Slashdot Mirror
Are New DRM Technologies Setting Vista Up For Failure?
PetManimal writes "Computerworld has picked apart the way Vista handles DRM in terms of hardware and software restrictions. Trusted Platform Module, Output Protection Management, Protected Video Path and various Windows Media software components are designed to 'protect' copyrighted content against security breaches and unauthorized use. The article notes that many of the DRM technologies were forced upon Vista by the entertainment industry, but that may not garner Microsoft or Hollywood any sympathy with consumers: 'Matt Rosoff, lead analyst at research firm Directions On Microsoft, asserts that this process does not bode well for new content formats such as Blu-ray and HD-DVD, neither of which are likely to survive their association with DRM technology. "I could not be more skeptical about the viability of the DRM included with Vista, from either a technical or a business standpoint," Rosoff stated. "It's so consumer-unfriendly that I think it's bound to fail — and when it fails, it will sink whatever new formats content owners are trying to impose."'"
I originally had no intention of looking at this article. Then I saw the above snippet in the post and felt compelled to find out what a "Directions on Microsoft" is. They have an About Us page, it turns out. Their first entry is:
I knew that Microsoft supported, in one way or another, a lot of organizations around the world but this takes the cake. A professional, corporate stalker? The world must be coming to an end sooner than I thought.
You never know... By the time the game industry is dx10 mainstream WINE may support it well. WINEs implimentation of dx7/8 is going well and dx9 is getting better all the time. A recent post in the WINEhq newsletter also suggested that adding support for dx10 once 7/8/9 were working nicely would be a doable affair. So in the end you may be able to play more of your Windows games than you can under Windows ;) ...Just like the current state of programs (yes you can run more Windows programs under Linux than under Windows if you include win 3.11 to xp sp2!).
I ate your fish.
Windows users are continuing to test the waters of Linux and to be honest I think this is the best way to convert them...Show new users that over a period of time Linux is a manageable learning curve and has some clear advantages. Every one I know that uses Linux full time after being a long time Windows user did it this way including myself and it takes about one to three years. This process is being helped a long now that Linux isn't playing second fiddle to Windows and is now focusing on catching up to OSX and finding its own identity instead of just being a straight (boring and useless) Windows clone. And with compiz/xorg working on everyday hardware without issue and Vista's upgrade costs at least force a bunch of new to Linux Windows users start testing the waters. If this is kept up the rate of users defecting to Linux and Mac will hopefully turn into a land slide in the next five to ten years and then we will truly see the year of the Linux Desktop.
Note I do hope users go to both Linux and Mac in roughly equal groups as I'd like to see us avoid another monopoly situation like this Microsoft hell we've had to live through.
I ate your fish.
I don't think so. The norm currently is that if you ask me for a copy of the new albulm I just bought I might umm and ahh over it for 10 minutes, but ultimately I have the choice of giving you a copy. I might feel guilty about it, because all that propaganda I've seen on tv tells me it is wrong, but I actually have the option of doing the "wrong" thing. But if you ask me for a copy and I say "can't, its copy protected" you might reply with "can't we crack it?" and then we'll go search the net for 20 minutes, not find anything, call our geeky friend and ask him and he might say "as yet, there is no crack for Microsoft's DRM" and by that point you and I will be looking at my computer like most geeks look at this stuff: proprietary software stops me from doing what I want. And that's it man, the geeks have won then, and Microsoft just don't get that.
How we know is more important than what we know.
With Microsoft bleeding billion into the Xbox, a billion into the Zune, and with Vista set up for failure...
Oh, please... That poor, poor Microsoft. What I find mildly amusing on Slashdot are all these young and idealistic IT "professionals" pretending to be cynical realists; talking about Linux this and Linux that, and about Microsoft's impeding demise (if not next week, then by Christmas for sure). These are the kind of boys and girls who get their first real job and think that somebody actually gives a rat's ass about their opinions and their wonderful programming skills.
It takes years in the IT field to finally realize that smart ideas and good products don't sell. What sells? Entirely random stuff. Some of it turns out to be not bad, but most of it is crap. Why does it sell? Because people running Microsoft and such know just a bit more about selling stuff than an entire army of twenty-year-old comp sci graduates. Reading all this excited chatter about how badly Windows suck make me feel like I am in a twilight zone. C'mon people, pull your heads out of your asses and try to understand that Windows is not a computer operating system. It IS the computer, as far as the vast majority of PC users understand it.
So current DRM schemes run into some issues with Vista. Big deal. The entertainment industry will comply with Microsoft, because Windows is how people watch their stupid movies and play their stupid MP3s. What about Linux, you ask? Well, most PC users think that linux is a kind of a wild cat with pointy ears.
I wish I could disagree with you (I'm an anti-DRM Microsoft employee), but I'm not sure that I can.
Based on conversations I've had with "the people that know", content protection features in some of our products go above and beyond what is strictly required by the letter of the law. What I cannot get a straight answer on is if it is because of contractual obligations we have or for some other reason.
It is very frustrating because the people involved (and some of them are lawyers) are not especially helpful or forthcoming when it comes to explaining their decisions. MS is a relatively open company internally - you can candidly ask any employee about what they work on, challenge their judgement, etc. Usuaully you find out they're pretty smart and had good reasons for doing what they did. It's a good system - 90% of the time I can agree with a point of view or a decision I didn't initially agree with, because I replace my (incorrect/incomplete) assumptinos with real data/knowledge from the people that directly attacked the problem. But that hasn't always been the case when trying to understand why certain content-protection behaviors are the way they are. There's a growing undercurrent of employees that are at least as ugly as some slashdot trolls anytime some new person says "i was trying to do thing X with my media and i can't.. why not?". We'll spout off answers like "because MS is the bitch of hollywood, not the company that cares about its customers" and the baiting goes pretty much unanswered/unchallenged.
I've been barking up a lot of trees in my internal anti-DRM crusades and the answers sound a lot like "we're not talking to YOU about this". I wonder if it is just me, but the people I've tlaked to that aren't quite as obnoxious as I am get about the same treatment.
So yeah. Some of it, maybe even most of it, is us trying to cover our asses legally. But not 100% of it. And that non-zero amount really pisses me off.
My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily represent those of my employer.