d j00 541, 31337 15n't t3h r0xor5 ne m0r3???
  14. DRM enforced bit by bit by SkunkAh · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I guess DRM is being enforced by the large manufactors bit by bit, I guess that in 5 years all the software/hardware from the large vendors will have DRM build in and will be enforcing it!

    And in the long run this will mean you can't even decide for your self what you can do with your computer/software, no this decision will be made by your vendor!

    1. Re:DRM enforced bit by bit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      And in the long run this will mean you can't even decide for your self what you can do with your computer/software, no this decision will be made by your vendor!

      I think you meant to say, "this decision will be made by my parents."

    2. Re:DRM enforced bit by bit by SubtleNuance · · Score: 1

      Only in the USA. Remember, the rest of the world is a much larger marketplace, with very different (more citizen-friendly) rules.

    3. Re:DRM enforced bit by bit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only until they sign some stupid treaty to get it.

      Half this crap here is from treaties. BY LAW if we sign that treaty we must make law that enforces it. In this case the DMCA. It was to come into compilance with the 'rest of the world'. Which basicly meant some countries in Europe. Which is why EVEN IF the DMCA got to the supreme court they would be compeled to rule it is legal. Not because they like it or that it goes against our other laws. But because it is the enforcement of a treaty.

      Free trade my ass.

    4. Re:DRM enforced bit by bit by SubtleNuance · · Score: 1

      Do some research. You will discover that it was the USA -- via the WIPO -- that drove the WIPO Copyright Treaty that the DMCA is a USA embodiment-of.

      The USA sought the WIPO treaty in order to pass the DMCA. Currently, the USA has the MOST onerous digital-copyright control policies in the world. Others have SIGNED the treaty, but none excelled at implementation like the USA (which should speak to their motivation/place/participation in the whole process)

  15. mplayer by FrostedWheat · · Score: 1

    What's to stop someone loading a Win32 version of mplayer? Or MPC? I doubt they would tell the driver to start the Marcovision corruption.

  16. revelations from my desk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    1. People will get around it as fast as they bring it in.

    2. Nvidia will sell a few less units because of this, (what a foolish business strategy). God, have they not heard of a successful strategy called "Ethics?, profit is prime"

    3. Macrovision is a bit pointless when you can rip the dvd straight from the dvdrom drive. Having it there will save the film industry sum in total ZERO.

    These obvious statements have been brought to you by another anonymous coward.

    1. Re:revelations from my desk by James+Lewis · · Score: 2, Insightful
      "God, have they not heard of a successful strategy called "Ethics?, profit is prime""

      I don't see anything unethical about what they are doing. Like everyone else, I find it annoying in the extreme that I should be inconvenienced by DRM protection. However, implementing DRM isn't unethical, in fact, it is easily argued that it IS ethical to try to stop people from using your product to break the law, especially in this case where there is no proof that Nvidia will benifit financially from this move.

      That said, I think it a bad business move for anyone to enforce measures that don't prevent copyright circumvention at all, with the result that they only inconvenience people. It may not be unethical, but it certainly shows a lack of respect for the needs of the consumer. That is why I think it absurd that removing DRM protection just so that you CAN use a product in a legal way should be illegal. The politicians that brought about the DMCA had no consideration for the rights of the consumer, which is their JOB to protect, and were swayed by the financial backing of companies. That I DO fine unethical, just not DRM itself.

    2. Re:revelations from my desk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      However, implementing DRM isn't unethical, in fact, it is easily argued that it IS ethical to try to stop people from using your product to break the law

      It is unethical, because it stops people from excersizing fair use at the same time that it prevents people from breaking the law. If that is a good thing, I might as well be locked up in a jail cell, just in case I decide to commit a crime.

      If a product can't differentiate between fair use (copying a DVD to VHS so that it can be watched in the bedroom, etc) and illegal use, it should just stay out of the way. Otherwise it violates the rights of law abiding citizens, and that is unethical.

    3. Re:revelations from my desk by SillyNickName4me · · Score: 4, Insightful
      However, implementing DRM isn't unethical, in fact, it is easily argued that it IS ethical to try to stop people from using your product to break the law


      When I buy a videotape I pay a levy due to the fact that I have a right to make a personal copy of a copyrighted work on it.


      How is it ethical for the movie industrie and hardware producers to take away that possibility while on the other side I AM PAYING FOR IT ???


      Sorry but it is not ethical, and it doesn't stop piracy either, never did.

    4. Re:revelations from my desk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      When I buy a videotape I pay a levy due to the fact that I have a right to make a personal copy of a copyrighted work on it.

      Yes, but the distributor of that video tape does not have an obligation to make it easy for you to exercise that right. Does a book publisher have an obligation to supply you with a fully searchable CD-ROM copy of a book's text along with the book, so you can exercise your fair use rights to copy a few pages here and there?

    5. Re:revelations from my desk by SillyNickName4me · · Score: 1

      They do not have to make it easy.

      However, using a technical measure to prevent copying, together with DMCA (or in my case the EU copyright directive, which is equivalent) makes that it is now ILLEGAL to excersice my right.

      Not making it easy is ok. Makign it difficult and illegal on purpose while havign peopel pay for the right is simply unethical.

    6. Re:revelations from my desk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Otherwise it violates the rights of law abiding citizens, and that is unethical.

      No. Rights are not being violated here. Fair use doctrine is an assurance that you will be free from civil or criminal guilt if you perform certain activities, like making personal backups and such. It is not a guarantee that those activities will be made easy for you to perform. This is an important distinction. If that were the case, then every book published would have to have a "lay-flat" binding so it is easy to copy a few pages. Or, the book would have to come with a CD-ROM containing the full text so you could print out a few pages.

      That's why there is an important distinction between the actions of private companies employing copy protection measures, and laws like the DMCA. In the latter case, the government is restricting our fair use rights by allowing prosecution or civil lawsuits for activities which could be used for otherwise legal purposes.

      DRM alone, outside of the problems with the DMCA, is simply part of a private entity's prerogative to package content in any way it sees fit; and you as a consumer are free to make the choice as to whether whether that packaging is acceptable to you.

    7. Re:revelations from my desk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I actually meant that they should take the unethical route like everybody else and not bother with the macrovision. Especially when as many (and myself) have pointed out, circumnavigating this will be possible.

      Not that I wish to debate the legitimacy of having macrovision on as an ethical business practice. The point was more focussed on the fact that in a cut throat industry like this, it would be very unwise for a company to suddenly develop a conscience. Best to continue to do as much as you can (fiddle drivers to peak in benchmarks etc) to get your product selling.

    8. Re:revelations from my desk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting
      However, using a technical measure to prevent copying, together with DMCA (or in my case the EU copyright directive, which is equivalent) makes that it is now ILLEGAL to excersice my right.

      I agree 100%. But the problem you and I both have here lies with the DMCA, not DRM. Thus it is the government that is in the wrong here. And yes I know that content providers pushed for the DMCA, and they were wrong in doing so.

      I personally believe that the DMCA ought to be completely and utterly repealed. And content providers simply should be allowed to decide for themselves what level of DRM is sufficient to allow them to make sufficient profit; and we as consumers simply should be allowed to decide for ourselves if we will put up with it. It is the content provider's duty to insure that the DRM is secure enough for their purposes; and if we consumers crack it, tough luck. The government ought to stay out of it.

    9. Re:revelations from my desk by mcg1969 · · Score: 1

      I have a feeling that they may have been notified of certain contractual obligations, maybe even threatened quietly with lawsuits. I'm sure they wouldn't have bothered adding Macrovision unless they had been "reminded" to do so.

    10. Re:revelations from my desk by SillyNickName4me · · Score: 1

      Not at all. The DMCA (or in my case the EU copyright directive) makes it illegal. This was pushed for by content providers, which was not very ethical at all.

      Hardware manufacterors who try to play nice with those content providers are definitely not beign ethical, they support an unethical practise knowingly.

      That has nothign to do with DMCA or equivalent laws, it has everything to do with a useless (for DRM purposes) bit of technology that achieves one single thing, making it difficult on purpose for people to make use of rights they are paying for.

      It in no way prevents peopel who want to pirate the stuff, it ONLY, I repeat, ONLY hurts the legitimate user.

      Sorry, but DMCA or not, this is not ethical, neither from hardware or content providers. The DMCA just makes it worse, but senseless use of DRM is the problem here.

    11. Re:revelations from my desk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      It in no way prevents peopel who want to pirate the stuff, it ONLY, I repeat, ONLY hurts the legitimate user.

      You seem to be putting people into only one of two categories: the people who are determined to be pirates as a moneymaking venture, and everyone else.

      But there is, in fact, a third category: people who normally wouldn't pirate content, but do so when it's so darn easy. The Napster/Gnutella phenomenon has amply demonstrated that this group exists. We can argue all we want about whether file sharing is wrong, or whether or not content providers would do a better business by embracing file sharing instead of fighting it. But the fact remains that very little of what occurs on file sharing networks constitutes fair use; most falls clearly outside of its bounds.

      So I agree with you that any attempt to thwart hardcore pirates is likely to fail. And you know what? I'll bet content providers feel the same way. But that's not who they're trying to stop. They are trying to stop this third category, these "casual" pirates, and in that sense DRM can be reasonably effective. To prove me wrong, you'd have to point me to a web site where I can trade uncompressed DVD-Audio and SACD content.

      Your claim is false, then, the only legitimate users are harmed by DRM.

      Finally, I might ask: under what system of ethics do you ascribe that this is unethical? It would be one thing if we were talking about food or medicine or other necessities. But we're not: we're talking about entertainment and related goods. So frankly I think you'd have a pretty tough case to make that DRM somehow truly harms anyone. Inconvenient, yes. Harmful, no. And again, the consumer is free not to use said content, because it is not a necessity.

    12. Re:revelations from my desk by SillyNickName4me · · Score: 1

      You seem to be putting people into only one of two categories: the people who are determined to be pirates as a moneymaking venture, and everyone else.

      I differentiate between uses that violate copyrigth law and those that don't. The motivation for the violation is only really relevant for how much money someone can justify to throw at the problem. For as far as content providers are concerned both need to be stopped.

      But there is, in fact, a third category: people who normally wouldn't pirate content, but do so when it's so darn easy.

      Yes, companies like Sony in fact played on that by selling tapedrives that allowed for high speed copying...

      The Napster/Gnutella phenomenon has amply demonstrated that this group exists.

      That was already demonstrated by the amount of record/tape to tape copying done with traditional audio equipment.

      We can argue all we want about whether file sharing is wrong, or whether or not content providers would do a better business by embracing file sharing instead of fighting it. But the fact remains that very little of what occurs on file sharing networks constitutes fair use; most falls clearly outside of its bounds.

      Filesharing is a distribution medium. Copying and distributing are 2 seperate issues, and 2 seperate exclusive rights in copyright law.

      But the whole p2p issue is irrelevant to this because macrovision in no way hinders ripping a DVD and posting a divx.

      Also, whatever the motivations are for macrovision and similar measures, it is still unethical to first force a levy scheme on us and then make it impossible to use what we pay for. Solution, if they insist on this stuff, then remove the levy.

    13. Re:revelations from my desk by Pofy · · Score: 1

      >...together with DMCA (or in my case the EU
      >copyright directive, which is equivalent)...

      I don't think this is really true. It is my understanding that the DMCA is not only about proetction of copying (or other copyright "rights") but also about protection for access. This is not true for the EU directive. Sure, some European countries have expanded their implementation to include such things too.

      If one look at the Swedish proposed implementation (I don't think the final proposal is done yet though), it is very specific in that only protection that protect the rights granted to copyright holders are to be considered. Copying is such a thing, access is not. Thus, a protection system that protects access (and not copying) you are free to cicumvent all you want. And yes, a protection that mixes what it protectes, you will be allowed to circumvent too.

      So no, the EU directiove does not seem to equal the DMCA in that case which is a significant difference in my opinion.

    14. Re:revelations from my desk by Rakarra · · Score: 1
      No. Rights are not being violated here. Fair use doctrine is an assurance that you will be free from civil or criminal guilt if you perform certain activities, like making personal backups and such. It is not a guarantee that those activities will be made easy for you to perform.

      Though the mini-discussion isn't about the legal fair use rights, but the moral rights.

  17. Three cheers for NVidia and Macrovision by DarkkOne · · Score: 1

    It's always good to intentionally BREAK your hardware with driver updates. Isn't the purpose of a version update generally to IMPROVE functionality, compatibility, and performance?

  18. Re:Alternatives = none? by sygin · · Score: 2, Informative

    Macrovision is a company that developed the a copy protection system to protect VHS tapes from bieng copied. EVERY "new" VCR has the Macrovision system designed into it.

    This system messes with the video signal that leaves
    the device in such a way as to confuse the AGC (automatic gain control) in he video signal receiver (TV), which in turn screws up the picture.

    All new digital products that output an analog video signal will/should have this system designed into them, to prevent the analog signal bieng copied.

    Thios includes cable, satellite boxes, video cards etc.

    --
    Don't make your problems my problems!
  19. hrmph.. just return it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you buy a movie and it won't work. It's defective, it doesn't work.

    Return it. If Macrovision wants to be that big of a a-hole about stuff, then just don't give them your money.

    Pretty simple, realy.

    It's not like it's your right to view movies or anything, so if they make products that you can't use... don't use them!

  20. 2 words by u-238 · · Score: 2, Informative

    slysoft's AnyDVD.

    runs in the background like a service and stealthily removes all region/macrovision bullshit, works like a charm on my Ti4400 GF4 + latest 56.72 drivers

    1. Re:2 words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      slysoft's AnyDVD.

      runs in the background like a service and stealthily removes all region/macrovision bullshit, works like a charm on my Ti4400 GF4 + latest 56.72 drivers


      Much like the "downgrade your driver" method, this breaks functionality and should be unnecessary.

      Slysoft software gets blacklisted as much as Alcohol and Daemon Tools. Which means that you will have to stop the service or possibly uninstall it completely or modify its registry entries in order to use new or recently patched games (or any other software using blacklist methods).

  21. MOD PARENT DOWN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It is much funnier to watch people get all wound up over this like it actually impacts their petty, misinformed existences.

    1. Re:MOD PARENT DOWN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Indeed, I mean why else read slashdot other than to watch a bunch of self-righteous nerds yammer on about trivial shit?

  22. ATI Radeon DVD Player and copy protection by danila · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Copied from here:

    I was just reading about the DVD player included with the ATI Radeon All In Wonder series. It says that screen captures and other things I might want to do will not function if the DVD is copy protected. Here is the quote from the ATI document -

    Recording from a Source Encoded with Analog Copy Protection

    The ATI ALL-IN-WONDER? products detect analog copy protection on the input source and will refuse to capture video from such sources. The record button automatically becomes disabled. Further, TV-ON-DEMAND is not possible with an analog copy protected source.

    Since for all practical purposes there are only two video-card manufacturers and both of them enforce Macrovision DRM, I have no other choice than avoid buying DVDs, at least the legit ones. So it's DivX or DVD-R from P2P or a pirated DVD.

    P.S. I wish there was a digital freedom fighters group with a PayPal account.

    --
    Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
    1. Re:ATI Radeon DVD Player and copy protection by DgWatters0 · · Score: 5, Informative
      P.S. I wish there was a digital freedom fighters group with a PayPal account.

      How about the good old EFF? They claim to be "defending freedom in the digital world" which is exactly what you wished for. You can join or just donate and choose paypal as payment method.

    2. Re:ATI Radeon DVD Player and copy protection by Wyzard · · Score: 3, Informative
      I wish there was a digital freedom fighters group with a PayPal account.

      http://www.eff.org/

  23. Good thing the article is a year old by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You've probably been running the newer drivers all this time as the article is over a year old.

    My advice: Don't be a monkey-boy.

  24. Macrovision -hehhehheh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All you need is one of those rat-shack 4 way switcher/modulator boxes. Or at circuit city they have a nicer one that is made of metal instead of plastic and it feels heavier since it has a transformer rectumfryer for the power supply. I noticed the ma'crap'rovision the first day, it's an annoyance only. The only thing I didn't like was the TV-out (why even have it if it don't friggin work without TVtool?) I guess it does work, in that respect. I've yet to be needing an NLE that spews out svideo/composite, since we got 1394. Anyway I don't care because I am CREATING content not copying it. I wish they had some fscking cheap miniDV decks though!!!! Hella wearing out my cameras with this crap. I only see like Sony And Panasonic make em or I ain't looking in the right place.... and they're what USD $2.5k
    ouch... I rather save that for another 3CCD

    1. Re:Macrovision -hehhehheh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh you know nothing dont you...

      and cince you are using crap cameras it dont matter.

      I shoot with 3 - Canon Xl-1s cameras, and I use the dirt cheap $350.00 JVC and SONY Dv cameras as my input decks... hell those things are throw away junk compared to a real camera so I go that route with throw away junk cameras as decks. I do Have one DVpro deck that can read mini-dv but I dont waste a $1200.00 deck with capture duties, I use it only to lay out to DVpro to send to professional broadcast houses for airing of the commercials or TV shows I produce here in my home. (I have had 3 shorts and 2 documentaries aired on PBS and other local channels.... how many have YOU Done?

      get a clue, try and actually learn so you dont look like a lame poser.

      BTW, a TBC is the easiest way to scrub macrovision... and you dont hose your video quality with low-grade modulator crap like you think works.

  25. ATI 4 life! by dotz · · Score: 2, Troll

    I have used a cheap NVidia Riva TNT since about 2 years; Linux drivers were buggy and hanged the machine from time to time; same for FreeBSD drivers - they made machine unstable.

    As I've bought a bigger CRT display (21'), it came out, that there is some "ghosting" effect on that cheap NVidia, and I need to replace it with something better, just because my cheap clone was based on the hardware unsuitable for big displays. I have heard, that ATI somehow "supports" opensource communities - or at least gives them more information, than NVidia team.

    I've bought Radeon 9200 and tried FreeBSD's 4.9 DRI + XFree86 4.3.0 drivers with it.

    I was stunned. Everything worked as expected, no problems at all, no hangs, no sudden reboots, no nothing.

    Of cource, NVidia is making some progress in the drivers stability; also, their equipment for sure gets better each day - but I was so shocked with the stability & ease of setup of opensource ATI drivers, that I am not going to buy/recommend any other graphics cards.

    1. Re:ATI 4 life! by Curtman · · Score: 5, Informative

      I have heard, that ATI somehow "supports" opensource communities - or at least gives them more information, than NVidia team.

      Used to support the open source communities would be more like it. I've been using ATI cards for as long as I can remember.

      There was a time when ATI did things for us like funding Precision Insight to develop the open source Radeon driver in the first place. They used to be very good about providing specifications, although under an NDA which for some bizarre reason they require developers to sign, but allow them to publish drivers based on their contents. At the time they were the underdog in the 3D graphics market though.

      Now a days though, they don't fund any OSS development, and provide a binary driver instead. They will not give you specifications for any cards until they are close to their end-of-life. DRI and Gatos have done great work despite this, but ATI shouldn't be congratulated on today's treatment of the open source community.

      They still do have specs available from the developer relations page under NDA. But I doubt you'll get anything from them that would be considered current hardware.

    2. Re:ATI 4 life! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      hmmm, do I feed the troll or mod him down? I guess I'll respond, or other people may be to dumb to understand why.

      This guy is comparing a brand new card from ATI to one of the oldest cards ever made by nvidia. IF the story is even true, there are pleny of things that could have happened with the Riva TNT, the least of which being physical defects from the sheer age of the card.

      Please, read a post and use common sense before modding mindless drivel like the parent post up.

    3. Re:ATI 4 life! by Echnin · · Score: 1

      "I've bought a bigger CRT display (21')"

      Wow. That is pretty big.

      --
      Lalala
    4. Re:ATI 4 life! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Troll

      I drove a 79 Chevette for years, it was horrible. It was rusty, kept stalling and burned oil.

      I replaced it with a 2004 VW Jetta.
      I was stunned.

      Everything worked as expected, no problems at all, no hangs, no sudden reboots, no nothing.

      At least try and compare recent video cards.

    5. Re:ATI 4 life! by dotz · · Score: 1

      And "this anonymous coward" perhaps didn't get the idea, that the nvidia clone was no-brand and cheap and it wasn't suited for such displays by definition. I never said NVidias have loosy display, because this depends on the extra parts on the hardware, not the chip itself - but I do say, that NVidia drivers suck bad, when compared to opensource ones for ATI. That's all. "If the story is even true"... jeez christ.

    6. Re:ATI 4 life! by GreyPoopon · · Score: 1
      "I've bought a bigger CRT display (21')"

      About three days after I started my job at the company I'm at now, they brought all my equipment in and unpacked it. Brand new Thinkpad laptop with docking station, keyboard and mouse. Then they plopped in this monstrous 22" trinitron monitor. I had to resist the urge for the next several weeks to bow to it each morning when I came into the office. Sure, there are bigger monitors out there, but I've never seen anything like it given to a software developer without a really solid business case.

      --

      GreyPoopon
      --
      Why is it I can write insightful comments but can't come up with a clever signature?

    7. Re:ATI 4 life! by Ruie · · Score: 3, Interesting
      ATI does provide specifications - under NDA, but it allows publishing open source code.

      The problem with current hardware is that it became very complex, so one needs much more time per single session of coding to achieve something useful. Long stretches of spare time are hard to come by.

      Also, I want to correct you - it was Weather Channel that funded development of 3d DRI driver for radeon 8500 and 9200 cards, not ATI. (see Tungsten Graphics)

      Also ATI does provide sample cards to developers which is big help (hard to find bugs in drivers without testing on real hardware).

    8. Re:ATI 4 life! by numark · · Score: 1

      I think the joke was more along the lines that the grandparent put a single quote after the number, instead of a double quote. Therefore instead of saying 21" (21 inches) they said 21' (21 feet) ;)

      --
      Want Slashdot headlines on your site? Try SlashHead
    9. Re:ATI 4 life! by Curtman · · Score: 3, Informative
      ATI does provide specifications - under NDA, but it allows publishing open source code.

      I'm pretty sure that's what I said. What they don't do, is provide the specs for the current generation of hardware.

      it was Weather Channel that funded development of 3d DRI driver for radeon 8500 and 9200 cards, not ATI

      Let me refer you to an interview with Daryl Strauss of Precision Insight:

      • Steven: What other companies have contracted Precision Insight to write DRI drivers? Are you working on drivers for any other cards?
        Daryl: The only companies that have announced anything publicly are 3dfx, ATI and Intel.


      As well as the XFree86 documentation:
      • The XFree86 4 driver was funded by ATI and was donated to The XFree86 Project by:

      • Precision Insight, Inc.
        Cedar Park, TX
        USA


      I was mistaken in that it was the Rage128 driver that was funded by ATI, and then the Weather Channel funded that to be extended to the Radeon GPU.

      Also ATI does provide sample cards to developers which is big help

      That is true. I guess they do deserve some credit for that.
    10. Re:ATI 4 life! by Curtman · · Score: 1

      Oh, and just let me say, I have no intention of disputing anything said by THE Vladimir Dergachev. I personally would give you much more credit than ATI for your contributions to the Open Source driver. I hold a tremendous amount of respect for you and your contributions. Thanks so very much for all your hard work.

    11. Re:ATI 4 life! by True+Grit · · Score: 1
      1. but I do say, that NVidia drivers suck bad, when compared to opensource ones for ATI


      ATI doesn't have opensource drivers any more than Nvidia does. Yes, there is the unaccelerated version for Nvidia cards called "nv" which is part of XFree86, and ATI has DRI drivers for its older cards, but you CAN'T find an opensource driver implementing hardware-accelerated 3D from EITHER company for any of their RECENT cards.
    12. Re:ATI 4 life! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have to be a member of the XFree86 core team to get any specs from ATI under a NDA. So basically, it's worthless.

      Specs under NDA == no specs at all.

    13. Re:ATI 4 life! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know where you got that idea from. But you couldn't be more wrong.

    14. Re:ATI 4 life! by GreyPoopon · · Score: 1
      I think the joke was more along the lines that the grandparent put a single quote after the number, instead of a double quote.

      Ooops. Missed that entirely. Thanks for breaking it to me gently. :-)

      --

      GreyPoopon
      --
      Why is it I can write insightful comments but can't come up with a clever signature?

  26. Only applies if you use an approved DVD player by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Of course, it only works if the DVD software tells it to use macrovision. Therefore the solution is simple, use DVD playing software that either does not enable macrovision or is hacked to play with macrovision disabled. This means either apply a patch to WinDVD or PowerDVD, or just use a DVD player based on libdvdcss. Fortunately, any linux based DVD player will not be affected as none of them will try to use macrovision or any other restriction system. For windows users, this will only encourage more people to hack around it, just like buggy copy protection (such as Safedisc 0.91 on Ultima IX) encourages people to crack the game because even the original game CDs will not work.

    1. Re:Only applies if you use an approved DVD player by SigNick · · Score: 1

      Unfortunentaly at least PowerDVD 5 doesn't have such patch, my only solution was to rip all my DVDs and encode them to xvid.

      There are patches for some VERY old Detonators, does anyone know whether Catalyst 4.x series have this "feature"?

      --
      Capitalization is the difference between "Helping your uncle jack off a horse" and "Helping your uncle Jack off a horse"
    2. Re:Only applies if you use an approved DVD player by bogie · · Score: 1

      As others have mentioned you can use VideoLan Client. Its a basic but nice player that plays just about anything you can imagine. Its also Free.

      --
      If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
  27. Software playback ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What still hasn't been answered: How does the Driver know there's a DVD being played ? Can playback of pure software decoding be prevented ? Which players are affected ? All Windows players ? What about Linux, xine & mplayer ?

  28. Re:The software must cooperate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    The driver knows a DVD is being played because in most cases the DVD software will tell the driver to use macrovision. Note that only DVDs with macrovision enabled will be affected, as macrovision is an optional feature. If you use software such as xine or mplayer that does not tell the driver to enable macrovision, or you use something like AnyDVD that makes all DVDs look as if they have no CSS, no macrovision, and are for all regions, you will be fine. You could also hack the software player itself, but why bother when you can get something like the AnyDVD software does it transparently.

  29. Windows or Linux? by farrellj · · Score: 1, Redundant

    I personally don't play DVDs under Windows, my main platform is Linux. Has anyone confirmed this DRM has been included in the Linux Drivers, and if it really works?

    ttyl
    Farrell

    --
    CAN-CON 2019 - Ottawa's only book oriented Science Fiction Convention! October 18-20, Sheraton Hotel, Ottawa, Canada h
    1. Re:Windows or Linux? by Dave2+Wickham · · Score: 4, Informative

      It requires player support, so no. I highly doubt Xine/Ogle/MPlayer will implement Macrovision.

  30. Re:Why record when you can rip? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Why bother to record from a standalone DVD player when you can just rip the DVD using DVD Decrypter (and DVDShrink if necessary). It will be much better quality as there is no analog conversion.

  31. Re:Alternatives = none? by Lord+Kano · · Score: 1

    Thios includes cable, satellite boxes, video cards etc.

    I have never had a problem with recording the analog output from a Satellite of Cable decoder.

    LK

    --
    "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
  32. almost hesitate to mention it by _Shorty-dammit · · Score: 5, Interesting

    for fear of reprisal towards them/him, but TVTool works just fine for disabling Macrovision with NVIDIA cards. At least with the GF3 in my HTPC machine I get no complaints from any DVD player software with TVTool's Macrovision disable option turned on. And I've been updating its drivers with every official release up until 53.03, just got lazy with the post-53.03 releases cuz everything works.

    1. Re:almost hesitate to mention it by EddyGL · · Score: 0

      However you seem to missing the point.. chances are your card's TV out chip DOES support macrovision ( though personally I'd no idea what you chip might be), therefore you have no problems.
      My older GeForce2 MX400 contains a Conexant Bt868 which does not support macrovision. I can not watch DVDs no matter what I do, even using TV Tool, PowerDVD XP will complain "cannot ply cpoy protected DVD with TV Out enabled" or some similar message. Even if I DISABLE the Overlay video mirroring feature.
      I have been stuck using a really old 22.80 version of the driver under XP, since it's the only version where everything worked as it's supposed to, with my card, AND I can play DVDs.
      I have tried the newest drivers, and they also work great, but, I can't play DVDs... SO back to 22.80.

  33. EFF by YetAnotherName · · Score: 4, Informative

    EFF

    PayPal accepted, amongst other methods.

    1. Re:EFF by danila · · Score: 1

      I would definitely donate to them when I can afford that, but I was thinking about something different - something with an Al Quaeda twist. What is going on in regards to our freedoms is abuse of the system, plain and simple. We (and EFF), on the other hand, are forced to play by the rules, making our struggle ineffective. As much as I am white and fluffy, I would love if some organisation would brutally murder Canadian Minister of Heritage, Macrovision CEO, RIAA executive team and every other evil and corrupt businessman and politician. For that I would open my wallet right now.

      --
      Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
    2. Re:EFF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      oh man, i love you.

  34. The sum total of my experience with Macrovision by JessLeah · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I tend to use a lot of odd/eclectic combinations of hardware. Once, I had an old Apple II RGB monitor (with an RCA-style plug in the back) which I used to display DVD video output from an old Creative Labs DxR2 decoder. Until I disabled Macrovision, I could not watch the movies I legally paid for (<sarcasm>from Wal-Mart, like a Good American(TM)</sarcasm>). So I had to break the law to watch what I legally paid for. (For the record, I was also using a Linux box to play the DVD, so <sarcasm>obviously I'm some sort of evil hacker criminal</sarcasm>).

    At another point, I had a set-top DVD player, and was trying to use it with an old TV player which had only a coaxial RF input. So at first I passed the signal through a VCR, which of course made Macrovision wreck the signal (image fading in and out, just like in the previous example). Until I scrapped an old Nintendo RF adaptor (which is probably DMCA-illegal for some convoluted reason also-- I mean, hell ,<sarcasm>'Consumers' have no right to open up products they paid for</sarcasm>) and rebuilt it into a generalized RCA-to-coax adaptor suitable for use on the DVD player, I couldn't play my (again legally paid for at a Good American Retail Outlet(TM)) DVDs.

    So, let's review. Macrovision has made it more difficult for me to play legally-owned DVDs. And it's pissed me off even more at the MPAA for getting in bed with those fucktards. So... what, again, does Macrovision do to decrease piracy? I can testify that it makes me more interested in disobeying the MPAA cartel's stupid rules, since all it seems to do is annoy people and force them to buy (or build) more equipment...

    1. Re:The sum total of my experience with Macrovision by merdark · · Score: 1

      At another point, I had a set-top DVD player, and was trying to use it with an old TV player which had only a coaxial RF input. So at first I passed the signal through a VCR, which of course made Macrovision wreck the signal (image fading in and out, just like in the previous example).

      Dammit! This happened to me once too, but I didn't know what caused it. Stupid dumb macrovision crap!

    2. Re:The sum total of my experience with Macrovision by demon · · Score: 1

      I'm sure your old Apple II RGB display doesn't have an AGC (automatic gain control) circuit. Modern TVs do have them, which is why VCRs and DVD players connected directly to them don't have a problem.

      Why is it that every "copy protection" system exploits some flaw in a technology that, given a chance, would be fixed in a later iteration of the technology, but someone manages to make an artificial restriction to hold the fixes back to keep their stupid copy-protection technology from working? It's really a poor situation, if you ask me. They really need to figure out it's hopeless to try to enact these ridiculous copy-protection schemes. Technology moves on, as well it should - and putting artificial restrictions on it is stupid.

      --

      Sam: "That was needlessly cryptic."
      Max: "I'd be peeing my pants if I wore any!"
    3. Re:The sum total of my experience with Macrovision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So at first I passed the signal through a VCR, which of course made Macrovision wreck the signal (image fading in and out, just like in the previous example).

      That's odd. I pass the DVD output through our VCR all the time. The only time Macrovision fucks up the signal is when I hit record on the VCR.

    4. Re:The sum total of my experience with Macrovision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You forgot to mention that you also paid for the Macrovision hardware, as well as an even more expensive licence on the DVDs so they could use it.

    5. Re:The sum total of my experience with Macrovision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The AGC circuit in a VCR or newer TV isn't the solution to Macrovision, it's the problem. Macrovision exploits the presence of AGC in VCRs. A direct TV connection usually works precisely because older TVs have no AGC (and newer TVs have an AGC circuit that differs from that in VCRs). VCRs could use a Macrovision-immune circuit too, but they don't for reasons that you can probably work out (free market, uh-huh).

      I don't think the OPs old monitor was an RGB, though - if it had a composite video input, it's a composite monitor (at least while using that input - some monitors and TVs do have more than one type of input connector, and the post didn't say the monitor was actually made by Apple). I use an old Apple II composite display connected to a VCR, and it works ok with prerecorded tapes - there is some very mild brightness fluctuation sometimes, but nothing like the full-on Macrovision ruining of a movie when you try and route a DVD player through a VCR to reach a coax-only TV (bastards). Wish I had a patch for the Mac OS X DVD Player app to turn off Macrovision. Who the hell wants to dub a DVD movie to VHS these days anyway? They'd just make a VCD or Divx file...

  35. A bit old? by Ephemeriis · · Score: 1

    Isn't this news a bit old? 41.09? The current driver is 53.something. How is this news? Anyone who was going to experience a problem because of this has likely already had their problems...a year ago or more!

    yrs,
    Ephemeriis

    --
    "Work is the curse of the drinking classes." -Oscar Wilde
    1. Re:A bit old? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Isn't this news a bit old? 41.09? The current driver is 53.something. How is this news? Anyone who was going to experience a problem because of this has likely already had their problems...a year ago or more!

      Not necessarily... the drivers have gotten worse and more restrictive with each release, and intrinsic DVD copy protection has become the norm whereas it wasn't always, before.

      I only became aware of the problems with the latest driver set, and I watch DVDs regularly.

  36. Really? That's a shame... by Chordonblue · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...I always buy whatever card gives me the most bang for the buck. I could care less about Macrovision since no DVD I watch ends up having it anyway regardless.

    Based on what I'm hearing about NV40 (16 pipelines, MPEG encoding acceleration, etc.), it seems that Nvidia will be getting my business again this summer, and that hasn't happened for a couple of years now. I currently own a Radeon 9800 Pro.

    I suppose it all depends on your application, but it seems silly to diss a card just because the rules that already exist are being enforced -albeit more stringently. Besides, do you really believe that the drivers are 'unhackable'?

    --
    "...Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam..."
    1. Re:Really? That's a shame... by gmby · · Score: 1

      Dark side powerful it is? Weak for the force of the dark side are we?

      _____

      gime a break... get a clue!

      --
      I don't want a pickle; I just want a Motor-Cycle! A four foot cop arrived with a five foot gun!
    2. Re:Really? That's a shame... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't be too hard on him. He's just a gamer. They don't know what they're doing. Or how to open jars. Or how to wipe themselves after they go Number Two.

  37. 53.something? 56.72 by _Shorty-dammit · · Score: 1

    yeah

  38. Should have warnings by t_allardyce · · Score: 3, Interesting

    slightly off-topic rant but since i did some upgrading i havnt been able to got my (ati all-in-wonder very old pro) tv card to work dual screen so i just took it out, my computer doesnt have a dvd drive so i use my PS2 as a dvd player connected up to the tv-card, but now i cant! so off i go to the tv (which is also very old) and find it only has RF-in, no problem, connect the PS2 to video-machine to TV to watch a DVD and hey ho, fucking macrovision kicks in, what am i supposed to do? now im not making this up why would i? i love bit-torrent as much as anyone else, but why the fuck should i suffer and not be able to use the stated features of something ive paid for when it did not say clearly on the box "WILL NOT PLAY DVDs UNLESS CONNECTED DIRECTLY TO YOUR TV" and it obviously does not adhere to any video specifications, as far as im concerned video equipment that uses macrovision is _not_ standard and should either carry a very clear warning or should not be able to even have composite/scart/s-video connectors on it! anything else is mis-representation and a lie to the consumer - i think most people would choose non-cripled hardware if given an educated choice.

    btw clear warning doesnt mean pt.6 font next to "all rights reserved"

    --
    This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
  39. Macrovision?? by Quazi · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I never play from the source disc. None of my backups have Macrovision, so I never have to worry about it!

    1. Re:Macrovision?? by Endive4Ever · · Score: 1

      I always make sure I return my source discs to the rental place before they charge me the late fee.

      --
      ---
  40. Macrovision eh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    its a pitty all my dvds are already ripped copies nothing for me to circumvent in the driver set now.

  41. Re:Alternatives = none? by ajs318 · · Score: 3, Informative

    You can stick Macrovision on a composite video signal (maybe even on an S-Video signal) but when you come to modulate it onto RF, the extraneous signals just overload the modulator and end up not coming out of the receiver. Since many older tellies still have no SCART socket, only an RF input, VCRs and cable / satellite boxes will need an RF output for awhile yet. And if RF modulation defeats macrovision, there's no point including it in the first place.

    NTL's pay-per-view movie service is Macrovision-crippled, but Macrovision strippers are readily obtainable from camcorder specialists {they're needed in order to watch macrovision-crippled cassettes/DVDs on most professional-grade monitors}.

    As an aside, what happens if your device's internal macrovision-crippler goes faulty and stops generating the Macrovision spikes? If you never tried to do anything with it that the manufacturers didn't want you doing, then you might never find out it wasn't working!

    --
    Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
  42. IT IS THE DRIVERS I COMPARE, NOT THE HARDWARE! by dotz · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Dear Anonymous Cowards,

    I think you hardly have any idea what's my point.

    Anyway:
    IT IS THE DRIVERS I COMPARE, NOT THE HARDWARE!

    Perhaps now some of you get it. ATI opensource drivers are better option, at least for the configuration I want to use.

    Sincerely,
    --
    dotz

    1. Re:IT IS THE DRIVERS I COMPARE, NOT THE HARDWARE! by MasterSLATE · · Score: 1

      You're comparing OLD drivers vs new ones.

      Need I say more, Mr. Troll?
      Go back under your bridge and back to collecting pennies from those that pass over it.

      --

      [sig]www.masterslate.org[/sig]
    2. Re:IT IS THE DRIVERS I COMPARE, NOT THE HARDWARE! by dotz · · Score: 0

      I understand, that being a NVidia user, you couldn't mod that other way. Oh well. At least I've got something, that works really good and has opensource drivers for it.

      You don't.

      Have a nice day!

  43. Movies on VHS tapes have Macrovision, too! by haggar · · Score: 1

    This is exactly the reason why I was unable to digitize and backup some of my old and out-of-print movies on VHS.

    I bought a vidoe stabliizer, but it proved not to solve the problem.

    --
    Sigged!
    1. Re:Movies on VHS tapes have Macrovision, too! by Tassach · · Score: 3, Informative
      You need a TBC (time base corrector) if you want to do video capture from VHS with anything resembling decent (or even adequate) image quality. A TBC cleans up the synch signal in video; since macrovision works by messing with the synch, the TBC effectively removes it. It also improves video quality by compensating for the mechanical defects in the VCR and the media (variations in playback speed, stretching of the tape due to age or heat, etc).

      Professional VCRs typically have a TBC built in; you can also get a standalone TBC. Either way, they're not particuarly cheap, but if you're going to be backing up a large VHS library, it's probably a good investment.

      See the ArsTechnica Guide to Capturing, Cleaning, & Compressing Video and the sci.electronics.repair Macrovision FAQ for more info.

      --
      Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
    2. Re:Movies on VHS tapes have Macrovision, too! by _Shorty-dammit · · Score: 1

      if you can crack it open, there is probably a single adjustment in it, which with a bit of adjustment while watching the playback may just turn it from dust collector to useful piece of equipment. The one I have only has one adjustable control inside anyways, and I needed to fiddle with it a bit before it was working as I figured it should. Worth taking a look inside it anyways.

    3. Re:Movies on VHS tapes have Macrovision, too! by myov · · Score: 1

      If you have access to a video switcher (even something low-end like a Panasonic MX30), try running your video through it.

      I discovered this one accidentally while trying to get some video to capture through a Dazzle Hollywood, with a TBC vcr. (Eventually I dumped the dazzle and replaced it with a canon camcorder.)

      --
      I use Macs to up my productivity, so up yours Microsoft!
    4. Re:Movies on VHS tapes have Macrovision, too! by haggar · · Score: 1

      That TBC-1000 would be nice, if it wasn't for the fact that it's NTSC-only. That would solve only about 60% of my collection.

      Still, your post is choke full of good info, I have quite a homework now.

      Thanks!

      --
      Sigged!
    5. Re:Movies on VHS tapes have Macrovision, too! by Tassach · · Score: 1

      There are multi-format TBCs that handle PAL and SECAM as well as NTCS and the various HD formats. Of course they tend to be on the high side of a grand.

      --
      Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
    6. Re:Movies on VHS tapes have Macrovision, too! by alan_dershowitz · · Score: 1

      It may just be your video stabilizer. I picked one up a few years back, and it works perfectly. It's a Sima Video Copymaster, Model SED-CM.

      Incidentally, there's another post that recommends a Time Base Corrector, but while it will remove Macrovision, its not going to improve your copy quality considerably unless you already have a nice VCR. TBCs are professional equipment (I want a new one! mine broke!) and are probably totally beyond how much money you want to spend to copy a few video tapes. On the other hand, a WORKING video stabilizer will cost around 50 USD. I made sure I could return it if it didn't do what I wanted, so it was risk free.

    7. Re:Movies on VHS tapes have Macrovision, too! by haggar · · Score: 1

      My first mistake was to not get mine with the option of returning it. Also, being in Europe restricts my choices very considerably.

      Alas, I might get me a new video stabilizer, after all.

      BTW, your nickname suggests you might be celebrating Pesach. In that case, chag sameach! Otherwise, my apologies.

      --
      Sigged!
  44. Been there by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Stupid drivers wouldn't let me play any dvds, even when the tv out was disabled. Had to patch the dvd player to ignore the macrovision flag. Yay for IDA.

  45. How Macrovision Works by sygin · · Score: 2, Informative

    "but when you come to modulate it onto RF, the extraneous signals just overload the modulator and end up not coming out of the receiver"

    The RF output of a VCR recorder does have macrovision, RF modulation does not affect the operation of macrovision (macrovision is designed with this in mind). Macrivision's protection scheme works mainly by sending a ....

    "Macrovision is a videotape copy protection for VHS video cassette recorders [24]. It is used on pre-recorded videotapes, and it seems to be more common in North America than in Europe. It is also used in the new Settop Boxes to protect the outcoming signals against copying (e.g. DSS and Digicipher). When dubbing a protected tape, or copying a protected analogue signal, the picture that has gone through the recording VCR will get dark and then normal again periodically. The picture may also become unstable when it is at its darkest. Some televisions do not like Macrovision either. The top of the picture might be unstable all the time and the colors may flicker."

    from http://web.quick.cz/pejovideo/eng/how_work.htm

    "Macrovision(TM) is a copy-protection scheme for analog
    NTSC, PAL, YUV, and RGB video signals, commonly used
    in the consumer market. Copy protection is implemented by
    modifying the video signal so that an analog VCR cannot
    track the video signal for recording, but a TV will still display
    a normal image. DVD players, digital settop boxes for cable
    and satellite systems, and VCRs all include Macrovision
    copy protection."

    from http://www.intersil.com/data/an/an9806.pdf

    --
    Don't make your problems my problems!
    1. Re:How Macrovision Works by ajs318 · · Score: 1

      But does it affect the RF output? Macrovision adds spikes to the "invisible" portions of the video signal signal to cause the AGC in the video recorder to reduce the signal level, thereby darkening the picture. I would have guessed that the modulation and demodulation processes would tend to cancel out the AGC-triggering spikes.

      At any rate, all you need to get rid of the macrovision signal is another AGC with a very short time constant; so it will flatten out the Macrovision spikes, then quickly reset itself so as not to affect the picture brightness. Alternatively, if you prefer digital to analogue methods, you could recreate all the timing information using a microcontroller; you would have to qualitatively sense the timing pulse periods on the "tainted" signal to determine when they occur, and switch between the incoming video signal {during the "visible" period} and your own, locally-generated, "pure" timing signal {during the "invisible" periods}.

      If there are standard ICs that add the Macrovision pulses to an existing "clean" signal, it is just about conceivable that a simple cut-tracks-and-join-with-wire operation modification would permanently fix the problem, especially if similar equipment is sold in countries that don't stipulate the use of Macrovision ..... it probably would have a simple resistor placed instead of the Macrovision IC, just bridging the output to the input.

      --
      Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
    2. Re:How Macrovision Works by alienw · · Score: 1

      But does it affect the RF output?

      Yes, it sure does.

      I would have guessed that the modulation and demodulation processes would tend to cancel out the AGC-triggering spikes.

      Why would they? A modulator doesn't do anything special to the signal.

      If there are standard ICs that add the Macrovision pulses to an existing "clean" signal, it is just about conceivable that a simple cut-tracks-and-join-with-wire operation modification would permanently fix the problem

      Nope. It's usually done at the video encoder IC (such as an ADV7175), which is usually programmed via i2c or something to put in macrovision. You generally have to hack the firmware of the device to disable that. Also, nobody requires you to put in Macrovision (although the DMCA does require your VCR to enforce it). Companies usually do it because the content providers impose that condition.

      In short, the easy way to bypass Macrovision is to not use a VCR to copy stuff. Or you could build a stripper box.

    3. Re:How Macrovision Works by anubi · · Score: 1
      I get the idea they stumbled on MacroVision by accident when they tried to put data into the "dead space" in the video signal between frames.

      Remember, when we were first playing around with the first character generators and trying to get a standard TV to display our output, how they would rip and tear if we didn't get the video drive just right, compared to the sync drives?

      And remember, on the old analog TVs, they would "roll" if the vertical wasn't adjusted properly, and you could see the "black bar" between frames?

      A NTSC TV image is nothing more than a series of interlaced frames sent, even/odd, at a rate of 262.5 lines at 60 Hz. ( well, 59.94 if you wanna nitpick. ) The "even" frame started at the top left corner and ended up at bottom center; the "odd" frame picked back up at top center and ended up at bottom right. Remember, the video was designed to be displayed on an old analog tube whose beam was electromagnetically steered by sawtooth-shaped current pulses ( deflection yoke ). It is easy to get sawtooth shaped pulses because a coil, by its very nature, accepts a linear sawtooth-shaped current if driven from a rectangular voltage pulse, and it is easy to set up a tube circuit to turn full on/full off ( vertical sweep multivibrator / horizontal output tube ). These tubes were run on-off, but the resultant current through the deflection yoke was sawtooth because of the nature of inductive reactance on the applied voltage.

      Bear with me, what I am getting at is the vertical oscillator could not be made to have instantaneous return, as that would mandate very high drive voltages and currents. So they decided to "throw away" a good portion of the picture while the vertical oscillator retraced to start the next frame. The networks decided to throw all sorts of interesting digital stuff in there themselves, being no one could see it anyhow. This area, known as the Vertical Interval, became home to the Vertical Interval Test Signals, teletext, and other little goodies the stations might wanna piggyback onto the signal. And a lot of the older sets went haywire when they did this, as the reference circuits the sets used looked at the average video signal strength and determined from that what voltages on the video signal represented the pulses to synchronize the vertical and horizontal oscillators to. If stations were not really careful how they inserted the signals, all hell broke loose on the customer sets.

      Now, someone notices how you can corrupt the signals by transmitting strings of "1" and it screws up the works. Macrovision Technology is born.

      I had an earlier analog TV for a while. I could easily see macrovision signals on it in the vertical retrace area between frames. They would alternate between bright white and full black. About eight lines of it. This really messed up the Automatic Gain Controls ( AGC ) of the TV, and it had a helluva time locking on this signal.

      Now, what MacroVision takes advantage of is that the TV sets now have really nice electronic phase locked loop circuits that can speedily adjust to phase variances, because the sweep circuits of a TV can rapidly reacquire sync, but a VCR has this big rotating head, quite massive, synchronized so that each frame of TV ( 262.5 lines ) represents one sweep ( 1/2 rotation ) of the head to tape. The switching from even to odd frames occurs as the VCR has one head leaving tape, and the head on the other side swinging into position to read the next stripe on tape. And here is where Macrovision got clever. That big head has a helluva lot of mechanical inertia, and if you can screw up its sync, everything gets out of place, and the whole house of cards indicating what gets placed onto the tape where, comes falling down.

      Now, its just a matter of participating companies to look for the signals in the vertical retrace area to recognize this and honor the macrovision intent.

      There are several products on the market whose entire design is to completely cle

      --
      "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]

  46. Umm. Duh. by Raven42rac · · Score: 1

    Yeah, I noticed this like a year ago with my GF3Ti500. One of the reasons I dropped the PC and switched to the Mac. I think it is an excuse for them to sell more cards. If you ask them, they will say it is to "protect the rights of producers", How about my fucking rights to watch the DVDs I have purchased?

    --
    I hate sigs.
    1. Re:Umm. Duh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How does this help you? The composite video outputs on Macs (like the iBook for instance) will produce a Macrovision-corrupted signal when told to by the Apple DVD Player software, and the software does read the Macrovision bit on DVDs. I haven't been able to use the iBook's composite output to watch DVDs on a TV through a VCR (which happens to make it useless in my case).

      I also haven't yet found a patch for the DVD player software in OS X (there was an OS 9 app called "Fair Use" that apparently did the trick, but it was apparently sued out of existence because I can no longer find it - obviously doesn't support OS X anyway). For that matter there's probably some built in way to disable it, but it doesn't seem to have leaked out of Apple yet.

      Anyone that sells any kind of DVD player has to include Macrovision on the composite output. Doesn't matter if it's a Mac player or a PC one or a set-top box. It's part of the DVD licencing.

      I have actually downloaded movies instead of renting them so I could watch them with friends on a large (but old) TV. And I'd rather rent them. It's absurd, and it serves no purpose except the movie execs paranoia.

    2. Re:Umm. Duh. by Raven42rac · · Score: 1

      Apples and oranges, no pun intended. I was talking about PowerDVD not playing a DVD I own. I had nothing hooked up to the TV-Out, it was because the card DID NOT have a Macrovision chip on it, that it did not play. This pissed me off to no end, no way I am going to spend another couple hundred bucks to replace a card I just bought to watch my own property. Herein lies the paradox of our rights, you are allowed to make an archival copy of your own stuff, BUT, the manufacturers do not have to make it easy, or possible to, but you are not allowed to circumvent their copy protection.

      --
      I hate sigs.
    3. Re:Umm. Duh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't use apple's DVD player. Use VLC. No restriction, no limits. It has deinterlacing, dolby surround, No macrovision, no regions, plus, it plays Quicktime, WMV, MPEG along with tons of other formats.

      www.videolan.org

      The mac version of VLC is by far the best version. This is not a mac supremesist POV, I use the linux version all the Time.

  47. Blackmarket Drivers by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    I can see the development of a 'black market' of drivers written by people so as not to have to the use crippled drivers offered by the manufacturers.

    Of course you get caught watching your own DVD with one of these driers, you go to jail..

    That is until longhorn, which wont even let you install the driver unless its 'trusted' by Microsoft. ( that is, if you use windows )

    Next step will be firmware level.. but then we can sue due to selling defective hardware... perhaps...

    ( whats next, video drivers that wont let you display text that others have deemed 'improper' ? _

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    1. Re:Blackmarket Drivers by TheLink · · Score: 1

      You ask what's next?

      Well imagine when you get auxiliary digital/artificial brains.

      You'd have to pay for access to some of your memories, or to send them to someone else (telepathy).

      A penny for your thoughts would take a whole new meaning.

      --
    2. Re:Blackmarket Drivers by rock_climbing_guy · · Score: 1

      This text ought to come up when you click on that stupid "Tell me why driver signing is important." link on the driver update screen on MS Windows XP.

      --
      Wh47 d1d j00 541, 31337 15n't t3h r0xor5 ne m0r3???
    3. Re:Blackmarket Drivers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the FUTUR WE will have happy-happy huglhuglhuhl
      Oh you are SUCH a futureist! cocks dongzzzzz

    4. Re:Blackmarket Drivers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good idea. Write a worm that makes it so. The nice thing about Windows is that anyone with a good idea can pretty much make arbitrary modifications to the majority of the installed base. ;)

  48. Re:Alternatives = none? by enosys · · Score: 1
    Right. ATI cards with TV out also generate Macrovision when playing DVDs that say they should. ATI cards that capture video even actually detect Macrovision and stop the capture.

    However, this is no big deal really. Cracks for the drivers are out there. You can also buy devices that remove Macrovision from the analog signal. They're not expensive either.

    BTW Macrovision also makes software copy protection. Photoshop 8 CS activation is by them. There's a keygen for it! How retarded is that? Activation could be cryptographically secure.

  49. They certainly are good at screwing themselves... by Featureless · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The Content Trust(tm) has decreed that "the analog hole must be plugged." They must somehow enjoy this quixotic quest, chasing all over the countryside playing whack-a-mole with the work of so many individuals (and the products of so many companies so much bigger than they). And they've even showed up at nvidia's doorstep. "Look, you want to be in the video card business, not the lawsuit business. Are you sure you want to endanger your relationship with Mr. Capone?"

    Meet our friend Mr. Macrovision. Phew, another glorious victory for the Content Trust(tm) over the Stupid/Evil Consumer(tm)!

    What's positively hilarious about this is that no one gives a shit about copying content back to analog. Hello - it's 2004, people. This perfectly exemplifies the stuck-in-the-distantly-receeding-past mentality these guys have. Analog hole? What about the gaping digital hole? People who bother are copying straight to their computer! Fully 3/4 of the people reading this probably haven't used their VCRs since they last dusted off the video store's copy of Capricorn One.

    Yet the Trust still races around showing everyone who's boss. That Macrovision protection is important! Ignore it at your peril! Hah.

    All this will accomplish is that more people who use their computer with their TV are going to have a problem.

    And those people will get angry. Who wouldn't? What an insult! They will soon learn about the foreign, boring field of intellectual property law - it's neither so foreign nor so boring anymore. They'll also learn about the messy campaign the Content Trust(tm) is running to hijack it.

    They will find that, to watch their own videos, they need to go into the back alley, to meet the Dread Pirates(tm)... only, look how friendly and helpful they are. "I think I'll remember them - I'll probably be back again soon."

  50. Re:Alternatives = none? by dnoyeb · · Score: 1

    This just seems passe. How can a signal be seen on a television clearly, but not on a VCR. Right.

    I suspect they exascerbated a flaw. I find it hard to believe a 2004 or even 2000 VCR by any manufacturer would contain this provision unless government mandated. Hell they wont even stick to the region coding on the DVD players.

  51. Long live...Binary Bob. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Heh, agreed. Every time we have a story on binary drivers, this is one of the points I bring up. Today it's Macrovision, tomorrow it's DRM, and since there's a contingent that feels that Linux binaries are OK, you'll see this kind of nonsence in other drivers. e.g. Sound Cards. BTW The "I'll hack the drivers, or get this aditional software" crowd is missing the point. One can get around the restrictions, but one shouldn't have to in the first place.

  52. Re:The software must cooperate by SillyNickName4me · · Score: 3, Informative

    Just a small note, there are cases where dvd + mplayer + tvout will result in mactrovision being used. Read the mplayer documentation.

  53. Keep creating criminals, you captains of industry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    On the PC connected exclusively to a TV for DVD watching, I can't watch DVDs... because a TV is connected.

    My first reaction is, "why the hell do I even buy DVDs in the first place when I can download this shit from usenet or IRC and view it with all of the quality and none of the hassle?", not "gee where's my standard DVD player to watch this?".

    As a gullible idiot who legitimately buys software and entertainment media I envy the warez doodz more and more every day. With every "insert original CD to play" and "playback disabled" message I question my purchases. Every time I am forced to apply a crack to achieve the same level of playability pirates have, my sympathy expands.

  54. Re:Alternatives = none? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    How can a signal be seen on a television clearly, but not on a VCR. Right.

    Maybe you don't understand because you clearly don't know anything about VCRs, signal encoding and Macrovision? Right.

  55. Re:DRM enforced bit by bit by nybble by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In all the PVR set top boxes sat/cable the digital coming out of the factories now the video stream is stored encoded on the HDD. This prevents you from playing the video stream on any other system.

    All the new products are also tested to a new global security standard to check that the system is secure and not easily hacked. The new products coming out have to use BGA chip tech and have thier data buses spread across seperate PCB layers. Some people even talk of "glueing" chips down (whatever the fukk that means).

    So once the hardware is secure & the software is
    secure ....

  56. outdated.... by EqualHate · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Not sure if this story is a repeat or not, but didn't any of you notice this story is a year old. Some of us with Nvidia cards knew about this a while ago. The date on the article is 2003, not 2004. And the date of the drivers should have given you a clue also as the drivers mentioned are 41 series... Nvidia is on 56.xx now... just something to think about

    --
    Don't take it personally, I 'm like this all the time.
    1. Re:outdated.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      A year old and nobody's done a damned thing about it.

      Drawing attention to this is constructive. Read the replies and you'll see that obviously it was not common knowledge.

      There is no legitimate complaint here.

  57. Well, IT DOES! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Listen,

    We get beat up by everyone for "piracy" - when in fact all we want to do is to do the right thing.

    This means that if you want to actually pay for a DVD, and watch it, even though you don't have a TV hooked up, the stupid Macrovision prevents you to do that, meaning, you HAVE to use hacking tools, just to enjoy something you paid for.

    This is plain bullshit. If someone wants to make a VHS copy of their DVD, LET THEM! I thought that making analog copies of digital works was covered under fair use! Seriously, WTF? As a result of them blocking this potential use of technology, I can't watch the goddamn Back To The Future Box set I shelled out some bucks for.

    So, the only option I am left with is to copy the DVDs, De-Macrovision them, and then give my Big "F U" to the studios, by selling the useless discs.

    I am not going to buy a new video card to watch them, and I am not going to relegate watching the movie solely to my television, I use a computer as the primary watching apparatus.

    Peace out.

  58. fuckers. by man_ls · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This actually, definately, 100% explains why my DVD player absolutely refuses to play certain DVDs.

    My decoder doesn't honor Macrovision...but if the drivers do, it fucks up stuff.

  59. Use VideoLAN by Czernobog · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I've had this for a while, some dvds refusing to play with PowerDVD, simply because my GF2 MX400 PCI has a TV-OUT I've never used. That TV-OUT is on by default, NVidia provides no way to disable it or turn it off, so they simply took my choice from me.
    That is the last NVidia product I will ever buy, even if it means I have to live with sub-par (which isn't the case currently) hardware.

    Back to the point, VideoLAN had come to the rescue. Plays all my dvds, to their full extent, it's free, practical and light.
    Oh. Cross platform too...

    --
    /. Where the truth
    1. Re:Use VideoLAN by ^_^x · · Score: 1

      I had the exact same problem with my GF2... except it doesn't HAVE a tv output.

    2. Re:Use VideoLAN by mindmaster064 · · Score: 3, Informative

      That's because your video card probably has a brooktree tv encoder whether or not it is actually hooked up to anything (sometimes OTHER models of your card have it, and the manufacture is copying a reference design). The drivers aren't probably smart enough to tell, thus you are screwed simply if you have the encoder, The problem with that is that virtually every nvidia card past riva tnt2 has this encoder. I wonder when these guys will get the idea that maybe some normal users are putting their computer in their living room with the tv and would simply like to output their digital media for their own use. Whoever figures this out probably will be the "next big thing" in video cards simply because modern cpu's are good enough to take over most of the video processing.
      Poly pushing and texture speeds are nice, but mean nothing/little in regard to dvd/mpeg/whatever playback.

      -mind

  60. stop buying them by RdsArts · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Well, here's a idea.

    Stop buying DVDs.

    They're not water or air, they're fucking DVDs. The world will not end if you do not own the entire 12 season of the Simpsons in full digital with Dolby 5.1 surround sound. And they have made it crystal clear to me and I'd assume to you that they do not want our business. Why still give it to them?

  61. What year is it? by Dun+Malg · · Score: 4, Funny
    From the linked article:

    Nvidia Macrovision DVD-TV rules forced on consumers

    Cuts out other TV encoders

    By INQUIRER staff: Thursday 20 March 2003, 10:19

    In other news, Reagan beats Carter, Soviets back down over Cuban missle issue, and WR Hearst says the USS Maine was sunk my a Spanish mine.

    --
    If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
  62. Linux surely is growing instead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    p(L)=M(L)/M --> M(L)=M*p(L)

    given: p(L)=const., M increasing.

    result: M(L) also increasing.

    Number of machines increased, percentage steady = Linux machines increased. qed.

  63. I was wondering which card to buy, now I know. by penginkun · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Thank you Nvidia for making the decision easy! ATI, here I come! Of course, by the time I can AFFORD a 9800 Pro ATI might have a similar thing in place. 8^/

    1. Re:I was wondering which card to buy, now I know. by TrancePhreak · · Score: 3, Informative

      ATI has Macrovision checks in too. Just check out what they say about their AIW line and DVD playback.

      --

      -]Phreak Out[-
    2. Re:I was wondering which card to buy, now I know. by penginkun · · Score: 1

      OK, so what does this mean then? Does it mean we can't play a DVD on the computer and output to a recorder or recorder app? Because if that's all, who cares? I'm not doing that to begin with.

      If I want to rip a DVD, I rip it using an app which automatically sets the region to zero and strips the macrovision filth from the video stream. Or is THAT what they want to prevent? I'm sure the MPAA doesn't care too much for it, but it's my legal right, so nuts to them.

    3. Re:I was wondering which card to buy, now I know. by TrancePhreak · · Score: 1

      From what I can tell, all it means is you can't take screenshots without turning down hardware acceleration. Big deal.

      So all in all, you're better off buying a card based on other merits.

      --

      -]Phreak Out[-
  64. Re:Alternatives = none? by gabebear · · Score: 1
    This just seems passe. How can a signal be seen on a television clearly, but not on a VCR. Right.

    Macrovision works by exploiting a "feature" in VHS that isn't in most TVs. It's all explained here.

  65. Rehashing a year old news story? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is from march 03 not 04, probably do a search and find the original posting of it here too i'd wager. Just lazy copy&paste monkies anymore getting stories in, bad enough it was on bluesnews as a news piece too but to make it here again?

  66. Remember, what is VESA or SVGA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I hate every king of protection.

    I don't want any king of protection.

    I hate TCPA-protection, Palladium-protection, SVGA-protection, TV-protection, Photoshop-moneypaper-protection, CD-protection, DVD-protection, BIOS-protection, wireless-protection, Bluetooth-protection, IBM-ethernet-protection, Intel-Centrino-protection, nVidia-protection, CPU-lock-protection, ...

    open4fre

  67. I have something which includes... by thrill12 · · Score: 1

    ...something like a TBC: my V2000 VCR :=)
    The V2000 does *not* support Macrovision (it's a VHS thing), therefore it's OK to copy a VHS tape over to V2000 and back. Maybe it won't be too good for the quality, but it should work (never tried it though). Perhaps Betamax and others work too ?

    --
    Slashdot: stuff for news, nerds that matter, matter for news, stuff that nerd
  68. Great move !-Bend over and take it in the Wallet. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Now is the time to do the same thing we did with forcedeth. If mplayer doesn't play DVDs with NVidias binary driver, fudge 'em in the ass."

    Umm...who has "whom's" money, again?

  69. stop buying them-P2P Stick. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "And they have made it crystal clear to me and I'd assume to you that they do not want our business. Why still give it to them?"

    Hell Yeah! And just to make certain they get the message I'll download that entire season off P2P. That'll teach them.

    1. Re:stop buying them-P2P Stick. by RdsArts · · Score: 1

      No, that just lets them say 'well, they aren't mad at us, they're just pirates.'

      Stop watching it. It's just TV or movies. There are millions of other fun things to do with your time. Hell, there are indie movies and music. Check around where you live, there may be a entire world of quality entertain made by people who do it for the love of the craft that you've been missing out on because of these large corperations pushing all the art out of music and movies.

  70. Even weirder by DaveCBio · · Score: 2, Informative

    When I play DVDs on my PC with the nvidia card I sometimes have to walk away and I will lock the computer. When I come back and unlock it the DVD will no longer play until the next reboot because it says the TV out is active eventhough it's not. Even if it was, isn't that thee point of having a TV out so you can use it for multimedia applications?

  71. affected me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This affected me, a year ago. My Creative-branded actually-made-by-MSI Geforce 3 would not play DVD's anymore no matter what software I tried to use (WMP, WinDVD, PowerDVD, Nvidia's DVD pap, probably tried more forgettable ones at the time).

    Seeing as my PC is my only DVD player, this was more than a little irritating. I used the 30.80 drivers for awhile, but newer games would not work without the newer drivers.

    Nvidia knowingly disabled a major function of their product (and my PC) after people had bought it. Absolutely deplorable, and worse, totally unnecessary - all they had to do was disable TV out during DVD playback.

    I currently have a 9800 pro. Currently my major video card driver issues go as:
    Nvidia: killed DVD playback, hardlock crashing on most Punkbuster-enabled games (only 2 driver releases ago did they fix this).
    ATI: nil.

    My next card will be... Whatever's fastest for my cash at the time. Kinda hope it's an ATI though.

  72. works for me by DragonTHC · · Score: 1

    I use different apps with my 5900ultra. the drivers are 56.64.

    zoom player works on tv out and powerdvd 5 works.

    with the VIVO functions of nView, you can automatically zoom video to the tv out.

    --
    They're using their grammar skills there.
    1. Re:works for me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I use different apps with my 5900ultra. the drivers are 56.64.

      Not all DVDs have Macrovision (e.g. MGM's). Are you testing with DVDs that are confirmed to have it?

  73. Nvidia install script removes all versions by Wormholio · · Score: 4, Informative

    I recently rebuilt the Linux kernel on my laptop, so I thought it would be worthwhile to get the latest Nvidia driver. Having done so, I found that their installer had deleted all copies of nvidea.o under /lib/modules, not just a previous copy for the kernel I was still testing. That means I lost the video driver for the stable kernel I wanted to use between tests. Ouch!

    This has nothing to do with Macrovision, but it's another reason to dislike or distrust Nvidia.

    --
    "Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire." -- William Butler Yeats
    1. Re:Nvidia install script removes all versions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had this problem, too. Here's what you do, to install for multiple kernel versions (It's the only way I could install coexisting drivers for a 2.4/2.6 "dual boot" system, and have them both work):

      NVIDIA-Linux-x86-1.0-5336-pkg1.run -s -n -K

      (agree to license / no prompt, no precompiled interface, install kernel module only. The -K argument is the only relevant one for your problem)

  74. I've been reading /. for a long time by rsilvergun · · Score: 4, Insightful

    and I hadn't heard about this. If it's not a dupe, don't complain. I'm glad for the article and the discussion. I've seen several helpful links to software that works around this issue. I was planning on getting an Nvidia card with TV out soon, and now I know to watch out for this problem and what to do if I get hit by it.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  75. Screw that crap. by EvilStein · · Score: 1

    I downloaded the reference drivers for a GeForce 2 MX on a rebuilt XP box a few weeks ago.
    A video card that *I paid for*

    I installed PowerDVD. *Software that I PAID FOR*

    I tried to play a DVD that *I PAID FOR*

    No luck. It refused to play because the particular GeForce 2 card has a TV out that you cannot disable. (I checked. You can't just "turn it off" in software. It's on.)

    What a load of crap. Utter bullshit, IMHO. The MPAA is stretching this "piracy" crap way too far and it's pissing me off.

    Fortunately, VLC allowed me to play the DVD I own on hardware that I paid for.

    Fuck Macrovision. Fuck the MPAA. And fuck you, Orinn Hatch.

  76. MOD THIS FUCKER UP!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Indeed, I mean why else read slashdot other than to watch a bunch of self-righteous nerds yammer on about trivial shit?


    HERE I RANT ABOUT OPEN SOURCE, THOUGH I DON"T UNDERSTAND THE GPL huglhuhlhuglhuglhuglPERSONAL VENDETTA AGAINST MICROSOFThuglhuglhuglhugl APPLE AND AMAZON and HP steal OSS software and return NOTHING huglhuglghugl
    oh shit! The copyingof DVD's and napster is FREE USE.
    RICHARD STALLMAN IS JUSTITFIES MY EVERY ACTION>
    microsoft sucks! The NT Kernel is a mess! huglhuglghugl

    Join the anti-slashdot jihad and anti-stupidity group on Orkut!
  77. "DRM" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    • DRM protection
    Macrovision is not Digital Rights Management in the sense we are talking about here, it is an ANALOG device. Sure, you have DVDs, but the Macrovision generator is actually in the DVD player, there is no Macrovision in the actual video data on the disk.
  78. previous slashdot article stuck in my mind by kardar · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I have been thinking a lot about the /. article about a week or so ago that concerned what the world would be like without Microsoft. I saw another article elsewhere that was talking about business software, spreadsheets, and the like, and how the current crop of spreadsheets has affected the way business thinks about these kinds of things.

    And I can relate to the "unpopular opinion" concept that the parent post has just talked about, because I was just feeling that way yesterday. I guess the best we can do is to try to present our opinions respectfully and honestly.

    So here it is:

    If you want to play a DVD, get a DVD player. That's what they are for.

    Certainly, there are many other issues, and wouldn't it be nice if my computer could do this, or do that, and so on, but I have been thinking a LOT about what a computer is, what its place is in my life, and maybe just redefine a little bit what a computer really is, and what the most effective things to do with a computer are.

    Personally, I would rather watch the DVD on a couch, with a plasma screen, with larger speakers and the surround sound. The entire thing of DVD on your computer, or music on your computer, or other things on your computer, which you had to purchase seperately before - it's a "something for nothing" proposition, kind of. Is watching DVDs on a computer just really cool or something, or is it just done just to do it, just for fun - of course there is nothing wrong with that, but I just see a DVD as something that belongs on a plasma with surround sound, with a nice couch. Of course, you may not be able to afford these things, but what I am trying to say is that "computers", as such, are (or should) be about more than just saving money because you can't afford nice things.

    Would it be better that we turn computers into DVD players by crippling them and turning them into something that is no longer a computer? I would rather have a computer be a computer, "computer" still being something that we probably will keep redefining, and something that actually, lots of people don't really need as much as they think they do, or maybe it's more like they don't need it as bad as the big computer firms need them to buy millions of computers.

    For instance, if there were small airborne transportation vehicles that you could buy, the sky would be all different. Setting up traffic lanes in the air, crashes in mid-air that come through your roof, things like that. Maybe it's better to not have everyone flying around in their personal aircraft, and to reserve aircraft for longer distances. There are many folks that feel that there are also too many cars, and that the focus has become one of car companies selling more of them, oil companies selling more fuel, "in the name of jobs". It's a stone age - it's a stone age.

    It's one thing to say "I have the RIGHT to play DVDs on my PC" - that's something in and of itself. It's another to say "I NEED to play DVDs on my PC". Wouldn't it be better with a nice couch , a plasma screen, and a high-end surround sound setup? To some extent, the same thing can be said about mp3 files and crappy computer speakers, although listening to music while you study or surf the net or are doing some kind of boring work in the office IS a nice touch. But watching a DVD is a fairly all-encompassing experience - it pretty much takes up all your senses. You have to stop what you are doing, more or less, to watch a DVD.

    I think that part of making computers integrate better with our lives is to not have one thing try to do everything. That's actually the whole Unix philosphy, GNU Coreutils, piping commands from simple building blocks, from one stdout to another stdin, instead of having one single monolithic application that takes an hour to just fire up. Split it up. DVD players cost $100 sometimes, sometimes even less. Who doesn't have a TV? I would rather that the manufacturers don't cripple the PC than go out of their way to bend the PC just so that you can p

    1. Re:previous slashdot article stuck in my mind by mav.rc · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you want to play a DVD, get a DVD player. That's what they are for.

      Right. Because I need another big box (TV) and a DVD player in my dorm room. And the 'surround sound' speakers you drone on about are connected to my PC, so I'd have to reconnect and reposition them every time I want to watch a DVD.

      Or I could just watch it on my PC. My PC is my Swiss Army knife for entertainment, dammit, not by choice, but by necessity. I'm poor and cramped for space.

      Hey, sit and lecture about why computers shouldn't be about something for nothing all you want. It's easy to do when you have a big home and a well-paying job and you can afford the nice plasma screen and expensive surround gear. The rest of us live in the real world where we have to squeeze every bit of value out of our things that we can.

    2. Re:previous slashdot article stuck in my mind by True+Grit · · Score: 1
      1. That's actually the whole Unix philosphy, GNU Coreutils, piping commands from simple building blocks, from one stdout to another stdin, instead of having one single monolithic application that takes an hour to just fire up. Split it up.


      While its a popular theory it isn't always followed however. Keep in mind the folks who give us the coreutils are also responsible for the operating system called Emacs. :)
    3. Re:previous slashdot article stuck in my mind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or use a HTPC. That is what all the serious audio geeks use.

    4. Re:previous slashdot article stuck in my mind by Rakarra · · Score: 1
      It's one thing to say "I have the RIGHT to play DVDs on my PC" - that's something in and of itself. It's another to say "I NEED to play DVDs on my PC". Wouldn't it be better with a nice couch , a plasma screen, and a high-end surround sound setup? To some extent, the same thing can be said about mp3 files and crappy computer speakers, although listening to music while you study or surf the net or are doing some kind of boring work in the office IS a nice touch. But watching a DVD is a fairly all-encompassing experience - it pretty much takes up all your senses. You have to stop what you are doing, more or less, to watch a DVD.

      Ah, but then there are the people with HTPCs. My Linux PC is nice and small (Shuttle XPC), making a nice bookend for the DVDs. It has TV-OUT for the TV, using mythtv for tv recordings and mplayer and xine for .avi files. The VGA-out goes straight into the projector, which requires very specific horizontal and vertical resolutions, else it starts scaling (badly) the picture. The PC outputs digital sound via coax cable into the receiver. So it is the centerpiece of a media center. One box that plays dvds, tv broadcasts, and files.

  79. Opportunity to convert more people to linux etc. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The glass is more than half full, it's overflowing! The fact that there are more and more people who are buying new systems and have not been brainwashed/damaged from years of MS use, means that this is an excellent time to use the newer and better linux and non-MS software out there to convert these new users away from MS and to better products. The fact that these people will be spending money on future software and hardware is good if you can intercept this process and divert these future money streams away from MS and into supporting Linux, and open source products!! MS depends on growing it's user base to keep it alive, lets reverse that trend!! Time is now!!

  80. Time for brilliance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One of the less popular graphics card companies should join with the FOSS community and allow development of their drivers!

  81. EFF not as fantastic as many believe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    It appears that even the EFF can't avoid their liberal roots. Instead of being a single issue advocacy group, they are allowing liberal extremism to creep into their lobbying.

    No jail for spammers? Slap on the wrists instead?

    As has been shown by the Buffalo spammer, the actions of spammers include fraud, forgery and identity theft.

    The company accused Howard Carmack - aka The Buffalo Spammer - of sending more than 825 million illegal emails since March 2002.

    Also, it alleged that Carmack and accomplices "used stolen credit cards, identity theft, banking fraud and other illegal activities to fraudulently purchase Internet accounts and send out unsolicited, commercial emails".


    The EFF has decided that since fraud and identity theft are "non-violent" crimes, these poor spammers sending billions of spam emails shouldn't be going to jail.

    If the EFF is going to start defending spammers, they might as well find something else to advocate on. Because even jail is not enough for the spammers. The Buffalo spammer, Balan, Ralsky, and others can make millions, do a few years in prison (tough time according to the EFF), and live the rest of their lives in luxury.

    One of the reasons other single issue advocacy groups are so successful is that they avoid straying onto other issues. The EFF, by arguing that jail time is too severe for spammers, is letting their majority liberal base speak on the issue of jail time for "non-violent" offenders, instead of concentrating on shutting down spam. This is a group that I was forcing myself to set up a paypal account for to donate, but after finding out their position on defending spammers, I have decided that I can no longer support, either financially or by word of mouth, their efforts. I find that I must now support legislation that is contrary to the EFF's position, something that I didn't think possible before.
    1. Re:EFF not as fantastic as many believe by Rakarra · · Score: 1
      No jail for spammers? Slap on the wrists instead?

      Maybe because spamming isn't so serious a violation that requires jail time? Certain crimes are appropriate for jail, certain ones are appropriate for fines. By no means does spamming itself merit jail time. Not when jails are overpopulated as it is. Sue them into bankruptcy and confiscate their ill-gotten gains instead.

      Now identity theft on the other hand...

      One of the reasons other single issue advocacy groups are so successful is that they avoid straying onto other issues.

      Whether spammers should get jail time is very closely related EFF's founding principles. This is not a case of EFF straying from its core issues.

  82. Even more amazing... by Anti_Climax · · Score: 1

    ...A +4 rated post with GNAA in the subject line!

    --
    Even people that believe in pre-destiny look both ways before crossing the street.
    1. Re:Even more amazing... by no+longer+myself · · Score: 1
      Not anymore. I watched (in absolute amazement) that it went all the way up to +5, now dropped like a brick. As of this post it's at +1,offtopic. I fully expect it to fall into the -1 abyss soon, but I'm cool with it no matter.

      In hindsight, I probably should have changed the subject line before I hit "Submit". I just didn't think of it.

      I still can't get over the fact that it even got modded up in the first place!

  83. But it costs money by spoco2 · · Score: 1

    We shouldn't have to pay money to get back functionality in hardware/software that's been taken from us... I bought my a fair while back so I could use it in my media center (geeze, I wish I'd got an ATI instead), and what do I find?

    I can't play DVDs on the tv, and I can't get it to display really 'Full screen' in PAL... (OK, now I can display full screen, however with MASSIVE amounts of overscan so I loose functionality by not seeing large chunks of my screen realestate...

    I refuse to have to PAY for TVTool just to get this functionality which really should be there in the first place.

  84. Big surprise... by Heretik · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Those of you who ranted on slashdot about how proprietary drivers aren't a problem:

    Told you so.

    How crippled does your computer have to become for you to finally wake up?

  85. Re:That is what AnyDVD/DVDidle are for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So you have to use software like AnyDVD/DVDIdle, which do real time DVD cracking. PowerDVD will think the DVD does not use CSS, does not contain macrovision, and is an all region DVD (like Cosmos is naturally).

  86. Driver troubles by slux · · Score: 1

    I decided to watch a movie through my TV-out today only to find that I only got monochrome through composite with the latest Nvidia drivers. Keeping TV-out on while booting revealed the Windows XP boot logo in full colour but when the graphics initialized it switched to monochrome.

    This was on a GF4 Ti4200 that had previously worked just fine and given a full-colour TV-out picture under GNU/Linux to the same TV with the exact same cables.

    I have no idea whether this truly is related to Macrovision but one post on a forum that got me looking for older drivers suggested it. Changing to the last drivers before the Macrovision "enhancement" certainly seemed to do the trick.

    1. Re:Driver troubles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Yes, that's a Macrovision issue. From the DVD FAQ:

      Macrovision may show up as stripes of color, distortion, rolling, black & white picture, and dark/light cycling. Macrovision creates problems for most TV/VCR combos (see 3.2.1) and some high-end equipment such as line doublers and video projectors.


      If you have component video output (and input on the TV, and cables) that should defeat the colorburst part of the Macrovision signal corruption. If you also have brightness cycling, you'll need a passthrough box to defeat that.
  87. No problem here by Simple-Simmian · · Score: 1

    My DVD playback under Linux is functional. I don't have Windows Media Player installed on my W2K partition but my Power DVD works. I have a FX5200 and Happauge WinTV card I think the card might use the BT848 chipset though.

    Reading the article it seems to imply the the problem is with certain Windows Media player versions not Nvidia drivers. Is this correct?

    --
    If you don't like what I write don't be a CS and mod it down. Refute it.
    Yea I can't spell. So what is your point?
  88. The future by Animats · · Score: 1

    2006: eBay no longer accepts ads for analog speakers.

  89. Is it really a problem? by Pan+T.+Hose · · Score: 1

    Sorry if I am misinformed (I only use plain Vesa standard X11 drivers) but is it really a problem that there is an annoying new functionality if anyone can disable it? How long before a patch starts circulating? Isn't that the true power of open suorce and Linux that we are the ones who control our OSen, not them?

    --
    Sincerely,
    Pan Tarhei Hosé, PhD.
    "Homo sum et cogito ergo odi profanum vulgus et libido."
  90. Ironic... by NeuroManson · · Score: 1

    The only solution would be a driver hack, which would make you a criminal for wanting to view the DVD you legally purchased.

    Yeah, it may be redundant, but that doesn't mean it isn't true.

    --
    Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!
  91. Re:You missed one by Thomas+Shaddack · · Score: 1
    Skewed stats. Google most likely takes their info from User-Agent headers. Many browsers allow setting up this header arbitrarily. Because way too many websites have the annoying habit of serving only MSIE, lots of other browsers are configured to pose as MSIE.

    I somehow doubt they use more reliable OS-discovery method, eg. passive fingerprinting.

  92. Re:You missed one by Thomas+Shaddack · · Score: 1
    You can build a Macrovision-removing device for a standard videosignal from few chips. The Net is full of various schematics, ranging in complexity from a microcontroller to a sync detector with some timer circuits. The principle is to bring the videosignal corrupted by Macrovision additions (high-brightness blinking during the blanking interval, which confuses the AGC circuits in the VCRs) back to normal (by removing these additions, forcing them to black level that belongs there).

    Screw DMCA.

  93. Re:You missed one by Thomas+Shaddack · · Score: 1
    So once the hardware is secure & the software is secure...

    ...full-scale open solutions appear more widely on the market. See eg. MythTV, for the example of a largely successful effort. Together with players from less-brand vendors. Just don't expect to find them en-masse in Wal-Mart.

    The recent developments in the area of mini-sized motherboards open a nice secondary market for homemade fully customized unlicenced players.

  94. Anyone remember the clipper? by old-lady-whispering- · · Score: 1

    How about the Clipper II? Industry and government have been trying to reign in the unruly conusmers who refuse to obey the laws put in place to protect the "industry" of video entertainment. Also consider that in the early 90's independent video store owners were being arrested by the FBI for renting shows taped of off HBO. Those new to techno polotics think that manufacturers and government attempting to control how consumers use products is a recent development but they are not. Just to list a few more;

    Satellite hackers fleeing america to escape prosection and holding up in the Bahammas (1980's)

    Scientific Atlanta/General instruments teaming up with FBI on massive arrest and sting of cable box modders(80's, 90's). Anyone remember the Nova clones of cable boxes, the people who made it went to prison in US.

    Computer User groups getting raided in the 80's for copying sessions. This was pre internet and pre cd roms.

    This is nothing new and it is just TV so I personally don't care that you don't get to copy the matrix from DVD to VHS. If you are that upset about it and want to do somthing constructive then opt out of the big media's video market don't buy/pirate any more movies or better yet don't buy anything that is encumbered by macrovision. TV is not required to live a full and interesting life perhaps it prevents it. So don't expect your whish for your congressman and senator to stick thier neck out to protect your right to copy macrovision encombered movies to VHS to come true anytime soon. there is a saying "whish in one hand and piss in the other see which one gets filled first"

    --
    The truth suffers more from convictions than from lies.
  95. ATI AIW Problems by aztracker1 · · Score: 1

    Okay, I run a Shuttle XPC (SB62G2), and bought a nice ATI AIW Radeon 9200 card, that suited my needs, and the price was right.. as soon as I had both the ATI drivers, and my MB chipset drivers installed, poof windows wouldn't work... concidering there are quite a few win2000 users left, and the 865 chipset is fairly common, this is unconcionable.. I didn't mind that ATI's support was a long distance call, however this was a friday night, and wouldn't be able to call until monday... answer, a GF4, and will put a tv card in the one covetted pci slot..

    Now they may have had a workaround or fix for this, however, there was nothing even mentioning this on ATI's site, and since the card was replacable, and the MB wasn't.. gues they just suck for that.

    It's almost like they never even tested their win2k drivers even once, because a "custom" install, it didn't see where the drivers where on reboot... 5 tries later, with different driver versions, I gave up. sorry.. (/rant)

    I like ATI, and have several friends with AIW-8500DV cards, just wanted a decent solution.. the clone option on the GF works much better than the AIW options anyhow... so, I will stick with nVidia, dispite this sorry change in policy.. however, I am set to US mode anyhow, and don't tend to watch foreign DVD's, besides can't I get around this with DVD-Anywhere?

    --
    Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
  96. A common mistake about HW specs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    ... we are simply not going to see the major card makers open source their drivers because too much of their proprietary hardware's inner workings are exposed by the driver.

    This statement is a common mistake made by a lot of people. Now, you can ignore this comment because I'm an AC, or you can listen to what an ASIC designer have to say about this.

    I spend every day designing proprietary hardware and writing the interface specs for that hardware. I can tell you, with absolute certainty, that giving away interface specs for your hardware, will not divulge any proprietary hardware secrets. We are talking about a bunch of register addresses, their size and their function. These are just facts, no secrets are revealed.

    OTOH, opensourcing your already proprietary driver, is a bad idea. The driver does contain secrets (mainly optimization/algorithm tricks, but may contain secrets of the dirty kind too) and 3rd party licensed software that you don't want to/can't give away. So opening up the driver is not a choice.

    So where does that leave us? With publically available interface specs, but no ready-made FOSS driver from the manufacturer. I think this is acceptable for the FOSS community. Unfortunately, a few manufacturers of hardware doesn't seem to agree on this issue (Nvidia and ATI in this case. And no, specs under NDA is completely useless). Don't worry, HW manufacturers that don't release specs, will eventually die. This has been proven in the HW industry in the past (What, you thought this was a new phenomenon?)

    Now, some of the more clever people will realize that there is one more component that is not discusses above, and that is firmware. So what is the solution about the firmware. Giving away the specs for the HW the firmware runs on, might give away HW secrets. And since we can't give away the specs, it makes no sense opensourcing the firmware. So, for the time being at least, making the firmware a binay-only release is the only option.

    1. Re:A common mistake about HW specs by True+Grit · · Score: 1
      1. I spend every day designing proprietary hardware and writing the interface specs for that hardware. I can tell you, with absolute certainty, that giving away interface specs for your hardware, will not divulge any proprietary hardware secrets. We are talking about a bunch of register addresses, their size and their function. These are just facts, no secrets are revealed.

      1. OTOH, opensourcing your already proprietary driver, is a bad idea. The driver does contain secrets (mainly optimization/algorithm tricks, but may contain secrets of the dirty kind too) and 3rd party licensed software that you don't want to/can't give away. So opening up the driver is not a choice.

      The second paragraph kinda contradicts the first paragraph, and besides, I was thinking of the issues you mentioned in the second paragraph anyway. Yes, the registers themselves may not reveal much, and with some hardware knowing how the registers get used may not tell you anything at all, it all depends on how sophisticated the hardware/firmware is, and it is my understanding that these 3D accelerated video cards are *exceedingly* complex, and so is their drivers, meaning that a lot of "IP" (algorithms, optimizations, detailed knowledge which would help reverse engineer the hardware) is in the *driver* and not just the hardware/firmware. Thus my point.

      This is especially true since no one is following an industry standard in making these cards, so they're splitting their "IP" between the hardware and its driver in their own arbitrary way. An industry standard interface on the other hand, typically moves most of the "IP" to the hardware/firmware, simplifying the interface and not forcing companies to reveal substantial details of their hardware, thus making an open specification possible in the first place.

      Due to the nature of their knowledge of how the hardware works (they make it after all), a FOSS driver without their optimization magic is effectively worthless anyway. No one will use it if a better optimized, higher-performing alternative was available.
  97. cant we remove the Macrovision IC's? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If that is true can't we just find the Macrovision IC's and remove them?

  98. Re:Great move !-Bend over and take it in the Walle by Krow10 · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Umm...who has "whom's" money, again?
    You do understand that business is a process not an event? I've personally spent several thousand dollars over the past ten years on video cards for myself and my family and will probably do so over the next ten. It's not whether nvidia has my money now, it's that they won't get any of my money in the future if they continue down this path of providing only intentionally crippled drivers for their cards.

    Now, I'm not going to scrap the few nvidia cards I have. I'll just move them as needed to non-multimedia machines such as servers and workstation/gaming machines I build for family members.

    Whether or not there are enough people like me to have an economic impact on nvidia's bottom line is another question. I don't really care as long as there are alternatives.

    Cheers,
    Craig

    --
    Corollary to Clarke's Third Law: Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
  99. Your free clue by metamatic · · Score: 1

    I don't see anything unethical about what they are doing.



    I make DVD movies for my family. Because not all of them have DVD players, I tape the final product to VHS for some of them. I've also done this for a friend who needed an audition tape for a movie audition.

    If I want to copy my DVD which I made myself using footage I filmed myself using my own camcorder, nVidia are going to treat me like a pirate and tell me I can't do it. That's what's unethical.
    --
    GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
  100. There is a workaround... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I ran into this problem with my GeForce4 Ti4200 and PowerDVD a while back. There is a registry key that disables the check and allows DVD playback.

    I don't have it on me now (sorry!). If I remember I will post the registry key when I get home...

  101. Off Topic?? please tell me how. by Mycroft_VIII · · Score: 1

    How is pointing out that the AIW also supports macrovision off topic on a discussion about nvidia adding support for it in thier drivers? Espcially when alot of people are talking about switching to ATI products to get away and could be unpleasantly suprised thereby? You have to be a pretty hard core 'topic purist' or a rabid ATI fan to mod off-topic (or blindly modding based subject line which I should have changed from an re:GNA somthing or rather the first time). That there are two such.....
    BTW I use a radeon AIW-9600 myself on my main system, it replaced an AIW-7000 that still works, so I'm certainly not slamming ATI eigther. (just pointing out they are not perfect eigther)
    Oh well at least I got my first -1 post after my first +5.

    Mycroft.

    --
    https://signup.leagueoflegends.com/?ref=4c3ed6600b6ea