Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Re-Brands PlaysForSure

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the always-a-pleasure-doing-business dept.

mikesd81 writes "Information Week writes about a licensing change intended to 'beat Apple at their own game'. They're going to use a combination of branding and DRM, and replace the "PlaysForSure" logo with a "Certified for Windows Vista" tag.'The certification is used to guarantee compatibility with Microsoft's copyright-protection software and is the same logo used for the company's Zune player. The problem, however, is that music and video bought from the online Zune Marketplace won't play in their native format on other devices, including those that will carry the new logo.'"

38 of 194 comments (clear)

  1. Plays for maybe? by gEvil+(beta) · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Might play sometimes"?

    --
    This guy's the limit!
    1. Re:Plays for maybe? by wkitchen · · Score: 2, Funny

      Plays for shit.

    2. Re:Plays for maybe? by nickyj · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "PlaysForSome" then in small print, "NotForMost"

      --
      Causing Chaos Everywhere,
      Nik J.
      The strange world of a loner, in a populous city, drowning in society
  2. How about XP? Confusing? by guruevi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So now we're going to have Certified for Windows Vista on things that have nothing to do with Vista? Will it work on XP? That's going to be really confusing for their consumers (Microsoft doesn't have customers) especially since that logo will be found on software and hardware.

    I also don't know what music and music players have to do with Vista other than the DRM. They should rename it: "Plays only on Vista, bitches" and then say like... bitches.

    Apparently the front page is now also infected with DRM since I can't post anything and it keeps logging me out.

    --
    Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
  3. PlaysForSure + Certified for Windows Vista? by wellingtonsteve · · Score: 5, Insightful

    = PlaysForVista

    a subtle hint for the future? ie that you will need Vista to play anything new?

    1. Re:PlaysForSure + Certified for Windows Vista? by vought · · Score: 4, Funny

      a subtle hint for the future? ie that you will need Vista to play anything new? BINGO! As Microsoft unifies PlaysFerShure and Zune DRM, they will include the feature in Vista only, ensuring that millions of people will not care in the slightest, but cementing the reputation of their marketing department as brain dead.
    2. Re:PlaysForSure + Certified for Windows Vista? by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Funny

      Well, if the name says as much as "playsforsure" said, it means it will play on Mac, on Linux, even on your cell, but never under any circumstances on Vista.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    3. Re:PlaysForSure + Certified for Windows Vista? by RareButSeriousSideEf · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually, the branding is -- for the first time -- becoming quite clear to me. Microsoft's DRM logos on a device means "protected content must be purchased separately for this device; you cannot transfer previously purchased content to it."

      There. I'm not even an Apple fanboy, but that's an easy target for a "Hi, I'm a Zune," "...and I'm an iPod" commercial. Or better yet, "I'm a generic MP3 player, and content you purchased for me will play on damn near anything."

      --
      Pi Ran Out
  4. What ? by terrymr · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How is Microsoft doing something utterly incomprehensible supposed to "beat apple at their own game ?"

  5. Maybe better? by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 4, Informative

    Given that only Windows could handle PlayForSure, and that Microsoft was unlikely to let any other OS developers have the necessary licenses, maybe this is clearer. Maybe its clearer that this form of lock-in requires Microsoft Windows. Either way, its DRM and its nasty.

    --
    Jumpstart the tartan drive.
    1. Re:Maybe better? by ozbird · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Perhaps they think that labelling it "Certified for Windows Vista" would help them sell more copies of Vista; if so, they're sadly mistaken. "PlaysForSure" may be tainted as a brand, but then so is "Vista". They've put lipstick on the pig, but people still won't kiss it - especially brown lipstick.

  6. No... by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...they originally just planned to drop the 'L'.

  7. Certified confusion by rsborg · · Score: 3, Funny
    Well, Microsoft surely have Apple beat when it comes to customer confusion.

    How does this play with a former "PlaysForSure" device that is intended only for XP? What about the Zune (which, AFAIK, still doesn't work with PlaysForSure media, but *does* work with Vista?

    Seriously, are MS intending to hand Apple a computer media format monopoly on a silver platter?

    --
    Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
    1. Re:Certified confusion by AJWM · · Score: 5, Informative

      MS pumped in a whole heap of money into Apple at one point to basically keep them solvent

      Uh, if you mean the paltry $128M or so that Microsoft paid Apple for some non-voting, non-dividend stock back in the 90s, Apple had a couple of $Billion in the bank at the time. AAPL stock price was tanking because of lousy management, not lack of cash.

      The money was actually a settlement of some lawsuits by Apple at the time, the "investment" thing was a face-saving figleaf that Gates required if Apple ever wanted to see another version of Office for Mac.

      And yes, there were plenty of Apple fanbois moaning about it and accusing Apple of selling out.

      --
      -- Alastair
    2. Re:Certified confusion by GaryPatterson · · Score: 2, Informative

      No, you're wrong about Microsoft keeping Apple solvent.

      Apple were being called "beleaguered" and "struggling" by a media hooked on those terms but the fact is that had around 2 billion dollars in cash reserves, were just about to launch the iMac, the iPod was in the works and the company was working hard on getting OS X into a public beta state. The company was struggling to get past the crap left by a bunch of poor CEOs and to raise their image, but not struggling financially.

      You would have heard a lot of the Apple fans booing Gates when his video appeared on stage, if you'd seen a clip. Many of the more zealot-y people were very upset indeed about any deal, or Microsoft's money (which was settling a few patent disputes and a bit of stolen Quicktime code). I liked the idea of certainty around Office releases, and I'm pretty sure I wasn't alone in that.

      Microsoft's $150M in non-voting stock was reparations and a gesture, and they made a very tidy profit when the sold a few years later. Of course, if they'd held on that money would have been worth quite a few billion by now - Apple's stock was around $16 (from memory) and while it's now around $190 it has split a few times. They'd have made more profit than their entertainment division has in its entire life.

      But I guess all that doesn't fit your poor memory and doesn't help you throw around terms like "overly smug Apple fanbois." You were correctly moderated as "-1 troll" although I'd like to think you can learn better.

    3. Re:Certified confusion by DragonWriter · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Tell me - why would Apple accept Microsoft's money unless they ***NEEDED*** it?


      Because it was money?

      Supposedly, they were deadly enemies.


      Corporations are rarely (though, still, it happens) anything like "deadly enemies" outside of the mind of their respective fanboys. They were, of course, competitors in some markets, but MS was also the vendor of a software package that Apple felt was important for its platform. They weren't "deadly enemies", they were companies that were each trying to make money. Apple would take MS's money because it was money, and the strings attached didn't outweight the utility of the cash.

  8. Makes no sense by Tridus · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This move makes no sense. PlaysForSure devices/stores are not compatible with Zune devices/stores, but they'll both carry the same logo? This defeats the entire point of the PlaysForSure branding in the first place: that any device and any store with the branding will work together.

    Somebody at Microsoft has lost their minds.

    --
    -- "So they told me that using the download page to download something was not something they anticipated." - Bill Gates
    1. Re:Makes no sense by ruiner13 · · Score: 2, Funny
      I'm sure it makes perfect sense if you're in marketing. I, however, am not in marketing. I suspect it goes something like this:
      1. Rebrand PlaysForSure
      2. ???
      3. Profit!
      --

      today is spelling optional day.

    2. Re:Makes no sense by RAMMS+EIN · · Score: 5, Insightful

      ``This move makes no sense. PlaysForSure devices/stores are not compatible with Zune devices/stores, but they'll both carry the same logo? This defeats the entire point of the PlaysForSure branding in the first place: that any device and any store with the branding will work together.''

      BEEP. You fail it!

      Compatibility was never the idea of PlaysForSure. First of all, PlaysForSure is DRM. DRM is all about making sure things _don't_ play for sure. Secondly, Microsoft introduced the Zune with a PFS-incompatible scheme, without so much as blinking.

      I don't know what exactly the strategy is, but it smells like sucking as much money as they can out of as many idiots who will fall for it. First, they bought into PlaysForSure. Then, Microsoft introduced the Zune...which would have made Zune DRM the tech to get, had it taken off. Now, those who bought into PlaysForSure is screwed because it isn't what Microsoft's _own_ player uses. And those who bought into Zune are screwed, because nobody uses the damn thing.

      And Microsoft, who brought them to this hell, is sitting on piles of money.

      And it became night. And it became day. Just another day in monopoly land.

      --
      Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
  9. Why not just no DRM? by PeterChenoweth · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Unlike many slashdotters, I don't have a big problem with Microsoft. Writing software with their tools pays my bills. But it baffles me as to why they can't figure out that their whole DRM plan is broken. First they create a 'Plays For Sure' system, but then they release their own player that doesn't work with it. Who was the genius that decided that? It's as if Apple had different DRM's for different versions of the iPod. And now *another* name change? They just can't figure it out.

    If Microsoft wants to win customers from Apple, they should just drop DRM all together. If Amazon and Apple (iTunes+) can do it, why not Microsoft?

    1. Re:Why not just no DRM? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If Microsoft wants to win customers from Apple, they should just drop DRM all together. If Amazon and Apple (iTunes+) can do it, why not Microsoft?
      You are forgetting that Microsoft was and still is -- despite Gates' quote -- a huge proponent for DRM. Microsoft wants to be the gatekeeper to the entertainment world and to the connected living room. DRM was/is their vision of this tollbooth. Consumers buy electronics using Microsoft licensed technology, entertainment producers license softwares based on Microsoft technology. MS wins both ways. It was MS that convinced the record labels that DRM could guarantee their business models, that piracy could be solved by technology alone.

      Apple's success with iPod+iTunes sorta screwed up this plan, but that doesn't mean MS is giving up. That's why they keep on going with jAnus, PlayForSure, Zune DRM, Certified for Vista.
  10. PlaysForS*** by 517714 · · Score: 3, Funny

    At some point, the lawyers prevail over the marketers.

    --
    The US government have made it clear that we have no inalienable rights; any we do not defend vigorously will be taken.
  11. "PlaysForMe" comes to mind by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Funny

    As in "It plays for me. The problem must be on your end."

    Hey, why shouldn't MS copy the ancient excuse of every tech support on the planet for their products? They copy everything else.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  12. Re:Yeah... by mabhatter654 · · Score: 4, Informative

    don't blame the article... that is EXACTLY what Microsoft is doing!!!! Putting the same "compatibility" sticker on PfS and Zune, when they are clearly not compatible.

  13. Beating Apple at their own game? by dangitman · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Riiiiight

    Becuase Apple's game was to promote the iPod as being exclusively for one platform, and having multiple incompatible DRM formats. Funny, I though Apple did the opposite, and (unusually for Apple) made the iPod cross-platform, and implemented fairly simple DRM that is consistent across all its products.

    --
    ... and then they built the supercollider.
    1. Re:Beating Apple at their own game? by dangitman · · Score: 2, Insightful

      When did I say that DRM was good? Please show me the part of my post where I said that.

      I don't like DRM one bit. I was talking about consumer acceptance in the marketplace. If the iTunes DRM was as convoluted, incompatible and as flakey as Microsoft's DRM - then the iTunes store would never have been a success in the marketplace.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
  14. i for one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    do not welcome our restrictive drm laden asshat overlords

  15. Re:I think you mean by jcr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Make you buy a bunch of DRM-infested music

    Hold on there.. They're not making you buy anything.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  16. No WMA? No problem! by dj245 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Thats not a bug, thats a feature! Microsoft is trying to get people to use greener, less CPU-intensive codecs like MP3 to save power and the environment.

    Kidding aside, what is Microsoft's business plan with the Zune??? Judging from the vast numbers of deeply-discounted Zunes being dumped into the market (I bought mine for $80 on Woot), they can't possibly be making money on the hardware. The software is so terrible that I only use it when my music collection changes substantially, and their music store certainly doesn't have much going for it right now. What is the "attachment rate" for Zune store purchase? Its probably shockingly low.

    The whole thing reminds me of Xbox 1 (and the 360 to some extent) where Microsoft deeply discounted the hardware hoping to make money on the software, but then didn't because their projections of attachment rates were completely off and the hardware was selling at just too great of a loss.

    --
    Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
  17. Whazza works on XP? by amigabill · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I use XP. I'm not interested in Vista. Certified for Vista doesn't make me fell like I can use this stuff... I'll also assume it won't work on my ipod. What about my Sansa with Rockbox? Still dunno. I feel safer _avoiding_ "Certified for Windows Vista" items.

  18. Re:Lies, Damn Lies, by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That's not why it didn't sell. It's like saying a kitchen set advertised as "The most notable kitchen set you'll ever own" won't sell in English speaking countries because people would think it includes no table. Notable and No Table are the same thing right?

    http://www.snopes.com/business/misxlate/nova.asp

  19. Plays For Sure by DieByWire · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...for small values of 'for sure.'

    --
    Never shake hands with a man you meet in a fertility clinic.
  20. Re:Plays for not at all? by Spinlock_1977 · · Score: 2, Funny

    I like the way Microsoft markets Apple iTunes - by continually stepping on their own wanker!

    --
    - The Kessel run is for nerf herders. I can circumnavigate the entire Central Finite Curve in a lot less than 12 parse
  21. Know what REALLY plays for sure? by Tyr_7BE · · Score: 3, Funny

    A straight up unladen MP3. THAT plays for sure.

  22. Re:Lies, Damn Lies, by Evil+Adrian · · Score: 2, Funny

    If you know people that stupid and you aren't killing them, you should be fined heavily.

    --
    evil adrian
  23. Re:Plays for not at all? by Gilmoure · · Score: 3, Funny

    Does MicroSoft have a long wanker or no shins?

    --
    I drank what? -- Socrates
  24. Re:Plays for not at all? by reidconti · · Score: 3, Insightful

    For Apple's DRM'd music, on an iPod, iPhone, or registered computer (Mac/Windows) running iTunes.

    How is this worse than Microsoft's play?

    What's confusing about Microsoft has done here is called PlaysForSure "Vista Compatible" while ignoring the fact that it also works on XP and whatever else. They also call Zune music "Vista Compatible" but the two formats are not compatible with each other.

    Or with music players that most of the world owns.

  25. Re:Plays for not at all? by cgenman · · Score: 4, Informative

    Apple:

    1. Apple creates proprietary iTunes schema, as none such existed in the market. Sticks with it for ten years. Starts to transition to universal MP3's.

    Microsoft:

    1. Microsoft creates proprietary PlaysForSure schema in response to apple. Partners with lots of companies to push as an proprietary but licenceable standard. Sells PlaysForSure tracks on MSN.com.

    2. Microsoft abandons PlaysForSure, destroying the standard. Microsoft instead sells the Zune, with zune-specific music tracks.

    3. Microsoft sticks PlaysForSure and Zune DRM together as "Certified for Vista." Except that things which are all "Certified for Vista" will play with Vista, but won't actually play with eachother. And it will play with non-Vista things. Right.

    So the music player with an estimated 2% of the market is paired with an OS that has 6%. Good luck with that!

    --
    The ______ Agenda