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."'"

17 of 554 comments (clear)

  1. Media companies are ruining innovation by IntelliAdmin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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

    1. Re:Media companies are ruining innovation by TheDreadSlashdotterD · · Score: 5, Insightful

      How much would you like to bet that only 10% of the U.S. population will really care?

      --
      I have nothing to say.
    2. Re:Media companies are ruining innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'd be honestly amazed if more than 1% of the population cares.

      I expect that most people who wind up getting Vista will get it on new computers. These new computers will most likley be 64-bit computers anyway.

      In the end, the only people who will care are geeks. Everyone else will assume that it's a problem with their old computer. I can already here the meme coming up, "oh, 32-bit isn't enough for HD, you need 64-bit to do HD!".

      The vast majoriy of people will assume that 64-bit computers are required for HD content due to some techy reason they don't understand. They won't believe that someone would intentially criple their computer.

    3. Re:Media companies are ruining innovation by Kadin2048 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I would really laugh if that's the route they go.

      Keeping the HD hardware from running on the machines that most people have, would really be the nail in the coffin of legitimate HD distribution.

      It's like they want to guarantee that people find illicit ways of obtaining HD content. First, they're going to make the players incompatible and obnoxiously expensive, by failing to agree on a single format for physical distribution. Then, they decide that the only kosher way to play back legitimately acquired (which implies DRMed) HD content, is with new hardware and software.

      Excuse me if I'm not impressed. What does this leave the average person who wants HD to do? Well, you just download it illegally. It's pirated content, distributed in un-DRMed formats, that's going to be most people's first taste of HD on their computer.

      The DRM will always be broken: somewhere inside that cable box or LCD monitor, is an unencrypted digital signal. With the right test equipment, somebody will figure out how to get it back into a computer and record it. From there, they need only to compress it with one of the many HD-capable codecs and video formats available and playable right now (H.264 inside an AVI or Quicktime container), and dump it onto the P2P networks.

      This smacks of what we saw happen with MP3 music a few years ago. The music companies feared it, and hoped that they could kill MP3 by using proprietary formats instead (anyone remember ATRAC3?). Instead of buying the legitimate, overpriced garbage that the recording industry tried to foist on them, consumers ignored it and got their MP3s illegally instead. By ignoring demand, the music companies gave up billions of dollars in revenue and created a generation of buyers who got used to getting music for free.

      The movie and video companies, together with electronics manufacturers, have an opportunity now to not repeat history. If they give the market what it wants -- HD movies without onerous restrictions, playable on the hardware they already have (which by-and-large is technically capable of the task), sold at a reasonable price -- they could start making money immediately. Instead, I think they'll probably resist the inevitable outcome as long as possible, and waste millions (or billions) of dollars in misplaced technological development and make criminals out of their would-be customers in the mean time.

      --
      "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
  2. Bullshit by Spad · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re: Bullshit by Black+Parrot · · Score: 4, Insightful

      > "The media companies asked us to do this ..... so we had to do this."

      > Interesting - after all, thats precisely the line Apple uses about the DRM in ITMS songs.

      At least we know who their real customers are.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  3. an opening for competition against Media Player by MrLogic17 · · Score: 5, Insightful


    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/

    1. Re:an opening for competition against Media Player by Spad · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I suspect the MPAA will refuse to licence the HDCP decoding tech to anyone that doesn't go to extreme lengths to "protect" their content.

      This, combined with needing a new 3D card and new monitor - or a new TV - and having to splash out £500 for a player seems like just another nail in HD/Blu Ray's coffin before it's even started.

  4. Scariest part ... by throbbingbrain.com · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "The media companies asked us to do this ..... so we had to do this."

    Wow.


  5. x32? by linuxci · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well x64 sounds bad enough but now they're referring to the 32bit x86 architecture as x32. Just doesn't sound right.

  6. Malware? by DingerX · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Uh--so let me get this right, "Malware" now includes anything that does not "register" with Microsoft and adhere to unconscionable DRM schemes?

  7. The future of Windows is not for me... by RyanFenton · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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

  8. FSF are ruining innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "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".

    1. Re:FSF are ruining innovation by grasshoppa · · Score: 4, Insightful

      *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".

      You got modded troll, but you are actually really insightful.

      It's somewhat sad that you are as insightful as you are, I would expect this to be common sense.

      If you don't agree with the movie industry, don't support them. If you don't agree with the music industry, don't support them. By extension, that means all the electronic companies out there trying to screw you for them by proxy.

      it's quite simple really.

      --
      Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
    2. Re:FSF are ruining innovation by Jeremi · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Much like the FSF "dictates" what some of it's users can do with its code.*


      Except that FSF produces and thus owns the code it writes. The media companies do not produce computers or operating systems, and yet they try to dictate rules to the companies that do. See the difference? When Richard Stallman is able to strongarm Microsoft into removing all DRM from Vista, then your comparison will make sense.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
  9. Yep by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  10. Media companies are *driving* security innovation? by Gary+W.+Longsine · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.