No DRM for Apple in Intel-based Macs

JWeinraub writes "OfB is reporting that, contrary to widely-published and discussed rumors, Apple is not including the controversial Trusted Platform Module (TPM) chip in its Intel-based Macs. An anonymous registered Apple developer claims that the Apple x86 test boxes do not have DRM or TCPA components." From the article: "As to why those with access to the kits have been quiet concerning the claims, our source said, 'you can rest assured that Apple is keeping very close tabs on those of us who have them.' The kits are only available to those who accept a non-disclosure agreement."

Comments

Re:I'm still confused

[Jackdaw Rookery]

I doubt that you're going to get a definitive answer until the MacTels are released.

The chip is in *some* of the dev kits. That's all we know for sure. The rest is rumour.

Is it on all dev kits?
Is it enabled?
Is it enforced if enabled?
Will it make it onto the released kit?

Simple answer: Dunno.

Anonymous truth

[skinfitz]

An anonymous registered Apple developer claims that the Apple x86 test boxes do not have DRM or TCPA components.

Wow - so regardless that the dev kits contain the code and the mobo's contain the chip, an anonymous developer said they don't have them?

Well obviously the anonymous developer must be right; after all - who can argue with anonimity?

Re:Anonymous truth

[gnasher719]

"Wow - so regardless that the dev kits contain the code and the mobo's contain the chip, an anonymous developer said they don't have them?

Well obviously the anonymous developer must be right; after all - who can argue with anonimity?"

I am quite sure that everybody who claimed to have seen some chip on an Apple devkit machine has done so anonymously, and so has anybody who claimed to have taken a photo of an Apple devkit motherboard. Because if they put their name to it, Apple will jump on them so hard that they never recover.

So for all we know, the guys who claim to have seen any DRM chip could be complete idiots who have never been anywhere near an Intel Mac. In any case, they are in breach of an NDA, therefore not trustworthy. If they breach their contract with Apple, what makes you think they would tell _you_ the truth?

Re:I'll give you price

[tomstdenis]

You're comparing a fully shut down laptop to a G5 in suspend mode?

Right.

Also, you can run windows "sans-AV". it's called "don't have services you don't need on" and "don't install software you don't trust".

And for the most part you can configure AV's not to do boot scans but just runtime scans.

So really you're bitching that your properly inconfigured totally turned off laptop [which probably has way slower disk, memory and processing than your DESKTOP G5] is slower to boot then your properly set up desktop G5 in suspend mode. ...

Tom

Either way Steve needs to deploy the RDF

[ianscot]

If Apple wants to gain market share based on differentiating itself from the competition's draconian DRM measures, it'd be a good idea to put some english on this "spin" right quick. Letting the world speculate based on anonymous sources and not-for-production developer seed systems is not such a good idea -- assuming they think this is a good talking point for them, and given the iTunes store's emphasis on liveable DRM, they seem to.

What we need here is some of Steve Jobs's patented straight talk routine. Stand up and tell us that the DRM will work solely to limit the OS to Apple-branded systems, or whatever... but tell us something, rather than having rumors turn themselves over on slashdot.

(Not that there's any way to get 'hold of /. rumors for good. But you want to shape them a little.)

Re:This flies in the face of reality

[TheRaven64]

OS X, Linux, NetBSD and OpenBSD all run on my hardware. OS X runs quite happily in Mac-on-Linux and QEMU (more or less). So, where is the DRM lock-in you are talking about?

don't be so melodramatic

[cahiha]

Americans generally only get upset at the loss of Freedom when those it is the kind of abrupt in your face taking that DRM represents.

The trusted computing hardware doesn't prevent you from running untrusted code, it just prevents untrusted code from accessing protected data. What the lack of inclusion of trusted computing hardware would mean is simply that, if trusted computing catches on on Windows, a lot of Windows-based music and video can't be accessed on the Macintosh at all.

Would this leave Apple as the only "General computer" left?

Apple has never produced "general computers"; they don't support running other operating systems on their hardware, and they have a long history of using proprietary and undocumented hardware components in their Macintosh platform. The reason things have gotten better recently is not a change of heart at Apple, but the fact that they are increasingly using standard PC components in their systems.

A more accross the board move to Apple could even be a boon to linux as more people accept the fact that there are options to wintel

Apple hardware will be a decent choice for Linux as soon as (1) Apple gives you the option of buying the hardware without the software and (2) Linux developers aren't forced to create drivers by reverse engineering anymore.

On balance, I still think it's good for Apple to leave this out; if they really need it later, they should be able to provide it as a USB dongle. However, leaving it out doesn't make Macintosh an "open platform"; it never has been, and the way it looks, it won't be any time soon.

Re:This flies in the face of reality

[squiggleslash]

You can run any operating system on your PowerBook that's compiled for it. Many versions of GNU/Linux for example will install without problems.

I believe there are versions of Windows NT 4 that work with older Macs, I don't know about newer ones as there was a change in firmware architecture shortly after Microsoft stopped supporting the PowerPC version of NT 4.

There's a difference between third parties not necessarily supporting hardware, and that hardware locking them out.

No TPM? No IP for you.

[tepples]

There is Pegasos PPC from Genesi who is catering to the Linux PPC workstation crowd. And you can still buy Sun workstation computers too. And there are many other manufacturers making computers like this. These manufacturers probably won't ever add DRM to restrict the people that buy these machines.

And they won't be able to connect to the Internet if the vast majority of ISPs require Trusted Network Connect in order to get an IP address, which some people expect to happen between 2011 and 2015, possibly by force of law.