Slashdot Mirror


UK Greens Declare Vista Bad For Environment

schwaang writes "The UK Green Party says that Vista's DRM requirements will force many unnecessary hardware upgrades. Quoting: 'There will be thousands of tonnes of dumped monitors, video cards, and whole computers that are perfectly capable of running Vista — except for the fact they lack the paranoid lock down mechanisms Vista forces you to use. That's an offensive cost to the environment. Future archaeologists will be able to identify a "Vista Upgrade Layer" when they go through our landfill sites.'"

22 of 290 comments (clear)

  1. Am I missing something? by Erwos · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm kind of confused. You see, the laptop I bought a couple years ago, which apparently has no support for HDCP or any of those other copy-protection measures, actually runs Vista _just fine_. In fact, my desktop, which is a relatively old AthlonXP 2500+ machine, ALSO doesn't need to be upgraded, beyond maybe getting a little more memory.

    Look, DRM sucks. But DRM is no excuse to just start making up FUD. Vista is a hog, but blaming it all on DRM seems pretty inaccurate. Saying that everyone is going to start filling landfills just because their video card doesn't support HDCP seems like it's crossing over into "deliberately lying".

    --
    Plausible conjecture should not be misrepresented as proof positive.
    1. Re:Am I missing something? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Look, DRM sucks. But DRM is no excuse to just start making up FUD.

      While I agree, pro-DRM and anti-DRM groups have been using it to make up FUD on both sides for awhile now ...

    2. Re:Am I missing something? by kjart · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Have you tried playing Blu-Ray on said laptop? HD-DVD? If you did, I think you'd find that you can't play it in high definition. It will downgrade the signal if you try to play it on your 2-year old Celeron, and will not play in full 1080p glory.

      I doubt that a two year old laptop will have a Blu-Ray drive, so no, I don't think it would be able to play one. People will have to upgrade to enjoy such things, but this has nothing to do with Vista.

      The bottom line is we aren't getting what we paid for.

      Yes, I would tend to agree, but I don't think this has anything to do with the features in Vista or any other OS for that matter. It is the content producers choice to use DRM on their content and they are rightfully to blame for it.

    3. Re:Am I missing something? by BFaucet · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You should only have to upgrade your optical drive to view HD content. If you're running Vista, however, your older monitor that is missing the HDCP (that has absolutely NOTHING to do with quality) will have to be replaced despite it's full ability to display HD content. THAT is the concern. Not that you'll have to upgrade the whole laptop.

      A lot of folks like being able to upgrade only what's needed on their system. Vista is just making it so you'll need to upgrade stuff for the sake of getting their DRM shit working. Even if your system is already capable of doing all the whiz-bang stuff.

      Fuck it. I've been using Win2k/Ubuntu and have yet to have a reason to install XP. I doubt I'll feel the need to move to Vista. I'll just drop Win2k when things stop supporting it. Why should I drop $200 for something that'll require me to drop another $1000 for no new functionality?

      --
      -Derick
    4. Re:Am I missing something? by mysticgoat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It is the content producers choice to use DRM on their content and they are rightfully to blame for it.

      I won't argue with blaming the content producers for DRM. But they aren't the ones who are paying for it. The people who buy Vista are paying for it— through the additional monetary costs of the hardware needed solely for the Premium Content pipes, and through the obligatory CPU overhead of running the processes that assure the OS that you haven't sneaked any non-DRM hardware onto the machine in the last few milliseconds.

      The people who buy Vista are paying for all this even if the box will never be used for Premium Content. Even if the only thing they will ever do is run spreadsheets, word processing, Blender, and Tetris— they will stay pay to protect DRM Content Providers from the possibility that a copyright might be infringed on in their box.

      Vista is a great way to spend a lot more money on a new box that will give you marginally better performance on the job than your old WinXP box. If you think that the appropriate design goal of an OS is to provide the user with the most cost effective means of utilizing cost effective hardware to get his computing tasks done, then Vista is "defective by design".

    5. Re:Am I missing something? by westlake · · Score: 2, Insightful
      If you're running Vista, however, your older monitor that is missing the HDCP (that has absolutely NOTHING to do with quality) will have to be replaced despite it's full ability to display HD content. THAT is the concern.

      Your monitor is an aging 17 to 19 inch 4:3 display. Your monitor is a power hungry fifty pound glass bottle. Which will in not so very distant future be making the trip to the dumpster anyway.

      Tell me that there is anything which will hold you back when the big screen HDCP monitor become mass market.

  2. stupid by otacon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Future archaeologists will be able to identify a "Vista Upgrade Layer" when they go through our landfill sites No we won't...the same reason we don't have a mainframe layer or black and white TV layer and the same reason we don't have a sword layer...people aren't going to buy new stuff to run software that does the same stuff...if you are going to buy a new computer and it comes with vista great, but people are really overestimating the market demand as far as the average PC user and even most 'advanced' (I use that term loosly) users.
    --
    In a world of acronyms, the words are the real victims.
  3. Gates' probable response by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
    If I were Bill Gates reading the announcement I would probably sponaneously orgasm. Whoever said that Microsoft's view is that you can buy anything is more right than they could have imagined. It seems you can buy a relationship with your OEM's that money just can't buy.

    Future archaeologists will be able to identify a "Vista Upgrade Layer" when they go through our landfill sites.'"
    Just put yourself in the position of an OEM reading that.
  4. oh please by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Future archaeologists will be able to identify a "Vista Upgrade Layer" when they go through our landfill sites

    Number of people wo will buy Vista retail - tiny
    Number of people who will upgrade an old PC just to run Vista that they just bought - tinier
    Number of people upgrading who will toss out perfectly good vid cards/monitors rather than building a secondary PC - all 3 of you.

    1. Re:oh please by KiloByte · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, ordinary folks toss out the whole perfectly good computer.
      Already a lot of them prefer purchasing a new machine instead of paying a sizable part of the price to have it "repaired" by removing spyware.

      --
      The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
  5. Old News... by PenguinBoyDave · · Score: 1, Insightful

    This is nonsense...it was said about WindowsXP as well. I don't see any news here.

    --
    I'm not a troll, but I play one on Slashdot.
  6. Vista defaults to Standby, not Power off! by xaxa · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The "Shutdown" icon in Vista no longer shuts down the computer -- it just puts it into standby! To shutdown properly you have to select the option from a tiny menu. This is going to waste a lot of energy, since people won't realise the difference.

  7. FUD by cybrthng · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Vista isn't negating all that hardware, the Movie Studios are. You have the same problem of not being able to run protected content no matter WHICH platform you choose. If Linux ever gets High Def DVD or if MAC's ever get Hi-Def DVD you bet they too will be DRM'd

  8. Re:Strange... by tgd · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Thats actually how I got the machine in question. A company was getting rid of it because it "didn't work" -- it was spyware infested. Its actually, I believe, a 1.8ghz Celeron or something like that. The drive is bigger, 60gb perhaps, and its got on-board video and sound. Nothing special. I bet the machine didn't cost $500 two years ago.

    Vista runs fine on it. The "experience" score was a bit low, but everything worked fine.

    People who want the latest and greatest whiz-bang crap may need to upgrade, but those people are the type who drop $3k on a gaming rig every few years anyway and secretly are looking for an excuse.

    Is there a chance that the uninformed will be taken advantage of by the likes of Best Buy to buy things they don't need? Of course, but Best Buy does that even without the excuse of Vista.

    Vista is 5 years more advanced than XP. Of course it needs more resources. Go compare what a Linux system typically would install nicely on in 1998 and 2003, or worse 1994 and 1999. I ran Linux on 8 meg systems for 4-5 years, now most installers won't even load in a system with less than 64 meg.

  9. What a load of rubbish. by Toby_Tyke · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They might have a point if millions of people were going to rush out and buy Vista. But thats not going to happen, so the Green Party is, sadly, talking rubbish.

    Far and away the vast majority of PC users will be sticking with their current XP install until they buy a new PC, which will come pre-loaded with Vista. And even then, people don't tend to throw away their old PCs if they still work. They tend to keep it around as a second machine, or pass it on to a relative (instant recycling).

    I hate DRM as much as the next Slashbot, but come on. Thousand of people dumping perfectly good hardware so they can watch HD-DVD movies? I don't think so.

    --
    "I realise this is not a very popular opinion but it's the truth, and there for needs to be said" -Bill Hicks
  10. Get Serious by Luscious868 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I hate sensationalist crap like this. Vista won't require a hardware upgrade for relatively new systems unless you want to experience all of it's bells and whistles. IMHO that's beside the point completely since most consumers will stick with the operating system they have until they buy a new PC that will be preloaded with Vista anyway. I know I'm in no rush to upgrade our systems where I work (and I'll never do it at home since I ditched my PC a year ago in favor of a Mac). I won't even bother taking a look at Vista until it's been on the market for two years. Let others deal with the inevitable bugs, security issues, driver problems and software compatibility issues. I'll stick with XP as long as possible. I just don't see very compelling businesses reasons to justify an upgrade to Vista. I see a lot more reasons for consumers to make the leap but as I mentioned above they'll do so whether they need to or not when they buy their next PC.

  11. Re:How many dgrees by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Monitors are paricularly harmful to the environment because they contain quite a bit of lead.

    I've never quite understood all of the concern about monitors and lead. Almost all of that lead is vitrified in the glass, just the same way that leaded crystal drinking glasses are chock full of lead. If the lead is immobilized enough to drink out of, it wouldn't seem that monitor glass would pose a major threat.

    Moreover, monitors would generally end up in a landfill with some kind of containment system. People fret about the 5 pounds of lead frozen in glass and buried in a landfill, yet anybody can go down to Wal-Mart, plop down a couple of bucks for a pound of lead airgun pellets, and indiscriminately scatter them around the environment. Why no comparable outcry about that?

  12. The Real Environmental Issue by giafly · · Score: 2, Insightful
    The real environmental issue is, from the article:

    Vista requires more expensive and energy-hungry hardware, passing the cost on to consumers and the environment
    I don't think anyone could seriously argue with that. But assuming most people don't upgrade until they would have bought a PC anyway, the following claim is exaggerated:

    There will be thousands of tonnes of dumped monitors, video cards and whole computers that are perfectly capable of running Vista - except for the fact they lack the paranoid lock down mechanisms Vista forces you to use.
    --
    Reduce, reuse, cycle
  13. Re:Sure by egr · · Score: 1, Insightful

    What the heck is wrong with you people? Mac-lover, Windows-haters, Linux-fanatics... I can understand the fighting for open formats, DRM free hardware/software etc, but this OS love/hate wars are just retarded

  14. Computer-related activites already spoil the envir by Electric+Eye · · Score: 2, Insightful

    While their claims MAY be a bit exaggerated, you have to look back and see how destructive widespread computer use has really been. Remember 10 years ago or so everyone was saying more computers would = paperless society? Quite the opposite has happened, actually. The use of paper has skyrocketed to new proportions since 1995. Billions of tons of computer scrap has already been dumped, but mostly in China because they'll take anything we send over there. There have been plenty of articles about the mercury-laden landfills and communities there, with people scavenging around looking for valuable metals, etc. while the environment is ravaged by all the contaminants present in older computers that have been dumped.

    I still don't see why the world is going to rush out and buy Vista. I wouldn't recommend to ANY of my customers to even consider upgrading for a minimum of six months because there is going to be quite the bug-fest with Vista 1.0. Besides, what's the real upside over XP? Security? Ha!

  15. How about donating the old PCs? by blindd0t · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Not that I agree that so many people will suddenly dispose of their old computers, but if that were the case, why not establish some incentives for donating them instead of throwing them away? Give the original owner a free/discounted copy of Vista Home Basic or a free/discounted hardware upgrade (RAM/Monitor/Larger HDD/etc...) with the purchase of a new Vista-ready machine if they ship their old PC in (sort-of like replacing a car battery - you get the discount/refund when they get the old battery).

    Think about it - if that were the case, companies like Dell and HP could possibly work with an institution (be it academic, charitable, or whatever) to start a ODPC (one desktop per child) project, where old PCs that would otherwise be completely trashed would be reformatted, have a free OS installed, and then sold at a very low price for similar uses as the OLPC machines. Granted, there's no spiffy hand-crank, but you have to admit it would have its benefits for education! Kids could still learn to type using these computers.

  16. Re:Linux is bad for it too by isorox · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So I plan to hit the used computer store and garage sale market hard now that Vista has come out. I'll be able to finally put together that 100 node Beowulf cluster I've always been wanting...cheap!

    And that's green-friendly, 100 computers draining at least 60W, doing the same work as a single computer using 400W could do.