Slashdot Mirror
No Full HD Playback for 32-bit Vista
snafu109 writes "Pity the Vista user with a 32-bit CPU. Senior Program Manager Steve Riley announced today at Tech.Ed Australia that full HD content shall only be played at the full resolution where only signed drivers are used — only in the 64-bit version of Vista. From the article: '"Any next-generation high definition content will not play in x32 at all," said Riley. "This is a decision that the Media Player folks made because there are just too many ways right now for unsigned kernel mode code [to compromise content protection]. The media companies asked us to do this and said they don't want any of their high definition content to play in x32 at all, because of all of the unsigned malware that runs in kernel mode can get around content protection, so we had to do this."'"
This is another example of the media companies dictating what the consumer can purchase in the marketplace. They have been hampering innovation since the beginning of time. If it were up to media companies we wouldn't even been able to purchase a tape recorder back in the seventies, a VCR in the eighties, and an MP3 player in the 90s, and now they are doing the same with HD in the 00s. I bet Linux will step up to the plate and be able to play HD.
Free Windows Admin Tools
... by the time Vista finally hits store shelves, 32-bit CPUs will be a long forgotten antique.
..... Microsoft can hedge their bets in terms of which standard wins. After all, nothing sucks more than being on the losing side.
This is my opinion. To make sure you don't steal it, it's covered by the DMCA.
i guess this the major upgrade MS is talking about!
The war with islam is a war on the beast
The war on terror is a war for peace
The media companies asked us to do this and said they don't want any of their high definition content to play in x32 at all, because of all of the unsigned malware that runs in kernel mode can get around content protection, so we had to do this.
Because if Microsoft had said no, then the Media Companies would all have just jumped ship to Linux, thus destroying Microsoft's monopoly once and for all.
Seriously, in Microsoft's position they don't have to do *anything* they don't want to - I suspect large amount of money or other "incentives" changed hands here.
Wait, so Microsoft is cutting back on feature bloat in the name of security? (Clicks heels chanting "there's no place like home.")
Information wants a fueled airplane waiting at the hangar and no one gets hurt.
Sounds like an opening for competition against Media Player. If WMP is shipped brain damaged, what's to stop 3rd party apps from doing full HD payback instead?
VideoLan anyone? http://www.videolan.org/
But what about non MS media players which run on Vista?
What hurdles will they have to get HD content on non DRM'd to death systems? Or am I off on a technological tangent which is impossible?
I'm a fiscal conservative, it's a pity we don't have a political party anymore
"The media companies asked us to do this and said they don't want any of their high definition content to play in x32 at all, because of all of the unsigned malware that runs in kernel mode can get around content protection, so we had to do this."
Now watch everyone her get up in arms about their "rights" to be entertained.
And I thought the PS3 was doomed.
Looks like consumers of hardware and software find themselves in a slack period for the next time where companies try how far they can go before producing things that can get purchased again.
"The media companies asked us to do this ..... so we had to do this."
Wow.
MS had to? No, they chose to.
XP is the last MS OS for me.
Well x64 sounds bad enough but now they're referring to the 32bit x86 architecture as x32. Just doesn't sound right.
This is a clever way to make people upgrade to Vista. People will want to run HD content even if they don't want to use Vista. Now they will be forced to buy a new computer just to support HD, and OEMs will have vista pre-loaded onto their computers.
I am shocked that Microsoft wouldn't put their end-user's interests first I'll tell you.
Oh... wait... Never mind.
Help save the critically endangered Blue Iguana
Uh--so let me get this right, "Malware" now includes anything that does not "register" with Microsoft and adhere to unconscionable DRM schemes?
there will either be a hack / crack for win32 or someone will just write a nice win32 client that ignores all that moronic drm.
ms will do nothing but lose share over this.
-.no
...that media providers can take DRM and shove it up their orifice of choice, because no matter what they do, they will be wasting their time and money since someone will always find a way around it. Good thing too...at least some people are looking out for our best interests.
"Malware" is ware that's mal (bad) for us, not what's bad for the MPAA.
Seriously folks. There are no distinctions between the current 32bit systems and future 64bit systems. All video will play just fine on any mac.
I have full HD resolution video clips on my Macbook Pro and there are no resolution based DRM restrictions in OS X.
Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
HD definition content is and will still be playable on any Windows computer with the proper hardware and software. However, HDCP protected content will not be playable in full definition unless the proper DRM requirements are met.
"This is a decision that the Media Player folks made because there are just too many ways right now for unsigned kernel mode code [to compromise content protection]."
So basically MS knows that the 32-bit version is inherently broken and yet they are putting it out any way? Thanks MS. I'm glad to know exactly how much you value the users of your offerings.
Time for macosx.
Doesn't macosx already support HD content? It was my impression it did so for quite awhile. Admittingly it has no hddvd or blue ray support yet but video production engineers do use macs for editing hidef content
http://saveie6.com/
This is getting kind of ridiculous. I understand setbacks, feature freezes, etc. And delays! Boy do I understand delays. I'm a software developer.
What I don't understand at this point, is why *anyone* would be interested in upgrading to Vista. Is it me or does it just seem like XP with bigger hardware requirements and more annoying "are you sure?" dialogues?
Well I guess I am just going to have to scrap my plans to buy lots of HD-DVDs and Blu-Ray DVDs for $35 each (after I already spent lots of money on DVDs which work fine thank you), buy a player that can play them (do they exist yet?), and play them in Windows while I sit at my desk!!
I haven't run windows in fifteen years or so. But recently there's some software and features on win that I happen to need. But MS is making it *very* difficult, both by segmenting the market to inflate prices and feature limitations that I just can't justify the purchase. This is annoying. Over time computers are becoming less useful, not more! Who in their right mind would pay more for modern hardware and software to do less? These people are nuts.
Pity the Vista user ...
I will !
can play next gen movie discs.
Windows is nice because it is convenient. I can plug components in, copy my content around, play games, program, move songs and video to my portable player, etc., with no problems that aren't quickly fixed.
When the computer I'm using ceases to be my tool for handling data of my choice, it instead becomes a box where I have to ask permission, and it even goes so far as to prevent grey are usage (new console emulators with disc readers, remixing content, memory editors, No-CD checks for games I own, etc.), then I'd rather not use that kind of system. It is no longer convenient for me.
Now, the question is, how do you convince 'average' people that the new limitations will no longer be convenient for them? Or will it be too late for some forms of content when Vista and other DRM systems are completely mainstream?
Ryan Fenton
Wow. This is a major announcement. I guess they don't want most of the folks who buy Vista to be let down when they purchase it. I guess afterall they aren't copying Mac OS X, since HD playback is built into QuickTime 7.
Is this our explanation for why Dell finally gave in to AMD?
...the media companies are steering technological "innovation." How is this even remotely reasonable? The media distributors have resisted new technology since the advent of the recordable videotape, for precisely the same reason. My real question is - will Vista be able to play full HD content from media distributed by independent media companies (who choose not to use the HDCP garbage)? Furthermore, where the hell do the media companies get the idea that by limiting full HD content playback to signed drivers on 64 bit Vista, they'll prevent circumvention? It's only a matter of time until the so-called "malware" will catch up. Personally, I hope piracy does kill the current media empire, so they can stop meddling with my technology...
The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources. - Albert Einstein
Not that I support this move. Microsoft is in a strong enough position that they don't have to cave to the MPAA.
Sometimes I doubt your committment to SparkleMotion!
"This is another example of the media companies dictating what the consumer can purchase in the marketplace."
Much like the FSF "dictates" what some of it's users can do with its code.*
*Or to quote Linus, "he who writes the code, dictates the license". And to borrow another slashdotism. "If you don't like the license, don't use the code".
The media companies asked us to do this and said they don't want any of their high definition content to play in x32 at all, because of all of the unsigned malware that runs in kernel mode can get around content protection, so we had to do this.
No. You aren't at the beck and call of the media companies. Supposedly you are there to answer to your shareholders and ultimately the end consumer.
--- I do not moderate.
Does anyone have video footage of Microsoft bending over for the media companies? I was hoping it was caught on film.
"Thank you sir may I have another?"
- Bill Gates
I mean, hackers won't ever be able to figure out this 64 bit thing. Oh wait, they could?
Seriously, all this will do is spur faster malware creation for 64 bit systems. If there is data that you have in your possession and are able to access in some way, no amount of protection will help - it could always be retrieved and stored in a different format by a determined person.
However, this is an excellent way for M$ to push their new products. With slowing sales and consumers not feeling the pressure to switch, they needed something and they hope that requiring 64-bit vista to watch "all the cool new movies" will be it. Personally, I think they are mistaken. Just like mp3 is a sufficient format for most, so will the "new hd format" be unnecessary. We, humans, can hardly see the difference between divx and mpeg-2, and "Snakes on the plane" looks about the same in all of them.
I, for one, use my computer to watch all my existing DVD's. I've got a large screen, a good sound system, and a comfy chair. I can't remember the last time I used my TV to watch them.
And, while I have an AMD64 machine, for the most part, I don't see that a 64-bit OS buys me anything except problems with older drivers, and possibly software, too, I don't know.
So, why do I want to upgrade to a Blue Ray or HD-DVD again? I have a nice collection of DVD's, the resolution looks just fine on my LCD monitor, and they play in Linux as well as Windows XP. Vista (a.k.a. "Windows DRM Edition") issues aside, it seems to be that the movie studios are killing both HD formats with their greed and paranoia.
You know what they say: "Pride cometh before you're eaten by the lions". Or something like that.
"My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right." --Senator Carl Schurz (1872)
"The media companies asked us to do this and said they don't want any of their high definition content to play in x32 at all,..."
:-)
haha this is the worst lie i've heard these days...
any body should understand "AS our X64 platform doesn't sell very well , we hope by discarding 32 bit market to boost 64bit server and os shares..."
just my 2 cents...
Rubbish! You could have insisted that the media companies write their DRM protection schemes properly. (or not at all)
From TFA:
So how are the PC manufacturers going to pitch this in their various marketing channels? "Play your DVDs on your PC!" - I might not be wrong....
ilovegeorgebush
So wait, MS changed Vista because the media companies WANTED them to...
Isn't it about time they changed Vista because the end users wanted them to? Who do they get the most money from??
Is Vista merely a vehicle to gradually force the general populus into the vision of the future held by MS and its partners by sacrificing the wonderful potential benefits it could offer?
Screw Vista, I already decided Im going to build my next PC, install Ubuntu with XGL/Compwiz, sit back and enjoy.
Why isn't it surprising that Microsoft has a different notion of malware then the typical user?
So your OS has more security holes than a block of swiss cheese, and you're going to "protect" media companies by not allowing full HD playback at all in 32-bit versions? I guess I just have one more reason not to buy Vista. I'm guessing that Apple won't have these restrictions at all, and that Linux and other player companies like WinDVD and PowerDVD will come out with a version that will work just fine in current Windows XP, so this will be a non-issue, except for all those fools that upgrade to Vista and don't know any better, but most of them can't even tell the difference between 480p and 1080p in the first place.
"When the president does it, that means it's not illegal." - Richard M. Nixon
Flourescent (adj): smelling like ground wheat.
This means that even if you have an HD-DVD disc, an HD-DVD player, a video card that has the right code to process HD-DVD content, and a CPU/GPU powerful enough to handle the type of processing involved, enough memory in the computer, and a monitor capable of displaying HD, you still won't be able to watch an HD-DVD. Why the hell is Microsoft even engaged in this?
I guess I do know the answer, but c'mon, can't the video card be device that controls validation/DRM? Not being able to play valid HD-DVDs, even with all the above equipment, is not a feature of an OS. It should be considered a bug, and a very big one at that.
...and of course its only a coincidence that anybody wanting to play HD will have to pay $$$ and upgrade to another version of windows
This is great, I will be able to watch HD content but can't get the video off my Sony DSC-N1 camera because there are no 64bit drivers for it. You would think Sony would want to write those drivers to protect my home movie copyright. :-)
I'm right there with you.
I honestly have not heard anything that makes Vista seem appealing, at least from a feature standpoint.
The only motivators for 'upgrading' to Vista seem to be the lock-ins. Take for example directX 10 being only for Vista. This means that I will have to buy Vista to play newer video games. And of course this is not because there is something inherently better about Vista - it is simply an artificial constraint.
The one technology that had me interested was the databasing file system, but it was announced that this was pulled from Vista long ago.
It's as if Microsoft is an automobile manufacturer from whom you must by the newer model car to be able to use the newly built highway. Not because the new car is better, any safer, or indeed really any different from your current car. But simply because it is a Microsoft brand.
I wish I could believe that the consumer will not stand for such blatant charades - but technology is merely magic to the lay, so they have no choice but to accept what they are told, and they will buy Vista because they 'need' it to watch new movies, and I will buy it because I 'need' it to play new games.
My Computer Music Tutorial Videos
Is it just me, or is this actually good news?
RiAA and MPAA chastizing Microsofts products That's like two jocks terminating each other while the nerd scores the hot chick.
Microsoft: "The media companies asked us to do this (protectedt path video only)..... so we had to do this."
Apple: "The media companies said we had to charge more than $1.... so we told them to fuck off"
One company uses a monopoly to apply pressure the other direction...
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
It's just like Eben Moglen said in his Wizards of OS3 keynote speech in 2004. What these companies are competing with is FREEDOM - their most dire competitor - and they are going to lose.
So what good is a Windows media center edition box if you can't put an HD-DVD or Blu-Ray drive in it? Or are all MCE boxes going to have to be 64-bit Vista Server class boxes?
This choice to bow to the media company pressure hands the home living room media center box to Sony on a silver platter with cherries on top and the head of Bill Gates wrapped up in a tasteful box on the side.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
it is
w-a-l-l-e-t
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
uh, OUR fault...
And your customers (neither the users nor the EOMs) did not. Forces other than market forces are at work here.
And it occurs to be that Microsoft shareholders probably didn't ask for this either. Now would be a good time for Microsoft shareholders to ask Microsoft management for an explanation as to how telling customers "fuck you, we don't care what you want" is a reasonable strategy for maximizing the value of Microsoft's stock.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
I'm unclear as what they mean by "Full" HD. To me, that means that we will not be allowed to run 1080p video, but perhaps could still run 720p on our computers.
That choice of wording leads to believe that he is just talking about 1080p. But then previous to that he states:
Any high definition content sounds like it eliminates 720p from the equation as well. And if that's the case, this is a horrible move (imo). Vista, as an operating system, is actually making me angry. I don't want to stop using Windows, but I might just to spite them. And all of a sudden we need a 64 bit processor as well? My single-core Centrino 1.8 Ghz processor running XP can churn out 1080p right now... so why would I spend more money to do the same thing?
Everybody here seems to be ridiculing Microsoft for listening to the "Media Companies" regarding DRM. But you're missing one big point...
The "Media Companies" are the ones who are going to all of this content. It's not a question of DRM-free HD content or DRM-restricted content, it's a question of DRM-restricted content or NO CONTENT AT ALL.
People say this somehow restricts innovation. I'm not sure how. People are free to produce competing media formats. People are free to create media players that play those competing formats. But media companies will choose not to utilize those alternatives because they don't protect their copyrights.
Microsoft adding this restriction didn't limit choice or "freedom". If anything, it created MORE choice. It gave a big incentive to media companies to produce new HD content that people want. If the media companies though their investments would go to waste thanks to piracy they would be far less inclined to make those investments. But now that's not the case.
It's not like this is going to stop anybody from producing HD content that plays without restriction. There are dozens of media formats available right now that allow you to reach HD resolutions. If you don't want DRM in the content YOU produce, this will not affect you at all.
Not even the DOJ or the EU can force Microsoft's hand...
MS also has lots more $$$ than what the entainment industry would give away.
There got to be something deeper than this.
I'm sure the CEOs thought for a good three seconds on whether or not to try and fight this. One CEO probably opened his mouth to yawn, and before it was even half open the media industry had whipped out a big fat check.
Vista keeps looking more and more worthless. I think once (if ever) XP becomes useless to me, I'll just upgrade to Linux.
To get the full Windows Vista experience I need,
A shit hot graphics card
A shit load of RAM
A shit load of harddrive space
And a brand new shit fast processor
I think we all know where the real shit lies...
THE HONOUR OF THE KNIGHTS - CC Licensed Sci-Fi Novel
FUCK YOU and your shitty 64-bit Vista crap-thing. Go wash a toilet with it or something. Microsoft, time to go... Just like Bill already left. Rats/Sinking Ship. Shitty OS.
Hell, ya named your last one Windows Sex Pee. Next one to be called Shitsta? Great move there buddy.
What choice will be left for me the days "normal" DVDs are gone and replaced by HD-DVDs, BluRays. Let's imagine those are not hacked (yet) and it's impossible to use VLC to play them. So what, here's the choices I have:
- I can rent a HD/BR-DVD I can't play (32bit, no Microsoft Windows.. )
- I can d/l a DRM protected file I can't play (no WMP)
- I can d/l a pirate version on bittorrent, and watch it wherever/whenever I want without paying.
What will I do?
Today I'm using he 4th solution: use the VLC software ("illegal" software for DMCA) to make something morally right (buy/rent a DVD and play it). But let's not dream about it, DVDs will start to disppear and the next VLC like will be harder to code and more DMCA/EUCD risky.
That's what MS means by saying they "have" to do this. They don't mean that literally Sony has a gun to their head or anything. They could, if they wished, ship Windows without any DRM at all. However what would happen is the media companies would simply refuse them the licenses necessary to be able to play any of their HD content at all. While I'd like to see MS say "Fine fuck you and the horse your rode in on," I understand they realistically can't. They are doing a heavy push for this media PC concept and supporting HD is part of the hook.
So, I say what I say in relation to everything HD-DVD or Blu-ray: Boycott it. Don't buy it, just stick with DVDs. Doesn't mean you are shut out of HD content entirely, there are people doing some un-DRM'd HD stuff online (remember this new stuff doesn't mandate signed drivers for anything HD, just for anything with AACS, meaning HD-DVD and Blu-Ray). If HD-DVD and Blu-Ray fall flat, but regular DVD keeps going strong and new un-DRM'd content starts picking up, the media companies will have little choice but to drop it.
I agree with your assessment 100%. But the beauty, for lack of a better term, of the MS business model is that they don't need people to buy the OS. They just need people to buy new PCs, and their dopey OS will be there waiting for them. I know a lot of people who are running various MS OSes, and none of them went out and specifically bought the OS they have running. It just came with the box.
This space intentionally left blank.
I am currently using the woefully bloated and confusing 64 bit Vista beta. Y'all seem to have not brought this point up- currently the driver support for the 64 bit side of things, well it keeps me on my Fedora partition. My X-fi has been relegated to 200 dollar PCI decoration (yes I followed the attempt to install "unsigned" drivers method). So what is the point in having full HD if you can't have more than stereo sound? Call me paranoid but, perhaps MS's greater MPAA/RIAA Conspiracy is to destroy all media playback from their OS that isn't via crappy "signed" products. There's an even darker facet of this signatory hell that is native to "X64" Vista. Installing "unsigned" software often does not simply require clicking "allow" in three or four dialogue boxes, it requires accessing the special boot menu (F8) and selecting "allow unsigned software to run". Might I add this does not work all the time. Recently I've switched to a single LCD monitor capable of displaying 1920x1080 resolution, I am going to be damn irate when I try to watch something that wont cause pixel interpolation; only to see that because whatever product it is is not signed, I get a nasty dialogue box. I have to say, if RC1 is anything like this- let alone the "gold" version- I'll be one happy full time Linux user until I can justify one of them sweet Mac Pros.
"Won't someone think of the multi-millionaires?"
It doesn't matter whether or not anyone wants to upgrade to Vista. What matters is that if you buy a new, prebuilt x86 box, you are automatically going to be another satisfied Vista user.
Microsoft didn't get to be a leader by letting users get into situations where they decide what OS they want. Letting the market decide stuff, is a very stupid thing to do.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
People will upgrade to Vista when it starts coming "free" with their machines. Or when MS stops selling XP. Or when MS stops allowing XP to run. Or when some app they need requires it.
No it isn't.
Maintaining your software for older operating systems costs money. Why should MS support legacy operating systems? There's no money in that. But maybe charge 20us$ for a DX10 Backport. That might sell
This makes total sense - Microsoft aren't being told to +do+ anything. They are simply providing motivation to buy their product, 64 bit vista. To do that takes new hardware and an upgrade cycle. There arent any compelling reasons to upgrade to vista and Microsoft know it. It is only by differentiating a product that the demand will come. Is there anything that is intrinsically achievable with vista that you couldnt in principle achieve on XP? No - its Turing Machines underneath. And computers are fast enough to do most things that people want from a pc.
However, if I want to play my new dvds then I need to upgrade...
It's like the secret agreements they have with computer manufacturers like Dell, HP, Lenovo, etc. If you look at any IT or technology magazine, you'll notice that every advertisement for every computer states something to the effect that "HP/Dell/Lenovo/[Insert company name here] Recommends Microsoft Windows XP Professional." I would be willing to bet that these companies don't actually recommend anything, but are required by their secret agreements with MS to make this statement, in order to qualify for their "discount" -- or else they'd be paying $299.99 for every copy of Windows they install on every computer, which would price them right out of the market.
Now I don't know if this is still the case, but it was a few years ago: MS also had, in those secret agreements, a clause that these computer manufacturers could not also install MS's competitor's OSes on the machines (Linux, for example). This was "proven" by then Be, Inc.'s then CEO "JLG", who offered BeOS for free to any computer manufacturer, to include free on any computer they build. Nobody took his offer. Now, you say that Be was not a competitor to MS, with only .0000000001% of the market at its peak? Then why did MS cite Be as a competitor in court, to prove that MS doesn't have a monopoly?
It is this monopoly power that allows MS to do what it does best: Crush its competitors and blackmail its customers (in this case, the computer manufacturers) with agreements that could not possibly exist if MS did not have a monopoly.
And here is where the above comes into the range of the topic: Since MS has a monopoly, they can now also blackmail those who write drivers. "Oh, you write drivers for Linux/Mac OS X, too? Well, then, we won't sign your Windows drivers." Which means that 90% of the market won't buy this piece of hardware, or they will return it to the store when they realize that it doesn't play full HD, even on 64 bit Vista, since the driver is not signed. Which means that you can expect the major graphics card vendors to stop producing drivers for other systems.
Blackmail. Where do you want to pay us against your will for software you don't want today?
HDCP, the content-protection mechanism used for HD-DVD *and* Blu-ray, has been thoroughly cryptanalysed already by multiple groups (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDCP#Cryptanalysis or do a google search).
c ps-shiny-red-button/
And working devices to "erase" HDCP from a video stream have already been produced and sold, e.g. this one: http://www.engadget.com/2005/07/21/the-clicker-hd
The "smart" part about HDCP is that it allows content manufacturers to revoke keys, so that new discs won't play on hardware whose key has been compromised. However, it seems fairly unlikely that manufacturers will actually do this, given that they'll break the hardware of thousands or millions of users every time a key actually gets revoked! Furthermore, as the cryptanalysis shows, it'll be fairly easy to create new working keys, so it's an ineffective defense anyway.
Conclusion: HDCP is leaky as a sieve. My bet is that it won't be long before there's a hassle-free open-source program that will simply remove it from content transparently, just as libdvdcss does for DVDs right now.
My bicyles
You Mac fanboys really are clueless, aren't you? But go ahead, keep trolling away...
If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
If this concerns you, don't use WMV/VC-1, use DivX.
The most common complaint voiced around here against Vista is that Vista filled with DRM, that is, Vista supports "more DRM" than XP. That "more DRM" is/was the ability to play protected BR and HD-DVD discs. Vista32 now won't have that ability. So your "Vista is evil because it shoves DRM down our throats!!" complaints are now moot. :p
-- "I never gave these stories much credence." - HAL 9000
No-one will upgrade to vista. If they need a new p/c, they'll have no choice. It will come with ( ie they'll pay for ) vista like it or not. And almost all of them will be too ignorant to know or care.
This doesn't sound like a show stopper to me. You watch, their will be a release of WinDVD called WinDVD HD - it won't be long until a HD dvd player app comes OEM with drives.
HD content isnt something that 99% of the consumers go sleepless about. People gladly watch screencams of movies. DVD-rip is like, wow, look at that resolution, and man, no choughs! I have a strong feeling that HD is an excuse to try to force the consumers to shift to another format when they really are pretty satisfied with DVD quality. Its very nice when your customers have to buy their whole collection of media, again and again.
My theory is that it wont be many month after HD has hit the streets before someone makes a thingy that pretends to be an LCD-TV or Screen that connects to whatever you want to record into. But normal consumers, those who actually pay for their stuff, those are the ones taking it up the chute.
HTTP/1.1 400
64 bit systems are completely unnecessary and ridiculous overkill for the average home user.
This has nothing to do with media companies and everything to do with 64 bit hardware manufacturers.
I mean how many "Vista Capable" PCs for the average home user are going to ship with more than 4 GB RAM? None...
How to make the customer think they need something they do not.
64 bit processors are useful in applications like the HP superdome and similar hardware used in extremely demanding memory intensive applications. Decoding a HD-DVD does not require more than 4 GB of RAM, nor do signed drivers, nor does high res gaming, despite what the salesman will tell you.
Totally bogus... but it sounds cool and they have all this overbuilt consumer hardware inventory they need to dump...
People will upgrade happily, with or without it coming on a new box. The anti-Microsoft mentality is not near as pervasive as Slashdotters would like to believe. At one time I was the only person in my workplace - a development shop - that had a problem with MS products. I was the butt of jokes simply because I wouldn't buy a MS trackball, because I won't willingly and knowingly buy Microsoft products.
I know guys who have camped outside their favorite software retailer to buy the latest and greatest version of Windows.
Vista will be no exception.
The whole HD video scene has been thriving for years all over the net, especially in China. Hardly anyone who is viewing 'unlicensed' HD video is using any MicroSoft based directshow filters or codecs to view the content as they suck on levels unimaginable by the mere mortal mind.
There is already a huge catalog of open-source and third party support that plays HD content with great performance and can be installed on either x32 x86 or x64 systems so I'm not sure what this is supposed to solve.
Maybe we haven't yet heard about the reporting backdoor scripts in Vista paid for by the MPAA and RIAA. They inconspicously hide behind the trashcan on your desktop and peek at what you're watching (Why do you think Vista has such big icons?)
8-/
A format i don't care about or need, on a format I don't have or want? Alright then. next post please slashdot.
Fuck Windows Vista.
OS X, Linux, *BSD, and the list goes on. There is no good reason to waste money on Windows Vista.
http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/winvista_ff_x 64.asp
It is too bad that there is no shimming meaning you will see more UAP popup and This is a major handicap and will presumably mean that many legacy applications simply will not run on the Windows Vista x64 versions. Too, new 64-bit applications will need to adhere to the new Windows Vista application standards in order to run correctly on these versions. That means that even some software written specifically for XP x64 might not work correctly.
It also locks out third-party software from patching any part of the kernel
I also wonder how many game cd copy protection systems will work under vista x64?
Content is not protected; expression is. HD refers to a format, not content. Here it is correctly:
HD video shall only be played at the full resolution...any next-generation high definition video will not play in x32 at all...just too many ways right now for unsigned kernel mode code [to compromise copyright protection]. The media companies asked us to do this and said they don't want any of their high definition video to...
64-bit cpus have been sold since 2003. Anyone planning on running vista on hardware more than 3 years old is not making very sound plans. Newer systems should already be 64-bit and the newest ones should be dual-core as well. Buying obsolete hardware to save money is never a very good idea.
I say this is only meant to reinvigorate the PC industry for Dell, Gateway, etc. They've been hurtin' the last couple of years with the stagnant XP OS. This ensures everyone must buy a new PC, instead of the sufficient $50 RAM upgrade to run Vista. Time to pick up DELL stock!
So...choose not to play the new games. You already imply that you realize it is not a 'need' (its a 'want'). Choose not to play. It can be done.
What happened to "Developers, Developemrs, Developers" ?
/ 09/502014.aspx
= /library/en-us/Storage_r/hh/Storage_r/k307_6baca45 d-504c-46b9-9724-f82132c2bead.xml.asp
You know what? I've got a copy of the Vista Driver Development kit, and I've written XP and NT drivers in the past.
When Vista comes out, I plan to get a Verisign Class 3 certificate for $500 and write a filter driver to allow RPC-1 drives to be used, sign it and put it on my website.
http://blogs.msdn.com/oldnewthing/archive/2005/12
My plan is to catch and hack the IOCTL_DVD_* requests, or maybe you'd need to filter over the DVD drive itself.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url
Also, I'll sign any driver people send to me for a small fee, provided they send me the source code and it's well written.
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
Well since there has not been a really good game for awhile, that is no big problem. Unreal tournement 2010?
A people that values its privileges above its principles soon loses both. Dwight D. Eisenhower
I'd recommend for historical context that everyone who has not seen Cory Doctorow's Microsoft DRM talk watch it. In this video he aptly proposes to Microsoft that they build the record player that will play everyone's records (iTunes, etc.)
Clearly the message did not take. The failure of Microsoft's present strategy is clearly identified by Cory Doctorow's DRM talk.
Joe user isn't going to have to worry about this because he will more than likely aquire everything legally. If he wants to watch a HD-DVD, he'll go buy it and put it into his 64 bit copy of Vista and it'll play fine because it's all legal. Granted, you'll probably get the DRM error hiccup because it is Windows after all, but it still shouldn't hinder the ability to play HD content too badly.
This only affects you if you have to have to latest in technology and also downoad high def content that's protected. I'm not going to shell out for a 64 bit system that I can't use due to driver conflicts and is infested with DRM so I can watch movies that are higher quality. I have a tv for that and if I want to watch BR or HD, I'll buy a player and hook it up to my tv.
If nothing else this will turn people to watching movies on their tvs instead of their computers which may be exactly what the media companies had in mind all along.
Thats fine, it can only paly in x64 mode. But make sure that software and drivers are available for 64-bit Vista. I have an AMD64 chip and tried Vista Beta2. It sucked in 64bit mode. Only half of my drivers were supported for 64bit and it just ran bad. I put in the 32bit version and it ran much much smoother. Is this a problem with AMD64 processors, no. 64bit linux runs just fine. If they want anyone to use the 64 bit vista, they better start working on getting it working as well as 32bit vista does.
Click Click Bloody Click PANCAKES!
I see no one had any counter arguments to that.
BTW the DMCA is a pretty solid example of corporate welfare. No truly Libertarian system would let companies decide by force of law what you can do with what's in your house. You bought the physical DVD, you can do with it as you wish. Companies are free to copy protect until the cows come home, but you should be free to archive and protect your investment from damage.
The DMCA is just the media industry's way of saying "I know that disc might get scratched and if it does, I get to profit off you having to buy another copy." Corporate welfare at its finest.
--- Grow a pair, liberals... stop letting the Republicans bully you!
Can someone explain to me how it is in any way harder to make a hack x64 driver than it is to make an x32 driver. In what way is x64 more secure? I don't get it. Now I understand signed drivers only, that makes sense, but this 64-bit thing just baffles me.
That's fine that you can get Vista MCE in 64-bit (which I was aware of), I'm saying who will build and who will buy the more expensive 64-bit Vista MCEs? And will they stop selling the 32bit models or have the consumer hit a wall when the want to watch HD video at some point, and have to buy a seperate box?
Basically it makes using Vista for the MCE OS an untenable mess for a standalone consumer device that is meant to be like a PVR. They should cut the whole thing and just rely on the 360 as the living room media box, which has the OK to allow HD video.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
and in 5 years, it'll be illegal to sell and impossible to find the hardware needed to build an hdtv mythtv box. Maybe 10 tops. Ah well, when it happens, I'm just going to stop consuming.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
"The media companies asked us to do this and said they don't want any of their high definition content to play in x32 at all, because of all of the unsigned malware that runs in kernel mode can get around content protection, so we had to do this."
This almost sounds like an apology saying "I'm sorry be we don't have any balls so we cannot stand up for what's good for the consumer." Of course I know it's not really an apology to consumers. Rather it's a lame excuse to try and force hardware upgrades and lock people into their copy protection techonology
I'll keep my eye out for media & technology that doesn't sucks.
So basically we have HD drives that don't work. A new OS that doesn't work. And Microsoft is expecting come January that we'll suddenly be impressed?
http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/winvista_ff_x 64.asp
It is too bad that there is no shimming meaning you will see more UAP popup and This is a major handicap and will presumably mean that many legacy applications simply will not run on the Windows Vista x64 versions. Too, new 64-bit applications will need to adhere to the new Windows Vista application standards in order to run correctly on these versions. That means that even some software written specifically for XP x64 might not work correctly.
It also locks out third-party software from patching any part of the kernel
I also wonder how many game cd copy protection systems will work under vista x64?
When Apple included DRM in their iTMS songs, it only affected songs purchased through iTMS. They did not impose DRM on music you ripped from CDs nor on your existing MP3 collection that you imported into iTunes. And there are no plans to impose any such restrictions in OSX Leopard.
What Microsoft is doing, apparently, is preventing users from playing ANY HD content in Windows Vista running on 32-bit systems, thereby banning users from playing ANY HD content unless they have a 64-bit system with OS-enforced DRM, and no doubt with OS-enforced restrictions on use of 3rd party software.
Don't be surprised when you try to rip a music CD in Vista and the operating system imposes mandatory DRM on your ripped song, or even checks a central database to see if the record label gives permission for you to rip songs from the CD at all. And also don't be surprised when Vista prevents you from running any software designed to override these ridiculous restrictions. Vista will likely ban any software from having hardware access (ie, CD burning and ripping) unless that software has obtained official approval and certification (ie, only software with RIAA's and MPAA's blessings).
THAT is what Microsoft Trusted Computing and Plays for Sure are really about!
Jesus, people, all indications are the Vista is going to suck balls, and "leading" PC makers like Dell continue to cut down on quality and service. Just how cheap are all you m********ckers anyway?? Buy a *uckin' Apple already or stop whining.
"You tread heavily, but you speak the truth." LOL
:))
Everyone on slashdot thinks he's an "expert" on "everything", and speaks in a manner accordingly. (But in reality, most around here don't know what they're talking about.
-- "I never gave these stories much credence." - HAL 9000
No playback at all or will the content be downgraed? The "No full" leads me to believe that the content will just be downgraded 720p or 480p but the article seems to say no playback whatsoever. I still suspect many people will be happy to rip something downgraded to DVD quality and encode it with Xvid or whatever. The quality now isn't as good as the original DVD but that doesn't seem to bother movie pirates now. No apparently people are willing to sacrifice some quality for getting their movies for free. I seriously think these guys have completely overestimated how much people care about HD content. A full HD rip is going to be several gigabytes larger and thats more of a headache over p2p anyways.
How many people will be using 32bit in 5 years - how many people will will have HDTVs in 5 years??? The cheapest ones are still 2000 bucks and higher! They have been for a while. And if its just a matter of time before there is widespread adoption of HD I think its seriously a matter of time before someone breaks HDCP convincingly.
Reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled.
... as Sony owns a movie studio and MS doesn't. As MS is in fierce competition with Sony with their console, it's IMHO is in MS best interest to deny a request to block HD playback on 32bit: The less Sony sells, the better it is for MS.
Now Vista 32bit, the majority of the users will use this, will be crippled in a way users might not like (as Vista is here to stay for the next couple of years!).
Never underestimate the relief of true separation of Religion and State.
hardware makers and Congress aren't in bed with the FSF. That statement is analogous to, "If you don't like the PATRIOT act so much, move!" Granted, not supporting MPAA companies is a great start, but enough people still do support them that they're going to have clout with both lawmakers and hardware manufacturers for quite some time; both of those have affect the world around us, even if we are boycotting the MPAA.
--- What
You are right that supporting older OS's does cost money, the DX10 requirement for SOME games is an artificial constraint. Take Halo2 for the PC (when it comes out). It is going to require DX10 (and therefore Vista). But halo2 was of course a game for the original X-BOX, same as Halo 1. There can't possible be anything in Halo2 (graphics API wise) that was not also available in in Halo1, and Halo1 runs fine with DX9. DX10 wasn't even around when the X-Box was developed, so how is it possible that the PC port of Halo2 "requires" DX10? The only why is if Microsoft purposely added references to DX10 to prevent it from working with DX9. And the only reason for that is to sell copies of Vista. All because like sex, Halo Sells.
Seriously anyone else hear Frank Sinatra when we talk about Vista, DRM, 64 bit only, higher specs. Basically Microsoft has just told the public what they must have.
So basically Microsoft who was actually pretty helpful to the user in XP giving a good amount of control, has now said "How can we serve you master" to hollywood and the RIAA. Personally I'll be hanging out with XP since it still does as High Def as I want, and I'm sure someone will give us a HD player for XP even if microsoft doesn't. But on the other hand even if they only use 64 how long will it take for someone to crack the encryption and figure out a way to crack vista? A week? two?
There will be plenty of HD content being played on 32-bit Vista machines, it just won't be being played with WMP.
Just wait until Vista ships, and the "unwashed masses" discover that Vista won't even let them watch DVD's on their PC monitors anymore. (something we've been doing since for what, about a decade?) Now would be a good time to start writing MCE plugin's for profit.
I find this fascinating. The personal and identity information of every PC user on the planet has been under serious and sustained attack for nearly a decade now from "unsigned" malware, but that really didn't elicit meaningful changes in the design of the operating system that most PC users employ. However, when the entertainment industry realizes that these techniques for privilege escalation can be used to hijack their content, serious design changes are created to support the policy these customers seek to enforce.
100 million individuals can be easily ignored because they produce white noise when speaking, but a dozen individuals with hundreds of millions of dollars can speak with a very clear voice and wind up with veto power over Microsoft. They have decided that everyone must upgrade their computers to watch HD content. (It's time to purchase shares in Intel, the top PC component suppliers, and the top 10 PC makers -- they'll all be selling more stuff as a result of this.)
The security needs of the individual consumer will continue to be largely ignored, except where they happen to overlap with the needs of really big clients like the entertainment industry. It's not clear how to aggregate those little voices to speak with one, loud and clear, voice, particularly as they don't know, on an individual basis, what to say or even that they need to say anything at all. I suppose if enough people start switching to Mac OS X or Linux, and cite security concerns as a primary reason, that might get attention in Redmond.
If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.
Because Microsoft will choke off compatability with XP (for those that are running it). No DirectX 10 for gamers, and no new office software, rapidly decreasing support for new hardware, etc etc.
To add to that, I wouldn't be surprised if a statement comes out to the effect of "due to issues with the security model in windows XP, we cannot supply this patch/update for you." After all, wasn't that their reasoning for DirectX10 being Vista only.
At this point my primary concern is how long it will take the abstraction programs such as Wine/Cedega to properly run common/popular Vista apps. They seem to be ramping up compatability with 2k/XP (albeit mostly for NVidia cards in the graphics realm).
Those who have not already left because of the 500$ video card upgrade treadmill will leave the PC gaming world instead of "upgrading" and turn to the shiny new consoles. Vista will probably cost the same as a Wii anyway, if you don't need new hardware to run it.
Anyway, there are not many game styles that are not easily adapted to console play. Maybe the strategy and the MMORPG styles will stay on the pc... scratch the MMORPG's, consoles are ok for those.
You're not old until regret takes the place of your dreams.
...between that and the current Windows Media Player being unable to play DVDs. Doesn't stop people watching them, does it?
Game dev and music blog
XP is nothing but win2k with an interface for 4 year old down syndrom children and bigger hardware requirements. Yet you upgraded to that for no reason. Guess what, you will upgrade to the next useless windows for no reason, and the next, and the next. You are just one of the sheeple.
It's not just to cater to media companies. Microsoft has desperately been pushing 64-bit, and do you know why? Because the majority of Windows sales have always come from pre-installations on new computers, not retail sales. As we all know, Vista is a tough sell as it is, so Microsoft is trying to come up with as many ways as possible to convince people to upgrade (e.g., Halo will be Vista-only for no technical reason at all). 64-bit is a big part of this marketing push, and now Microsoft is crippling 32-bit version to add even more incentive.
The truth is that, while 64-bit is nice, it's not universally an improvement and is slower in many situations. Frankly, most consumers don't need 64-bit right now. How many home users need to access to 6GB of RAM?
Incidentally, OS X Leopard will be fully 64-bit/32-bit universal. It'll be one version, not separate 32-bit and 64-bit versions like Vista. And it will run 32-bit device drivers alongside 64-bit just fine, invisibly to the user. I'll be running HD playback on my 32-bit Macs just fine.
"Sufferin' succotash."
According to Jack Valenti, former spokesman for the MPA, in a talk he gave on the campus of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign a few years ago at Roger Ebert's Overlooked Movie Festival, one should not be able to make their own backups. Consumers should buy another copy of the media because Hollywood studios (his former clients) invested so much money in making those movies. Nothing was said about the investment consumers spend in buying copies of the movies and the consumer's desire to not see that investment lost to sticky-fingered kids mishandling costly DVD collections. For Valenti, copying and illicit distribution is framed as "piracy" and "theft"; Valenti was clear to position copyright infringement to be exactly like shoplifting. He didn't once call it by the name the courts use: copyright infringement. Valenti thought it right and proper for Congress to extend the term of copyright again during Pres. Clinton's term, thus denying some works entry into the public domain through expiring copyright (most notably, one of Valenti's former clients' earliest movies). The MPA strongly backs increasingly punitive laws which punish copyright infringement more harshly than other illegal acts like rape.
The FSF doesn't place any of these restrictions on my use of their copyrighted programs. The FSF licenses are written to allow sharing and the FSF never stands in my way of making a backup copy for my personal use. The FSF's speakers I've heard (including Prof. Moglen, RMS, and Brad Kuhn) are against copyright term extensions. They frame copyright infringement as copyright infringement, speaking out against conflations of real piracy and theft. I don't recall anyone from the FSF advocating for more punitive measures to be taken against copyright infringers, but I do recall reading about the FSF working with GPL infringers to amicably resolve the infringement so that nobody pays a fine, goes to trial or prison, or is necessarily publicly embarrassed about their infringement. Even for works that express a political point of view or convey artisic merit, the FSF isn't out to nail the public to the wall as an example in order to scare us into compliance. Instead, the FSF asks us to examine the merit of the laws, consider what copyright law was meant to achieve in the first place, and to consider that there can be bad laws which don't deserve our respect because they stand in the way of building community or transforming a dog-eat-dog society into a place we'd rather live.
I don't think the FSF and MPA treat us the same way despite working under the same copyright regime. I also don't think these two organizations have the same influence over how that copyright regime works in the US or abroad. I think the FSF shows us by example that we can choose not to become harsh like the big book, movie, and music publishers are. By the way, for all of their continued rants against what they call "piracy", one wonders just how ineffective their MPA's measures are since they apparently can't contain the "problem". One also wonders if stopping copyright infringement is the MPA's goal in the first place.
Digital Citizen
The putative reason for requiring all kernel-mode code to be digitally signed in x64 was to prevent rootkits... but the real reason is to harden DRM.
Microsoft's gall is just stunning... "unsigned malware that runs in kernel mode can get around content protection". So disk emulation, installable file systems, packet sniffing, intrusion detection, volume encryption... all this functionality relies on kernel mode code and is available in open-source form for Windows XP. But now it's "malware" and will not be allowed on Vista because doing so would also enable circumvention of DRM.
Of course the driver signing requirement will not stop digitally signed malware from the likes of Sony BMG.
Why do even /. people have such a hard time understanding this? Supposedly we're geeks/nerds/people with some basic understanding of electronics.
Crippled operating system or crippled video playback. Either way, everyone loses.
I love the way a program like DVDXCopy sounds like it is their idea of "unsigned malware".
To them, malware isn't what fux0rs your computer, it's what allows you to format shift their precious 'content'.
So this is good news for people to keep their AMD CPU's and this will boost 64bit usage in the future. ...Right...
Just means loads of people will make my head turn to water when they all come back to annoy me about their precious HD content and their low grade computers!
Geek hormones vented! ^_^
Another crack to be expected when massive usage of HD content breaks piracy support.
Blind are we who do not know that we are blind. The world has been boring ever since I got here.
The saddest parts in this story are two-fold.
1. That Microsoft with their immense market power can't even bring up a fight against any movie studios pressuring them on this. They wouldn't even violate any laws on supporting protected content on 32-bit systems. Clearly Microsoft's intents is to in the first place cater to movie studios, and only after to their users.
2. That 32-bit systems have no technical obstacles to playing this content. They usually have little problems decoding HD video in real-time.
There's no way to make this look pretty, really. It's a 100% consumer loss, in the days when movie studios are concerned about lacking revenues at least in reports about piracy. Gee, I wonder why.
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
I've had HD on my Mac Pro for a year now. Just got an Elgato EyeTV HD tuner and plugged it in and voila, a few basic network channels in HD, anything that comes over the air, and some HD torrents (wanted to try it out, but files are too large to bother with routinely).
So Vista won't play HD on my 32-bit CPU due to DRM concerns, eh?
Next thing you'll be telling me my current monitor won't be good enough!
Oh, wait...
Your mind is clear / The things that you fear / Will fade with how much you / Believe what you hear
"The media companies asked us to do this and said they don't want any of their high definition content to play in x32 at all."
Oh, good. Unfortunately for the media companies, this may mean their HD content won't be played at all. Now, not only does one need the correctly DRMed driver for the correctly DRMed hardware, it's got to be on x64 Windows which has tons of compatibility issues for lots of devices on the shelves today . . . so much so, I'd be awfully surprised if x64 Vista will make up more than a small fraction of copies installed for the next couple years.
and I'll say it again: 1 reason that is keeping me from switching to 100% Linux is the games. WINE is getting close though... I do wish the game developers would start to support Linux. Some have already, some have made WINEing easier (Warcraft 3, WoW). It would be awesome if Valve released a Linux version.
If I can't play media without restrictions on an OS, then I am going to switch to an OS that I can play media without restrictions. It is all good that Microsoft is concerned about what media companies want... but if they want me to purchase their product, they are going to have to worry about what I want too! Especially since it is the customer, not the media company, which pays their bills.
The resolution of most computers is MUCH MUCH higher than "high def"
Even if they cant full screen in xxx resolution what difference does it make? Unless they force full screen in 640x480 or whatever what can they do? I was under the impression that a lot of LCDs these days cant even handle that low resolution. Reguardless, why is it that people have to pay, or do anything to play any DVDs on their computers? Shouldn't the liscense to play them (or blu-ray or HDDVD) come with the hardware? (ie. DVDROM) It seems rediculous that people should be blocked out from playing media when they have legitimate hardware. I was under the impression when buying my DVD-Rom that I was allowed to play DVDs, am I just stupid? I'd imagine this is what most other people would think as well.
To completely misquote a great movie, "The needs of the few, or the one, outweigh the needs of the many."
So... 64 bit Vista isn't going to run anything other than signed drivers *anyway*. That has nothing (or at least very little) to do with DRM or the media companies, and everything to do with Microsoft *finally* trying to do something real about security. Step away from the podium.
To be most accurate...Microsoft did not enable certain modes of loading drivers, software, etc. under 32-bit Windows for compatibility reasons. One of these is requiring 'signed' drivers only. However, Microsoft declared that with the move to 64-bit, Windows will now require this.
i t/kmsigning.mspx.
Microsoft's customers will see this as Windows Vista x32 (the 32-bit version) won't do those additional tests before loading the drivers; however, Windows Vista x64 (the 64-bit version) will. The 64-bit processors, such as AMD's AMD64 series, also have an NX-bit that is not available in the 32-bit modes and 32-bit processors. (Intel's EMT64e variations of the Pentium line, and the CoreDuo lines are mere reflections of AMD's AMD64 architecture.)
Any how...for more info, search Microsoft's website on the issue, such as http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/platform/64b
Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)
I didn't. But thanks for the link!
YouTube has nothing of worth on it except for lots of incredibly unfunny home movies made by 16 year olds and copyrighted music videos.
Seriously twitter, you seem to think most of the public are behind you. They're not. Most people simply don't give a fuck.
By summer it was all gone...now shesmovedon. --
So Vista will have instant DoS? Funny.
They have decided that everyone must upgrade their computers to watch HD content. (It's time to purchase shares in Intel, the top PC component suppliers, and the top 10 PC makers -- they'll all be selling more stuff as a result of this.)
How do you figure? Who really gives a crap about watching HD movies on their PC anyway? The average consumer? I think not. Hell, I'm a geek, and I don't even give a rip about that. I just want a nice, plug and play box I can hook up in my living room to my HD-TV that is idiot proof. I certainly don't want to have to run Windows to do it. And you can bet that the average joe sure as hell doesn't want to have to mess with that crap. Buy a new computer just to watch HD? Not in a million years.
Knight37 - Once a Gamer, Always a Gamer
I plan to make sure that *some* of them get to *know*.
It would be good if everyone actually told his/her friends and relatives about this kind of things, nobody likes to be imposed with restrictions, and that kind of actions in the end lend to one more cent to the Linux camp.
I have a pretty good number of converts in my list, including non-geek people, and this things will only help to increase this list. So... in the end, its a Good Thing (tm).
no sig
They create an OS.
So what if the movie industry claims they won't be able to impliment HD, becasue it is not true.
Manufactureres will make DVD/Blu-ray/whatever players for computers. No one can stop that.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
My Pentium M 760 is only 32-bit but still claims to support the NX bit (called XD by Intel).
As an aside, I can't understand why Microsoft would bother with a 32 bit version of MS Vista anyways. All the CPUs sold now (and for a long time) have been 64 bit anyhow. I can't help but think that there would only be a small percent of people out there with 32bit machines willing to upgrade anyways.
Why would someone want to be limited by 4GB of memory of which you can only use about 3GB? Why should you have to depend on manufacturers to produce two sets of hardware drivers for each platform(Apple handled this better I believe)? Why should the user have to worry about problems like HD playback?
I think Microsoft is just creating confusion in the market place by releasing a 32bit and 64bit operating system. They should just work on the 64 bit distribution and spend the other resources on getting a single quality product out, with proper Windows on Windows emulation for backwards compatibility.
I'd be interested to hear if some of you plan to goto 32-bit Vista. Cheers.
I'm the odd man out in an even number of participants
Wow. This seems amazingly retarded. All we have to do is modify kqemu, which does support 64-bit, to allow kernel patches. Also, what is preventing people from patching the kernel on-disk, then rebooting?
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
.. there will be more of a push by manufacturers like Dell to ship Vista x64 systems, which means incentive for peripheral makers to write 64-bit drivers. The dearth of drivers that cripple XP x64 might be avoided this time round (it helps that, starting next month or so, Intel's line-up is all 64-bit enabled (funny that they managed this before Vista comes out too, and not because Microsoft was waiting for them)
Michel
Fedora Project Contribut
I believe Vista won't even install drivers which are not signed.
Why does having a 64 bit processor mean your computer is a server?
"That is, if you define "developing software for home made Tivo-type devices that circumvent the need to purchase Tivo and subscribe to its services" as a strong-arm tactic."
That's YOUR interpretation not mine. Anyway you have always had the ability to as you put it "developing software for home made Tivo-type devices that circumvent the need to purchase Tivo and subscribe to its services". The thing the FSF is doing is basically "dictating" to Tivo what Tivo has to do with their software on Tivo hardware. Which is as analogeous as the MPAA/RIAA telling Microsoft what it has to do to use their content.
"In the years of more "laissez-faire" capitalism - you know before the DMCA, 9/11 and the rise of ubercronyist globalist "free trade" capitalism - that was called creating a cheaper, more competitive product."
Feel free to do that...just without leveraging the hard work of Tivo.
"Wait, were you being satirical??"
Depends. Does this forum need another "yes man"?
Who really needs HD anyhow? Nobody. If HD succeeds, we'll all be up to our eyeballs in ...
both DRM and hardware replacement costs. Many people are happy with iPod video: doesn't
that clearly tell us that the excitement over HD is hype? Sure, HD looks nicer viewed side-by-side
with NTSC, but who cares if
the movie you are watching actually has characters and a story you care about
You are wrong HDCP is the DRM that can encumber DVI links, it has nothing to do with the silvery disks.
Bluray and HDDVD are encumbered with AACS, Bluray has B+ as in addition to straight AACS.
To put it another way; HDCP is to DVI as Macrovision is to composite and AACS is to HDDVD as CSS is to DVD.
-- To dream a dream is grand, but to live it is divine. -- Leto ][
Use h.264 -- it seems to do better at absolutely everything -- looks better, is smaller, for pretty much any compression rate and resolution -- except that it's a relatively new codec, and not necessarily supported. But DivX isn't necessarily supported either, and all "Codec X isn't supported" conversations can be ended with three letters: VLC.
And it's got nothing to do with WMV. It's the crypto on physical HD/BD discs. I can play pretty much any WMV file I want, though ironically the HD ones usually make me use a 32-bit mplayer on Linux, so they can use 32-bit Windows DLLs.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
Nice to see that someone got my point. And from an edu domain too. Sure raises my hopes.
But the motivation for my post wasn't to pick on the FSF or beat up on the MPAA/RIAA. You all can do that just fine without me. My irritation is more the whiney "I'm spineless" attitude around here.* Complaining while effectively doing nothing (and no, sitting in one's room with a P2P client isn't 'doing anything', and contrary to belief it's not helping the 'poor artists' either) gets old really, really quickly.
We have tested tablets (and flipscreen laptops) from Motion, Acer, Fujitsu, and IBM. Very few people like tablet mode. Handwriting recognition works, but unless you are incredibly fast it's slower than keyboarding. I imagine you would not appreciate its shell command writing abilities (basically, using the onscreen keyboard to "type"). Logging on with anything other than a simple password is a pain (although many come with fingerprint readers if you don't mind the insecurity). You really can't use the system one handed due to its weight, and then you can't set it down and read it because of glare from lights and the poor viewing angle. They have stands, but they're clumsy and flimsy. You can get docking stations, but they're large enough to make laptops desirable again. The pure tablets also tend to get very hot when running for a while. If anything, I recommend you buy a flip-screen laptop so that when you get sick and tired of pen input you can just switch to the keyboard, and the base doubles as a stand when you're tired of holding it.
"This is a decision that the Media Player folks made because there are just too many ways right now for unsigned kernel mode code [to compromise content protection]."
My foot.. its all about forced upgrades and enabling more control over YOUR content..
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Your right on all counts and this gets repeated by the clued both old and new about every time the subject comes up. Unfortunately those who see the problem and comment on the irony in their hundreds of thousands are dwarfed by the foolish and the uninformed in their multiple millions. The informed and the clued don't win this one for they will be outspent by the foolish and clueless. Microsoft is simply pandering to the money helping dictate the future by reconfiguring the computer from a tool of personal empowerment to machines of mass exploitation. It is the easier path to the greater reward and Microsoft is far from alone in their complicity if you consider what is happening to be a bad thing. That depends on whether or not you are sharing in the rewards after all, there are two kinds of people in this world, winners and losers and you can't have one without the other. I cannot live in comparative comfort and opulance if a hundred others do not suffer in poverty. Clueless and ignorant is a self defining caste system that marks them for exploitation and exploited they will be.
I am reminded of all the Jews rounded up and packed into train cars headed for the death camps in Poland. Most didn't realize what awaited them at the end of the line. Many held their suspicions in denial while a few knew and bit their wrists to bleed out on their own terms. This caused quite a panick and made those that remained difficult to handle. To offset this, the camps were made to appear as deportation processing centers and all along the way the captives were given reasons to be hopeful that the end was not as near as otherwise surmised. Most of them didn't fully awaken to reality until pushed through barb wire loading chutes and crushed into the extermination chambers. It took about twenty minutes to die as a diesel engine pumped carbon monoxide exhaust into the sealed chamber as the infighting ensued. The scene was always horrifying when the doors were reopened for the twisting of mangled limbs, the exposed bones in their breakage, excrement mixed with the blood and the urine seeping from the contorted pile of human flesh and the faces of those who remained recognizable forever frozen in terror and agony.
As the bodies were pulled from the pile, a worker would tear open the cheeks of the dead with a hook to make easier the breakage of teeth with the pliers but for the gold that may be found dropped in a coffee can like raindrops on a tin roof. It took four hours of grilling on grates of steel rails over a pit of burning diesel to render the bodies into bone and greasy ash as the smoke of burning flesh hugged the hillsides like an apocalyptic fog, flaring the nose in its ominous stench, yet it smelled of victory, profit and purpose and with the setting sun the winners retired with the comforts of another day done.
At the time the Germans claimed they had been the victims of exploitation as the Jews had exploited others and all such and sundry was their just deserts. Jews claimed they had been the victims of exploitation at the hands of the Germans as they had been exploited and robbed by others historically. Captains of industry, King makers and Kings care little of this for they simply wish to increase their grip on profits and power. The stirrings of a population are merely the imputus for desireable movements in those markets which tend to bolster, create or reapportion the stock in shares of winners and losers. The people are an exploitable commodity best served if feeling they are not but ultimately it does not matter once the line of no return has been breached.
We are at that point with Microsoft, their minions and co-conspiritors as the threshhold of choice rapidly approaches, to then quickly diminish. While a few realize the throat knives of more efficient exploitation are being sharpened on the monopoly wheels of corporate totalitarianism they remain for a time, helpless onlookers to the holding pens of the slaughterhouse filling with the rest of the human herd by their own volition. Soon enough t
No it won't. It only takes one person to strip the DRM and put up a torrent. Bingo, millions of pirated copies overnight.
That's why CSS didn't work for DVD even though most people haven't got a clue about the DeCSS court battle.
Agreed completely. I've tested several XP based PC tablets. There are some with good portrait viewing angles, such as the electrovaya scribbler 3100, and most recent models use an active wacom digitizer for pen input... the problem is not the hardware, it's the software. I have sitting next to me a ten year old Newton MP2100. Pen input on the device is fine. With a 1GB cf card the thing has oodles of space for plain text documents, and it supports excellent inline annotation. The damn thing runs a 160mhz arm processor with 4MB of RAM. It's a fine enough calandear, I suppose... though I don't care. I only care about carrying around lots of ebooks and classwork.
The Newton may be a pile of ten year old junk hardware, but the software is *still* more useful for this kind of work than XP tablet edition! WTF!?!?!?
Manufactureres will make DVD/Blu-ray/whatever players for computers. No one can stop that.
I think you missed the point I was trying to make. I'm not always completely clear in what I communicate. The movie industry is saying, "We are protecting our content. We want you to help us protect our content (and if you don't, we'll sue the hell out of you for enabling piracy)." Microsoft said, "Okay, no problem. We'll make Media Player DRM compatible and setup the OS so that only devices with signed drivers will play your content."
What do you mean when you say "Manufactureres will make DVD/Blu-ray/whatever players for computers."? Of course they will make the DRIVES that read the disks. But that is only part of the equation. The device driver still needs to interact with the OS, and Microsoft will only sign drivers that impliment DRM.
I can almost guarantee that when Apple decides that they want people to be able to natively play HD-DVDs and Blu-Ray discs on their Macs, Apple will have to sign the same sort of deal with Hollywood, and they will have to impliment similar DRM.
Time-shifted HD-material and pirated copies will play just fine on 32-bit computers, Vista or no Vista...
The irony...
*cough* Blue Pill *cough*
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
They claimed that Linux has a severe malware problem? I must have missed that part.
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
Leo Strauss called; he wants his elitism back.
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
Umm, never
Famous Last Words.
I hadn't known there were so many idiots in the world until I started using the Internet -Stanislaw Lem
Soon, This long time windows user will do something never done before: I will pay for an OS. (Yes I know about Linux - my time is worth more than a few hundred bucks.)
:-)
Unfortunately for Microsoft, that OS will be not be vista, as it doesn't run on a mac.
I think what's going on is FSF is enabling users, or asking Tivo to enable users, to use Tivo on their own terms and not Tivo's. You know, like how drivers use their cars on their own terms and not Toyota's... of course I could be wrong. Do you have links to examples of how the FSF is dictating anything to Tivo, much less whether or not Tivo is listening at all? And the MPAA/RIAA are using the law to force people to do things their way... which law is the FSF using to force Tivo to do things their way?
In short, where is the 'strong arm' in FSF's tactics? Strong arm implies force of law, or of lawsuits, or maybe a baseball bat or two...
--- Grow a pair, liberals... stop letting the Republicans bully you!
From Microsoft's help and support applet...
Life is not for the lazy.
Only approved media players (Windows Media Player) will have the correct digital signature for your own hardware to grant access to the precious bits.
Not only that, but WMP 11 won't play HD DVD or Blu-ray discs out of the box either: http://www.cnet.com.au/software/operatingsystems/0 ,39029541,40092160,00.htm
Maybe the manufacturer of the XBOX 360 will update their game system to fill this void in the living rooms across America.
They aren't taking any features away from the original OS. They are just adding the 'new' feature of displaying HD-DVD/BluRay to only the x64 Vista. That means that the user is not losing anything by upgrading.
Note the date
Never underestimate the power of a dedicated solution over a general one.
http://blogs.technet.com/windowsvista/archive/2006 /08/24/450081.aspx
Apparently Windows Vista will not ship with any 'inherent' ability to play HD content, just as WindowsXP didn't ship with any inherent ability to play DVD content.
The only thing of note from the story is the push of signed 64bit drivers and the fact they will raise the 'possibility' that the next generation HD players will allow the content to run on the computer. But knowing WinDVD and other companies that will be in this market, I truly don't see this becoming much of an issue.
So, as it turns out, not much of a story, so we can all just move along.
"Why bother?" well your post makes it obvious why i would rather have someone on the inside just e-mail me a working key and scheme"
And hence the revoking of keys capability. You all can think the RIAA/MPAA are stupid. Your choice, but don't be surprised if you find out too late that they're not.*
*And yes I'll be here to remind each and every one of you too.
I believe this generation of consoles and pc based playback apps will be the "Dien Bien Phu" of the DRM wars.
The media pigopolists and their electronics/software development sell-outs have been pulling out all the stops, excercising the most excruciating paranoia, and setting very strigent requirements.
Assuming this generation of media gains widespread adoption, I predict that once this next generation of DRM is cracked theyll finally give up or go out of business.
It's already happened with the xbox360, which has been locked down with the toughest and worst "trusted computing" tricks in microsoft's arsenal. Now less than a year later xbox 360 has already been hacked to the point that the games can be downloaded from the internet. Many consider it only a matter of time before the console is opened equally as wide as it's first generation counterpart.
VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
a dozen individuals with hundreds of millions of dollars can speak with a very clear voice and wind up with veto power over Microsoft.
That, and a warehouse full of exploding batteries. That'll beat a warehouse full of chairs any day.
Although I believe that the "average person" is basically lazy, he's not entirely stupid.
When getting something that normally costs money for free is on the line, never doubt the ingenuity of the Average American. (Or average person from many other countries, I suspect.) I know lots of people who can open a new port in their firewall, because they need to do that in order to download pirated movies off of Kazaa/Bittorrent/Gnutella/whatever. Or who can install Divx, because they need it to watch the AVIs they download.
I could keep going. The point is, the average person has the bare minimum computer skills they need to do what they want. They might seem like complete morons when it comes to doing something that we geeks think is important but they don't give a damn about (e.g. security, encryption), but when free shit is up for grabs, suddenly everyone and their brother wants to be an expert.
The real question here is "Will the average user care about watching HD?" if the answer is yes, and VLC or some other non-MS tool provides that ability (preferably for free), people will download and install it. They might not have the foggiest clue what they're downloading and installing, or how it works, and they probably won't care, but they'll do it if that's what's required to save a buck.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
I warned about the true purpose of the Vista 64 driver signing on my weblog in June. I got a lot of crap from people saying that I'm paranoid, and that I'm against security features in Vista. I even tried to post a Slashdot story about it (rejected of course). The problem is that I'm a nobody.
At Black Hat on August 3, Joanna Rutkowska announced her exploit to get around Vista 64 driver signing. I had come up with the same idea in June (see link above), although it's obvious that she had the idea long before me. I was insensed, however, that Joanna would give such a clear announcement to the world about how this works, and go as far as proclaiming her support for the "feature". I wanted to wait for Vista's release to really give a demonstration of the trick, because I wanted to do anything that would undermine Microsoft's imposition of driver signing.
I knew that this "feature" had little to do with rootkits, even though Microsoft had promoted it as such. It simply does not prevent rootkits. Rootkits are somewhat uncommon - the day-to-day trojans are almost all user-mode crap that adds itself to Run in the registry. Driver signing does nothing against them. Also, Administrator user-mode programs are allowed raw disk access, so what really stops a rootkit from overwriting the MBR and rebooting the system? They could ever cause a bugcheck to make it look like Windows crashed 3 hours after you ran the trojan.
I was hoping that a set of exploits would be made prior to Vista's released, then released one at a time on every second Wednesday of the month so as to cause maximum credibility damage to Microsoft. These would not be rootkits, just ways of getting a custom driver to run. I'd even try to make it difficult to use a real rootkit with it. I'm against viruses and rootkits, and have never made such a thing myself, but this isn't a virus issue.
Another thing that Microsoft has disclosed is that in future Windows versions (NT 6.1?), it will not be possible to run unsigned programs as Administrator anymore, even in user mode. The "elevation" system would be there still, but only signed programs could request it. I thought of a social attack against this system. I had planned to tell Microsoft because I believe in the user/Administrator separation, but now I'm not going to. I will not help a system that's against my morals.
Signature checks should be applied by the computer owner, not Microsoft. A PC is not an Xbox 360.
Melissa
"Screw Sun, cross-platform will never work. Let's move on and steal the Java language." - Visual J++ Product Manager
Wow. This seems amazingly retarded. All we have to do is modify kqemu, which does support 64-bit, to allow kernel patches. Also, what is preventing people from patching the kernel on-disk, then rebooting?
Yeah I wondered this as well; my guess is that there'll be multiple layers of boobytraps and security-through-obscurity to try to keep anyone from figuring out enough about the kernel to make a stable patch for it, or from loading a non-standard kernel at all. I think the latter thing you could do in part by having various other parts of the system checksum and verify the kernel during the boot process and barf if it doesn't seem kosher, meaning that in order to change the kernel, you would also have to disable or modify the signature/checksum checks, which could even include various pieces of userland software ("You are running a DAMAGED version of Windows! Microsoft Office will now Quit") in order to keep Joe User from running with a modified kernel; in short, they could easily make changing the kernel into a monumental task that would require someone to modify or patch huge swaths of the system.
And that's without really getting into TPM-based schemes, which I admit to not really understanding all that well.
When a single company controls the source to not only your computer's entire system, but also to many/most of the applications that you depend on every day, and only gives you source code -- and particularly when they can roll out updates to it at any time they want, remotely -- there's really no limit to the sort of nastiness they can do. Sure, it's all fundamentally flawed (as all DRM and security-through-obscurity is), but that doesn't mean that they can't make life really miserable for anyone with an urge to tinker.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
"from the get-what-you-pay-for dept. " Pay for Windows! BAHAHA, that's gold!
http://www.microsoft-watch.com/article2/0,1995,20
http://www.apcstart.com/site/dwarne/2006/08/1147/
I assumed this was posted already, but it appears not. I guess I'll get to have the fun :).
2 79993&&#post8279993
:).
FYI, I work on HD DVD at Microsoft.
The employee that was quoted in the article was mistaken. There are already shipping software players for Blu-ray and HD DVD that run on 32-bit XP, and they will continue to work on Windows Vista in 32-bit mode.
Here's our VP's reponse to this from AVSFourm:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=8
Sorry about the last 601 posts
My video compression blog
...just ignore Windows DRM, I mean Windows Vista. I wouldn't use it even if they paid me to. It's a matter of principles.
I was about to say 13256278887989457651018865901401704640, but it appears this number is private property.
Apparently, this statement was made in error
an "unsigned" driver ought to be able to work fine with other media players?
Note that any media player capable of playing the HD content would be a violation of the DMCA unless it were approved by the MPAA group in charge of HD. And obviously they will refuse to approve any player that works with unsigned drivers.
So Microsoft is deliberatly building this and other anti-owner mechanisms into Vista, and then trying to finger point the blame onto someone else.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
They have decided that everyone must upgrade their computers to watch HD content. (It's time to purchase shares in Intel, the top PC component suppliers, and the top 10 PC makers -- they'll all be selling more stuff as a result of this.)
I wouldn't be too quick. As someone who saw some HD content: it sucks. It may never pick up.
In some instances DVD were showing already signs of noisy transfers that can't be repaired unless details are blurred significantly by filtering.
All but 100% digitally shot movies will suck on HD, the noise is unbeliavable.
I will pay less and watch a better quality DVD on my 32-bit Vista versus paying more and watching highly detailed noise, thank you.
You toss off Microsoft's words "secure" and "malware" as if Microsoft were dong a good thing here and securing our computers FOR us and protecting us from what WE would consider malware.
This whole system is about denying us ownership and control of our own computers. About "securing" our computers AGAINST us, and about prohibiting us from running software Microsoft&friends dislike, and want to label "malware".
they can require all drivers on the platform to be signed
Signed and controlled by Microsoft.
If someone wants to run some software that has not paid for and Microsoft approval and/or Microsoft dislikes it - not malware but GOODware that the owner explicitly wants to use for good reason - that owner is forbidden to load that driver, or at best he may be able to load that driver and the operation system deliberately lobotomizes itself and locks you out of the new Aero desktop and prohibits you from using various other parts of your own computer.
It is pure Orwellian newspeak the way Microsoft outright lies with language using the work "secure" as if this were security and the word "malware" as if it actually meant malware.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
Oh yes I agree with you - the subcontext here is that Microsoft is doing this in the name of customer security, but their actual motivation, as this article indicates, is the Palladium DRM system - a system built to ensure a cryptographically secure code path from BIOS image to user space, in order to allow content creators to control how consumers can use their content.
This move is speculated to lock out other operating systems, non-approved keyboards and mice, capture devices, and basically turn your computer into a puppet. I don't know how much that's true but you can be sure of this - Macrovision on steroids is just the start of it.
Is the technology itself a good implementation? Sure, has to be, I've been wanting them to do something like this for a while - but will they put it to responsible uses for the consumer's best benefit?
I doubt it. They have openly acknowledged they are developping these functions in conjunction with content industry associations like the MPAA. The recording industry is tired of trying to legislate and take away rights from the consumer legally - they're just going to change the technology so it's not possible for us to not comply with their wishes, regardless what the law of the land may say...
I think this is a matter that'll one day have to be solved in the courts... assuming the fair use laws even cover consumer rights in this case, I'm not too familiar with them...
I am disrespectful to dirt! Can you see that I am serious?!
Microsoft surprised more than a few people on Thursday when one of its developers told a technical crowd in Australia that 32-bit versions of Windows Vista won't be able to play back next-generation high-definition protected content, i.e. commercial Blu-ray and HD DVD discs. Later Thursday, representatives in the U.S. said that senior program manager Steve Riley was mistaken. "The information he provided to that audience was incorrect," a representative told CNET News.com. "Playback is possible with Windows Vista in 32-bit." The decision of whether to offer that support, the representative said, won't be made by Microsoft but rather by the third-party software makers that create DVD playback software, folks like CyberLink and InterVideo. "It is up to the ISVs providing playback solutions to determine whether the intended playback environment, including environments with a 32-bit CPU, meets the performance requirements to allow high-definition playback while supporting the guidelines set forth by the content owners," Microsoft PR manager Adam Anderson said in a statement. "No version of Windows Vista will make a determination as to whether any given piece of content should play back or not."
Does God treat us as servants or friends? Check my homepage.
This has NOTHING to do with software. Kernel patch protection is a feature enabled in the HARDWARE of 64-bit processors. It's not security through obscurity; you can't modify any kernel segments of memory just like you can't divide by zero or modify another process' data.
DATABASE WOW WOW
Very true. Especially since the retroactive extension of copyright in the US cordons off not only the culture of today but also the cultural artifacts of your childhood and those of your parents and their parents. So, even if you make the argument that you can replace the culture of today, which seems an extreme unlikelihood within a broadcast culture, you are still closed off from the majority of recorded culture. This is already your culture, you can't simply buy a new history regardless of how much you wish to avoid patronizing the companies with a legal monopoly on selling you access to yours.