Slashdot Mirror
Longhorn to Require Monitor-Based DRM
Mr_Silver writes "Engadget has an interesting article regarding a new feature in Longhorn entitled PVP-OPM (Protected Video Path - Output Protection Management) which detects the capabilities of the display devices you are using and manages how (and if at all) content is sent to it. In short, this means that if Longhorn detects that your monitor is not "secure" enough, then your premium video content won't play on it until you buy one that is. Who gets to decide? The content providers of course." From the article: "So what will happen when you try to play premium content on your incompatible monitor? If you're "lucky", the content will go through a resolution constrictor. The purpose of this constrictor is to down-sample high-resolution content to below a certain number of pixels. The newly down-sampled content is then blown back up to match the resolution of your monitor. This is much like when you shrink a JPEG and then zoom into it. Much of the clarity is lost. The result is a picture far fuzzier than it need be."
As we live in a capitalistic society this of course means the end of Microsoft as an os providor as people generally don't want to buy crap (tm). I mean who would "want" to buy this?! I hope Linux is ready for the desktop (at least for Joe SP) when this rolls out because this is THE chance for linux to explode into the market.
"It's so convenient to have a system where everyone is a criminal" - A. Hitler
As ever, this won't stop anyone serious about circumventing DRM, and will only fuck over the innocent. Do they never learn?
Microsoft is considering the acquisition of an ASCII art company.
This is just the feature I've been waiting for. I wouldn't dream of buying a monitor without this priceless capability.
Daniel
Carpe Diem
Its interesting to see that Microsoft and DRM technology providers are now taking a leaf out of Slashdot's book.
Ripping an new rectum in the fabric of spacetime.
My Computer -> Computer
My Documents -> Documents
My Monitor -> Our Monitor!
Seriously, who didn't see this coming?
isn't this a case of indirect industrial price-fixing? by forcing you to buy a DRM-enabled monitor, they can easily collude and charge a, say, 20% premium, over a standard LCD.
Another reason why Tiger and Leopard makes Longhorn look long-in-the-tooth ^^
A Longhorn feature that everyone hopes is vaporware!
The problem is not things that *CAN* operate with a wide variety of DRM option. The abilty to support DRM isn't a problem at all.
:)
The solution, as always, is simple. Vote with your wallet for either (a) DRM solutions that make sense, or (b) for solutions that don't take advantage of the richly enabled DRM fabic available to content producers.
If I produce content, I should be able to decide what's done with it (for a reasonable time, anyway). If I want it to be one-peek-per-customer, that's my right, it's my content.
You...just shouldn't be stupid as to buy it
Another brilliant bit of marketing!
-All that is gold does not glitter - Tolkien
www.ra
Say goodbye to sending a signal to your livingroom TV, LH users.
Wow, I wasn't thinking of buying LongHorn. I mean, all those features they tore out was really kind of a bummer.
But dayamn, I have to have that feature!
Nice to see Microsoft finally give me a positive reason to buy LongHorn. Now I can't wait for LongHorn!
Can Microsoft innovate or what?
Guys, I don't think you really understand the "choices" being offered.
Company's who wish to provide Hi-Def content to PCs won't want to do it if it gets stolen/copied easily. With a secure copy-protection mechanism, far more companies will be willing to offer content.
This will create a large marketplace with lots of competition because it won't be just the big companies that can swallow the piracy loss entering the market.
So your choice isn't really between viewing this hi-def content as you wish or viewing it on a secure setup. It's a choice between content or no content.
Wouldn't you rather have at least the option of content that you wouldn't normally have?
So please, stop crying that Microsoft is out to get you and that they're infringing on some rights you think you have. Since when did the consumer of a service have the right to dictate how the company in question provides the service? You either use the service, or you don't... if it sucks and nobody uses it, the company will change the service or go out of business. Simple as that.
Microsoft will be creating MORE opportunities for services and products that can't really exist without their technology.
Don't buy the content that requires this.
Create your own content and sell it to others that with no restrictions.
III.IIVIVIXIIVIVIIIVVIIIIXVIIIXIIIIIIIIVIIIIVVIII
This is just wonderfull. Just think instead of finishing most of the features, that were to be included in the newest Windows family member, they (MS) decided to integrate DRM, in lie of the file system, and all the other features that were pushed out, or for inclusion much later in the products dev cycle. Well, I know I am not going to partake of the latest offering from Redmond now. I wonder how much Macrovision is getting to cross license this sceme?
My cat's picked up a Hammer. HEY! Put down that Hammer. Put Down that Hamm...THUNK!
If you need a certified monitor then you can't play your premium content out to an monitor emulator for recording the video signal to rip content to strip the DRM.
Kind of like how now I can play my DRM'd music through my lineout and record it on line-in in any format I choose.
It will be like DeCSS all over again but this time instead of DVD players it will be monitors.
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
True, but the DRM will still be there and I bet your brain won't be compatible.
I doubt they have monitors or video cards that can detect, say, a simple splitter or repeater. It's the sort of thing a third-year EE student can build (fourth year for digital signals).
It will stop some casual piracy, you know, the kind companies and congressmen say they don't care about. Mostly it will get Microsoft a piece of the monitor market without the need to develop useful features or compete on price.
So, let me get this straight. If I so chose to upgrade to Longhorn, I'd have to buy a whole new videocard and monitor to actually view the OS and any other programs tailor written for it? I am not aware of any videocards that currently offer DVI ports that actually also have HDCP standard (although I could definitely be wrong). Does this mean we'll all have to upgrade to videocards with HDMI ports built in?
I think this is pure idiocy. And people thought Apple moving to Intel based processors because of built-in DRM was a step over the edge...
"Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
"we're not gonna take it. da da da da da-da da. we're not gonna take it da da da da da-da da"
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
So, of the major features that were originally supposed to be the selling point in Longhorn...
WinFS pretty much seems indefinately stalled.
Avalon seems to be delayed until after release.
The new shell will not be available until the Server release.
But the crippling DRM feature that requires me to have an MPAA approved monitor to get "premium" video quality is right on schedule.
"You spoony bard!" -Tellah
The vast majority of the time, discussion of DRM on /. falls into the "nobody really cares except for the /. nerds". But this... I know everyone here hates Microsoft, but it's hard to believe they won't end up backing down on this. This is the sort of thing Joe Consumer will raise holy h*ll about, the first time it happens.
I know it's not "just Microsoft", but really - Microsoft can't afford to have the bad press this will generate.
#DeleteChrome
Bad news for Microsoft, good news for other operating systems.
"i'm sorry sir, you can't afford to remember that movie now... i know you paid to see it at the cinema, what right does that give you to remember it now? you only paid to see it once. after all you are still enjoying the memory of it - you must pay the actors and writers or else they will starve..."
IMHO, this is another example of the industry shooting itself in the foot, only moreso than they previously have.
It's one thing when joe-consumer downloads a song from the Microsoft music store, and can't copy it to his iPod. It's one thing when joe-consumer buys a DVD, and has a hard time making a VHS copy because his kids keep scratching the crap out her DVDs. Both of these things the average consumer accepts will not work, because consumers are used to different technologies not playing nicely together. They don't know about DRM, but they do know that they could never get those photos aunt Kathy sent to print on their printer, and figure this is more of the same.
If Morgan Freeman has his way, though, and movies are delivered to our homes by internet, consumers will be calling tech support in droves; "I can't watch my movie? What's wrong?" And those consumers will not be happy when they're told the 19" LCD monitor they bought two years ago needs to be replaced. Consumers DO expect to be able to watch a movie they download.
I think, ultimately, this is a nail in the coffin of the unborn movies-by-internet industry, which is a shame.
How long until we see something similar with audio? "Users without an appropriately DRM-equipped soundcard will hear down-sampled audio played back through the Windows PC Speaker driver"
The beauty of capitalism is that bad ideas usually die. The consumers dictate whether they will accept this by purchasing or not purchasing it.
Unfortunately, there is such a thing as marketers who create markets where there is none and desire where there should be none. If MS markets this correctly, people will want to give up their freedom.
From the article:
You don't think Apple is going to do this too? What will happen with Linux though? With Linux making inroads into set top boxes there will be some solution for Linux, though I don't think it will make its way to the desktop (legally).
When DRM requires the purchase of new hardware just for things to work like they used to, then thats when it is going to turn off even the clueless consumer who normally wouldn't care. When it starts biting into people's wallets they always stand up and take notice.
In my case, if my monitor is not "secure" enough, finding a replacement might not be so easy. My monitor is an older CRT that presents a very high quality picture. I use this because I dislike the ghosting and viewing angle issues that, while much improved from how they used to be, are still present in LCD monitors.
The problem is that it is hard to find a decently priced, truly good CRT anymore because most of the industry is switching over to flat panel production. They literally don't make them like they used to anymore.
I'm guessing that this technology is just geared towards people using video outs to TVs and Tivo like devices, but I really don't like the idea of being potentially forced to buy a new monitor just for an operating system. That is pretty rediculous.
You are who you are, let no one tell you different. But, never close your mind to a new point of view.
I could just imagine someone created a sort of blackbox that fools the PC into thinking that the monitor is opium (OPM) compatible. Connection would be something like this.
PC BlackBox Monitor
PC asks BlackBox - "Are you on opium?"
BlackBox reply - "Sure am, dude."
PC gives BlackBox on-restricted content.
BlackBox gives Monitor onrestricted content.
Hm...
1. Microsoft shell out Longhorn.
2. Foreign country (*cough*TaiwanChinaKorea*cough*) produces BlackBoxes(tm).
3. Opium bypassed.
4. ???? (maybe laugh in their face)
5. PROFIT (for foreign countries).
In US, you can easily buy enough major firearms to wipe out your neighbourhood but a few little fireworks are banned.
Do you honestly think it will be possible to purchase and watch content on a linux machine? Do you think the movie industry is going to give you something playable on your un-DRMed box? You might pirate it.
Of course, we all know that making bits not copyable is like making water not wet. But I think you underestimate the MPAA's lobbying capabilities. I fully expect it to be illegal to posses or discuss wet water any day now.
As far as Linux, expect that it won't work at all unless someone can manage to find a crack to unprotect content.
This is very unlikely to affect your standard PC monitor. I believe this is more of an effor to prevent you from using your non-windows media center edition PC, as a Media Center. By detecting the "monitor", and making sure it isn't a TV, it will allow them to restrict your ability from watching their content, on your TV without their consent.
If there is anything more important than my ego around here, I want it caught and shot now.
I think the point is that making sure the monitor is "trusted" means you don't simply have a video caputure device plugged in.
Of course, you might have your "trusted" monitor plugged in and simply sniff the signal (via a little box between the monitor and the computer that only "listens" to the outgoing analog signals).
This is not a "real" solution, but yet another clue barrier... So now, if you want to build a VGA video capture device, you need to make it just a pass through that passivly observers and does not participlate as if it was a monitor... Simple.
Spell check? Why bother. That is what grammer/spelling Nazi freaks who waiste band width posting "spell right" are for.
The problem is, people won't KNOW what it is
What this means is, WE HAVE TO TELL THEM.
People aren't going to refrain from buying Longhorn. People in a year or so literally won't have a choice; if you want a new computer you'll be buying Longhorn. However, we can make an impact on the secure monitors. It wouldn't be that hard to convince people (friends, family, neighbors, etc) that the new secure monitors and video cards are to blame (which they are, because if the secure monitors aren't picked up then the feature won't be used by content providers). Explain the feature enough that they'd understand it-- perhaps explain that the movie companies and microsoft want to stop you from doing certain things with your computer, and they can only do it if people buy these monitors-- them that and try to get them to pick some other brand.
Longhorn is unstoppable. Microsoft can and will do literally anything it wants. However a consumer backlash against the feature itself is possible as long as the hardware is targetted. Unfortunately I fear the American consumer is so weak right now no one will bother to try.
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
ok, now most security measures i can at least objectively see where they're coming from, but what is this supposed to gain for anyone?
The Microsoft link claims this is to protect you from hardware attacks. If I understand correctly, there is a concern that someone could write a hardware virus that would change the screen resolution from 640x480 to 1280x1024 multiple times each second. It is expected that this could physically damage the monitor.
But if the monitor is authenticated at both resolutions, then it seems the PVP-OPM would not stop the attack. So I don't really see any protection here.
I RTFA, and while the author doesn't actually say much, it seems to me that the point of this is to discourage someone from ripping a DVD and watching it on their computer. This is assuming that their video card won't do DVD resolution.
At the risk of being modded redundant, this is yet another DRM idea that will have no effect on the people it is intended to stop, and will inconvenience everyone else.
is going to wreak a lot of havoc. Imagine a virus that mark's certain application's as protected content with no resolution constrictor... A virus that marks' all microsoft applications as protected content so that they go through a resolution constrictor and look like crap. Just a matter of time before this is exploited in this manner.
WHY the hell are we, as consumers, always getting raped by these stupid freaking companies?
Becuase you keep buying their product?
Not much to see here, please move along.
--- Hot Shot City is particularly good.
This WHOLE thing is moot. We all know that DRM does't work and people go out of their way to avoid DRM content.
.wmv to secure online video, we use XviD. They region encoded DVDs, China starts pumping out millions upon millions of region free DVD players.
For instance, they made ATRAC as a secure format for digital music, we all still use mp3. They made
So who wants to bet that this DRM will die still born along with the rest of the attempts to restrict media?
Sometimes I wish I was a plumber, then I'd know how to deal with other people's shit.
GNUstep is an amicable project. What they are trying to achieve is great for the community, no doubt. But it is not anywhere near useful for the average user. Unless some miracles happen, it won't be usable as a Mac OS X -> Linux transition desktop.
Now, there are some people who are going to say, "But I can already check my email with GNUMail!", and to them I say, "Yes." But the fact remains that the NeXT-style vertical menus are too powerful for the average user. Apple realized that, and ditched them. While it is claimed that horizontal menus can be used when using bundles, it is far beyond the capabilities of your typical user to make such a change.
While it would be fantastic if GNUstep and Linux were able to replace Mac OS X for most people, that just isn't the case, unfortunately. They'll still be stuck dealing with crippled Longhorn.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
GNUstep is a development platform, not a desktop environment. There are some quite nice desktop environment projects based on GNUstep though, and the Nesedah Cameleon theme created for Étoilé looks very nice (and has been subject to very strict usability review).
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
... a mouse which can't click on certain links due to 'drm' constrictions, where the OS determines the user is not allowed to use the supplied anti-MS, anti-profit making link?
Veni, Vidi, Velcro!
and I did not speak outbecause I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak outbecause I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak outbecause I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me.
First they DRM'd the software and I did not speak out because I used non-DRM'd software.
Then they came DRM'd the OS and I did not speak out because I stuck to non-DRM'd OS.
Then they DRM'd the firmware and I did not speak out because I used non-DRM'd firmware.
Then they DRM'd the hardware and there was no where to run my non-DRM'd firmware, OS and software.
--Me
An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
Under this scheme, though, you are screwed by the time you get to see what services are out there. You buy Longhorn, you've just given control of your machine to more than content producers. You've handed control of your machine to a third party - be it Hi-Def content producers or Microsoft itself. You've given someone else the right to redefine *your* rights under copyright law and to control to which materials you even have access - now DRM becomes censorship.
This may not be how DRM starts out but it certainly is where it *can* lead.
What about my right to make a backup of digital content I've licensed for viewing? My DVD collection is a prime example - Jack Valenti once said something akin to "digital lasts forever" but the only reason that is even remotely true is because I can find a copy of every movie I own online and burn a copy if I chose. It certainly is not because DVDs last forever - a few scratches (and if you have young children in the house this is very easily done) and you are done.
This has been said before but I'll say it again because it is appropriate: content producers need to decide: are you licensing content or are you selling a product? If you are licensing content then you are telling me to what limits I can use your content - the medium upon which I place your content should not matter. If you are selling a product, then I can do whatever I want with the product as long as I do not violate the copyrights upon the content.
Remember, among your rights as a consumer are the rights to time- and space-shift the content you are entitled to possess (be it via explicit relationship defined by the exchange of money for goods and services or be it via the implied relationship defined by trading your time and eyeballs watching advertisements).
In general, as a software developer and an individual who would like to make a living as a writer someday, I understand the debate over intellectual property/copyright and DRM. I understand why content producers are concerned. However, you cannot have it both ways. DRM tries to let the content producers usurp or otherwise limit *your* rights in favor of their own and that is a very bad thing.
Be sure to read that second link in the summary as well. Looks like they have the same thing planned for audio too! DRM'd speakers, anyone?
I mod down all the "free iPod"-sig losers.
Unfortunately the choice the public will see is likely to be between:
- Buy Longhorn, and be able to view this premium video content.
- Run Linux/MacOS/BSD and not be able to view this content.
Sure, it may be possible for someone to crack the encrypted path, and distribute unrestricted versions online. But you can't exactly advertise that in your marketing campaign, whereas Microsoft can advertise this premium content as only being available on Longhorn.I think this can only hurt other OSes.
Wouldn't this just be done at video card or motherboard level or more likely software level? I'm assuming it will still have a standard output to any generic monitor, the average person wouldn't upgrade to a new monitor for a new OS.
Actually from the microsoft white paper:
>PVP-UAB provides the last internal link in the Longhorn content protection chain, to ensure that the premium video content reliably makes it from the Longhorn Protected Environment to being rendered on the card without a copy of the content being stolen.
So it's not a monitor thing, and the article writer appears to be a dumbass.
I'd rather whine about the content creators that want to have it this way...
This wouldn't be an issue if we didn't have paranoid movie companies.
Personally, I think it's a matter of who's developing the support -- just like Longhorn will indirectly support movie piracy like Windows XP does by not preventing it, it will supporting this technology. If Microsoft wouldn't, the movie companies would probably develop software for it instead.
Actually, just like Linus isn't against DRM in Linux, I bet he doesn't have problems with this support becoming a part of the Linux kernel in the future either, which is actually just another one in the long line of DRM technologies. At least I can't see a reason to why he with his stance of allowing anyone to use Linux for anything you want to, including watching protected content, would change that stance now.
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
Bees Knees
British (English) slang. Derived from the word Business.
Something may be described as "The Business" pronounced "Biz-Niss" hence "Bees Knees" or "The Dog's Bollocks" or "The Mutt's Nuts" all pretty much mean something is good.
Alright bloke.
What the planet really needs is more people throwing CRTs into the garbage. Way to go, Microsoft,
for making it happen!
If only we could charge them for the environmental damage they're going to cause. =/
25% Funny, 25% Insightful, 25% Informative, 25% Troll
First of all, it means they've failed to put their CrapWare(tm) in the computer's firmware. Less cruft in my motherboard is a Good Thing. Not that it would have killed Linux, anyway -- the Open Source community is pretty good at working around things like that. But still.
Second of all, this means that in order to access their movie content and so on, you'll have to have one of the "special" monitors, but the system will only work through Windows -- it's primarily a software solution which looks for the monitor feature, and fucks up the imagery if it doesn't find it. So, again, Linux remains unaffected.
Third, if we Linux guys decided to buy something like a future game console or set-top box (we wouldn't run a Windows computer per se, of course, because we're already wonderfully served by our Linux boxen) it would probably have this built-in, and we'd be able to do what we wanted with it.
I'd say it's not a bad idea overall.
Farewell! It's been a fine buncha years!
http://www.spatz-tech.de/spatz/dvi_magic.htm
Magic de-HDCPed DVI. Completely illegal in the USA thanks to the DMCA, but the rest of the world can enjoy our content at full resolution.
People aren't going to stop buying Britney Spears CDs no matter what the RIAA does because they like Britney Spears, and anyway, there's stuff going into their purchase decision besides just what the RIAA does.
People aren't going to stop buying Madden no matter what EA does because they like Madden, and anyway, there's stuff going into their purchase decision besides just what EA does.
But a monitor? People have no attachments to monitors. They're pretty much interchangeable, as are many PC parts, from the average apathetic consumer's perspective. You can't get someone to stop buying Britney Spears CDs because there's no way you'll be able to get them to look at the britney spears cd and see just the RIAA tactics that produced it. But, you can get them to look at this monitor or that monitor and just see the DRM. And you can do this because really, other than the DRM, what distinguishing features does the monitor have?
I don't think it's just apathy. Buying different music requires sacrifices. Buying different commodity PC parts does not require sacrifices.
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
Workaround for secure-monitor: Install linux.
So what if I cant watch "secure content" ? I dont watch/listen to "semi-secured" content anyway. I'm not going to buy into a "restricted use" hardware platform.
DRM is the equivelent of a proprietary OS. Sure, its "open" to the players who join the club for content development, but it serves the same purpose of the early MAC-OS - keep developers OUT.
Obviously, MS's main customer focus is on content providers (ie Media-10, XP activation, XBOX hardware protection etc), not end level users. Thats a fine corporate decision for them, but, its not the direction I'm willing to go. Its not the direction my development corporation is going.
We're migrating legacy apps off MS platforms. New development is specifically not using MS platforms. Funny how the development world has come full circle: in the 80s the Microsoft platform was "open" for development, API's were published, and the cost of entry was reasonably low - all in the face of locked development platforms like Mini/MainFrames. Take the view that apps are really content development.
Now, the means for content development is steadily being locked down. MS will continue to make their money with content providers with lots of sheep locked into their Paladium-Pens. Oh well. For the rest of us, we'll be using some type of Lx platform to continue our content creation.
The only PT Boat Journal on the web: http://www.PT171.org
Ultimately hardware options are not a solution pirates can use, since watermarking could easily identify which person freed some content from DRM. The number of people capable of freeing content is directly proportional to the ease in identifying them (and thus shutting them down).
The big problem in terms of maintaining freedom over your own computer is the BIOS. Nowadays it is compressed and encrypted, so if one day it started refusing to load non-authorised operating systems you could easily have a situation where only longhoard would load, it wouldn't let you load drivers or even read the decoding software instructions to simulate it, etc. So that's the key piece, since if that goes DRM-only then the only options are to a) hack the os or b) emulate the entire computer. But to do (b) you'll have to read keys, etc from hardware which can be made extremely difficult.
Of course hacking longhoard will be easy, for now, but ultimately that's a losing proposition. So people with the skill and that care should contribute to the open bios project.
That's precisely the question, and we'll just have to see.
Generally, when one asks "Will it run ____?" the blank is filled in with some commercial piece of software, usually a game or a productivity app. And the answer will always be yes: Photoshop, MS Office, Half Life 83, etc. will all run beautifully on this. Probably even the old versions will, since they're not video players. The same will apply to all of the most common media players; in fact, Windows Media Player will run right there.
The most obvious question from the slightly more insightful user is, "Will it play my existing DVDs?", and that's the biggest question mark. If the answer turns out to be "No", if somebody upgrades their laptop and discovers the next time that they board an airplane that they have to read the in-flight magazine rather than watch Tomb Raider 9 3/4, then you're going to see some serious, serious backlash.
I'm going to assume that MS knows that, and so existing DVD formats will probably play exactly as they do now (which does have various protections anyway, though they're easily bypassed.)
Instead, I expect that this will apply primarily to new content (or rather, newly-coded content). For that, question would be "But will it run NFF (New Fangled Format)?" and the answer is "Yes". The flip side, "Will NFF run on my existing box" will be "No", but I think that user backlash on that is smaller than you might expect. They could take it as an opportunity to switch to Linux/OS X/PDP 11, but as long as they're buying a new computer, they could buy one with Longhorn, which will run NFF along with all of their old programs.
The user is kept on the upgrade treadmill because at each step the logical choice will be "forward" rather than "right" or "left". That's partly because they expect that a side-step will just put them on a different treadmill, which is a whole different debate.
So I don't expect this to cause a mass defection from Windows, at least not by itself. Other factors (cheaper Macs, improved Linux, the stunning revival of the Timex Sinclair) will make it hard to tease out whether I'm right or wrong, so maybe all this is moot, but, well, it's Slashdot and I get to shoot my mouth off anyway.
No, I do not think you are correct.
Yes, the worst enemy of capitalism is capitalism. What that means is that as MS continues to become less and less paltable, competitors will take their place.
People are much more willing to engage in the little 'r' revolution, than to start over with a new system
The unencubered nature of OSS, and the much more limited DRM of apple-like systems will simply be another feature that savvy salespeople will use to push competitors products.
WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
I was referred to this article on another site.
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=24638
Intel to cut Linux out of the content market
Comment East Fork off key
By Charlie Demerjian: Friday 15 July 2005, 10:01
INTEL IS ABOUT TO CUT Linux out of the legitimate content market, and hand the keys to the future of digital media to Microsoft at your expense. Don't like it? Tough, you are screwed. The vehicle to do this is called East Fork, the upcoming and regrettable Intel digital media 'platform'. The funny part is that the scheme is already a failure, but it will hurt you as it thrashes before it dies. Be afraid, be very afraid.
To-do List: Receive telemarketing call during a tornado warning. Check.
'why' MS is doing this.
It's evident that there are plenty of people who are now less likely to buy Longhorn *looks around*, but surely making your product unattractive is not really any way to be a capitalistic market gorilla.
So - there must be an upside to this somewhere. Maybe there is, I hate the idea of DRM, but think of the iPod/iTunes. All those nifty litttle DRM devices suddenly spawned an online music market. Maybe when there is a large market of DRM supporting desktops out there, we'll suddenly get some other legitimate services - video on demand, software on demand? Not sure I like it myself, but surely you can all devote a little more thought to it other than "MS Baaaaad"
What TFA says is that it looks like HDMI/HDCP will become a requirement for watching digital content on PC systems. Microsoft is only adding support for this crap for Windows users that happen to have the corresponding hardware. I can't blame them for that and I can't see how they stand to gain very much. It seems to me that the ones to blame are the greedy content owners and media manufacturers and the ones who really stand to gain are monitor manufacturers since only a small minority of PC monitors sold today seems to have support for this stuff and unless monitor manufacturers offer upgrades to enable you to watch DRM protected material this means people will have to buy new monitors. What really stinks is that I just bought an expensive new 23" LCD monitor. Since I use it alot to watch movies it looks like I will have to scrap it in what? A couple of years? Those greedy sons of b*tches can't be serious about doing forcing N million PC users out there to scrap their monitors and buy new ones?
Only to idiots, are orders laws.
-- Henning von Tresckow
As soon as you need actual hardware to pirate the signal, copying movies becomes a restricted occupation again, just like selling free cable boxes.
No, copying movies the first time becomes a restricted occupation. Once a single unencrypted copy exists, then making a million more is no more difficult than it is today.
Whip out your favorite P2P client, and search for some copyrighted video. Do you see a hundred different rips made by each of the hundred different people sharing a copy? No, you see one or two of the best rips, each with hundreds of identical copies shared, in part because the swarming download protocols and hashing algorithms fundamentally encourage that behavior.
So what difference will in-monitor DRM make? Instead of having a few zealous groups using software to rip tons of movies that are then shared by millions of people, we'll have a few zealous groups using hardware to rip tons of movies that are then shared by hundreds of millions of people.
Wait - why will there be more people sharing these rips? Because most people will own some of the billions of non-DRM-capable monitors in existance, and the moron DRM-using publishers will have thus made it impossible for them to play a full-quality copy of these videos unless they have an illegal copy. Publishers couldn't do anything more stupid if they put a "Download free movies on P2P! It's the best!" advertisement at the start of every show!
No they won't. Not even the /. readers go out of their way to avoid proprietary implementations of things that don't need to be there. Lots of them use proprietary software (Microsoft Windows and MacOS X, most notably) and patent-encumbered formats (such as MP3, as you mentioned) instead of technically superior Ogg Vorbis which is not encumbered and is available to everyone freely. Most DVD viewers I know have no idea what region coding is, much less how to disable or alter region coding on their DVD players.
/. readers, there's no reason to believe it won't work on less adept mass audiences.
It's a matter of convincing users that some nifty feature comes with the system and taking on these restrictions (if they're mentioned at all) are the only way to get those features.
This is the path by which users are being lured away from pursuing their software freedom and if it works on the most technically-adept
Digital Citizen
It's not enough that the majority of installed PCs probably don't have the horsepower to run Longhorn, now M$ wants to force people to buy new peripherals. I hate to compare them to Apple, but I was using the old OS 9 on an old computer that wouldn't run OS X. So, I bought a used B&W G3, plugged in my ADB keyboard and a beige, Performa-era monitor, and installed OS X 10.3 which runs flawlessly. The OS was literally more expensive than the computer.
M$, on the other hand, would force me to buy a new monitor in addition to a faster computer to view content that I'VE ALREADY PAID FOR? Once again, I'm having difficulty seeing Windows as a value added product.
Make love, not reality television.
The problem is that these restrictions do not have enough exposure into the mainstream, even when it concerns TV.
Where was the uprising over commercial skip features in ReplayTV? What about the broadcast flag?
These "security features" will be slipped in, with people unaware, until they want to do something that is not allowed (like skipping previews on DVDs). Then they will be stuck with it, and may very well accept it as "how things are."
Will this affect 500+ GB *ripped and _reencoded_* .avi Video Libraries? I mean, I hear some people have them...
Not I, of course. Just sayin'...
Akarsz Magyar Gentoo fórumot? Akkor
You know, the one who is supposed to be always right, or mostly right. It's obviously not the end user anymore. Typically a copy of Windows is purchased by guys who make the PC, so it's not really up to the end user to concern himself with these things. So MS cuts a deal with Dell, and cuts a deal with a consortium of content providers and the vast majority of the people don't know a thing until their computer tells them they can't do something. With the exception of better USB support in newer systems. I have no qualms with continuing to use Win 98 SE.
The whole thing is a war of egos over a market which doesn't exist. Who really wants to intercept video going to their monitor anyway? DVD sales are dropping in general because the sad reality is that for all the movies produced in a year, damn few are worth watching once, never mind more than once. The whole idea probably stems from the idea that if you don't prove you are defending your copyright, you lose it. This is just another frontier on which you have to prove you are defending your copyright. I think it's pretty obvious from X-Box sales that Microsoft isn't going to own the living room in our lifetimes. So they should develop a better strategy for holding the office before somebody makes Linux palatable enough for the masses.
Big OS is the same damn thing as Big government. To get the 1% you want you have to finance the 99% you don't want. If Microsoft is going to keep developing for the interests of people other than the end user, they should really just give the OS out. There has to be an end to how much you can force people to buy upgrades that have nothing they want in them. You may be able to mess with ignorance of the home user, but small business owners tend to get pissed being charged something for nothing over and over. I know a lot of shops that still use old Windows variants and even a few DOS shops. They don't even think about it until they try and add a workstation and get some crap like XP pre-installed.
When DRM starts really hitting users in the face, they will look for alternatives, or just look away. None of this amounts to a serious business model for content providers, because they really haven't been putting nearly as much effort into the content as they have into the delivery systems. Their sloth is coming home to roost, and all the DRM in the world isn't going to save them.
If you read Microsoft's little plan for drm, you might notice subtle hints on video card design. These hints could be interpreted as:
"You may want to include lots of undocumented interfaces for you video card, as that will make it easier to certify your card. Try to conceal the exact functionality from the dirty Linux hippie thieves."
However, I haven't used Linux in a long time, having switched to Macs. Perhaps obfuscation of video hardware is now the norm.
But the last time I checked, DeCSS was a dubious procedure at best. With the DMCA, everytime you use DeCSS you are committing a federal felony by breaking a form of digital encryption. A handful of major Linux distributions have stopped supporting DVD playback in their "out of the box" distribution for this concern. Yes Linux will play it, but it will be illegal. Im sure the same can be said about a windows user who goes to similar lengths to play a movie through one of these new encryptions.
Most people don't care about watching video on their PC. I know someone who was all excited about his new "Media Center" PC when he got it. Then he discovered he can't play DVDs he recorded on anything else - including his DVD player in the living room. He doesn't talk about it any more, and obviously he doesn't bring over any cool shows he recorded either. The only thing I've ever really said about it is "why do you want to watch TV on a 17 inch monitor?". Now he's got a DVD recorder by the TV. It's just stupid, and when these issues come up, Joe consumer is just going to buy an HD-DVD player and connect it to his TV.
The real key to all this is to spread FireFox. If web sites decide they have to support alternative browsers, there just won't be any DRMed content anyway. The stuff you buy in the store most people don't view on the PC. This is an attempt by Hollywood to eliminate the distribution channels (and costs), but people just don't want to download movies and watch them on a PC - not most people.
People almost all of you are part of the problem. Not just non-geeks. Why do go around calling people consumers?? You've already been brainwashed. You're citizens or people!
Who the hell cares if you can't see some dumbass movie or the listen to the latest manufactured pop star's video???
I'm gonna be labelled a troll for sure, but hell this mentality burns my butt. The problem isn't DRM the problem is that you all believe you *need* to see the lame things being offered up.
Come on. You got better things to *do* than just be a content "consumer". And for those that don't they deserve all the DRM and rights violations that are happening. Look at where you've been lead to think. If you don't think the content is worth the price they are asking for it then clearly the answer isn't to fight DRM.... the answer is just don't buy it.
That's what this is all about.
If Longhorn is a bloated mess and comes with utter sillyness such as "monitor DRM" that requires you to buy a new monitor (remember the MS keyboard? Keyboard manufacturers were crawling up MS' ass to be able to build and sell them) then the hardware vendors will hail Longhorn as the best OS ever. And be happy to sell you the great hardware you need to honor this OS.
That's what this is all about.
I hope they screw this one up.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
MacroVision for VHS wasn't 100% effective either, but it was enough to stop the vast majority of people from copying video tapes.
I can spend a hour trying to find a bad overly compressed screen capture of a movie off BT, or $15 for a new one at Target, or $3 for a rental at BB. Which one is a better use of my time? Which course of action gives me a better movie experience?
All the studios need to do is protect the majority of their market, while not pissing them off by being too heavy handed, and they'll succeed. And don't think for a second they haven't been observing the music/mp3/itunes battles with great interest.
I don't think they're going to make all of the same mistakes, but I do expect them to do what they can to protect their investments.
And if P2P and Freenet become perceived as too much of a problem, those protocols will be monitored, banned, disrupted, blocked, and/or the users fined or jailed. Too many people think that because their computer is sitting down in their basement that their internet access is "private" and unmonitored and untraceable.
I've said before, and I'll say it again. The key here is not to crack and steal their work, but to create and patronize new models and new works. Do the first, and you enter into an arms race. Do the second, and they have no choice but to embrace them... or die.
Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
Also from engadget: http://www.engadget.com/entry/1234000230050640
A bit expensive of course, but proves the theory. I think Steve Jobs even said on stage (maybe at D a couple of years ago) that DRM is only a stop gap. If people want to get stuff uncracked it can happen. Everything is crackable. Unless you start working on quantum algorithms you're not going to create something a computer can't deduce with enough time. Not to mention, the layering of software and hardware - (example, the TCP/IP stack sits on top of the networking stack. The window manager stack sits on top of the display stack etc.) you're always going to be able to override some library somewhere.