Yeah, but I play Halo with my friends. They're more important to me than a mouse. I can either buy 4 gaming rigs, 4 copies of Windows, 4 copies of Unreal Tournament, and 4 monitors, OR... 1 console, 3 extra controllers, 1 game, and one big-ass TV. Guess which leaves me with enough money to cover the devastation my friends wreak upon my beer stash?
Oh, lord. Paying MS money is now considered cruelty? Not being able to access the Internet is now considered cruelty?
Do you even remember a time when you didn't have Internet access? You sound like a spoiled brat who thinks that the nation should serve at your convenience.
a.) allowing someone to resume their life outside of prison, but with a luxury highly related to his crime to be regulated at the convenience of the government, and
b.) attacking someone's constitutional rights because of genetic factors over which they have no control
are the same thing? How incredibly shallow. Linux isn't some epic struggle - it's just an operating system - and this man is no hero.
The ability to comply is well within his reach... it's called the power button. Not only does it meet the government's requirements, it's absolutely free!
Besides, why should I have to pay via my tax dollars for the development of Linux tracking software so that he can use whatever he wants?
Being vigilant is a pain in the ass. I'm sorry if people don't want to think about what their computer is about to do, but connecting a device containing your sensitive personal data to a worldwide network seems like a pretty bad time to go on mental autopilot.
Sorry, I meant to say "The biggest use of DRM seems to be media players." I started a thought with "opposition", but decided to start from a different angle, and must not have cleared the sentence.
The biggest opposition to DRM seems to be media players. How much pertinent state is there really to save in a media player?
The content providers are going to do whatever they have to to not be in violation of this patent while still delivering DRM-protected content. They simply aren't going to do business without protecting their interests to the fullest extent that the law allows and that the customer accepts. And right now, most consumers seem to be pretty accepting of DRM (see iTunes).
Yes, but if Timbaland hadn't sampled the work, would the money he made have instead been made by Tempest? According to Slashdot logic, "lost sales" from copyright infringement are bullshit; why is "lost income" suddenly okay?
People want a machine that runs every bit of their software, with every bit of their hardware. Sure, everyone wants to use a web browser and an email client, but that's where common needs end. Some people want to use MySpace or YouTube, and Linux can do that fine. Some want to fill their iPods, which means iTunes had better run in Wine (they're not going to want to track down some other application). Maybe they want to play with the pictures on their digital camera, which means whatever crappy software came with their camera had better run in Wine. Maybe they want to play some games - maybe it's World of Warcraft, maybe it's Half-Life 2, maybe it's The Sims or Bejeweled - and Cedega had better be able to handle those games (including the copy protection) with solid performance and without glitches.
Everyone talks about what people want to do with their PCs, but what's really key is what they DON'T want to do with their PCs, and that is: worry about them. They don't want to maintain them, which is why there's a whole industry of software to do it for them. They don't want to think about what does or doesn't work together, which is why they buy a new machine when their current one is too slow. They just want it to work, and when it doesn't, their first question about your alternative isn't "does it work" - it's "how much would I have to do to make my stuff work?" If the answer is anything more than zero, they're not interested. Every piece of shovelware at Best Buy, every hack-ass remote access client people's employers give them, and whatever the trendy new toy is, on the day it comes out.
The year of Linux on the desktop is the year that everything just works, with no thought whatsoever. I can't stress enough how important that last part is - WITH NO THOUGHT WHATSOEVER. Non-geeks don't want to think about their computer. They just don't - full stop. It's a completely different mentality from people like us, who enjoy thinking about our computers so much that we're discussing it on an internet forum on Saturday night. If there's still a chance that any effort would be required to make a user's stuff work, they won't install it, and no OEM would go out on a limb and install it.
"The minute they roll this out you will see studios using HDCP because they can and if you don't have a brand spanking new monitor then there is a nice little ICT to drop your content straight back down to 480p and good riddance - now if I just bought HD content and have hardware perfectly capable of running it without needing an upgrade except to satisfy the Hollywood moguls then I damned well expect it to run and don't like being shafted. "
If that content isn't valuable to you due to the ICT, and you don't want to replace your hardware, then why are you willing to pay for that content? Microsoft's just offering a platform, while the content providers are the ones actually mandating DRM - in the end, if you don't like DRM, don't buy DRM-protected content.
Puh-lease. In the end, the money that pays the bills comes out of our pockets. If MS really were to do something half as crazy as disable access to a user's data just because it was unprotected, they'd find themselves with no customers. The modern computer user wants to check their mail, watch funny videos, and fill their iPod, and they'll use whatever gets that done easiest.
The DRM features in Vista aren't about taking away access to your content, they're about creating a secure platform for providers to offer content on. In the end, no one forces you to buy DRM-bearing content - just stick to CDs, don't buy DVDs, HD DVDs, or Blu-ray Discs, or purchase music from iTunes/Zune/etc.. Sure, it'd suck for me, but that's your choice to make.
In the end, DRM is about enforcing the terms under which providers are willing to license content - it still doesn't force you to buy in. You're free to dictate your own terms - just don't be surprised if no one is willing to cater to you.
So because I don't look like the trendy emo kids in the pictures, or because I have a boring, not-very-creative job, I can't appreciate and shouldn't purchase a Mac?
Nope, the customer ultimately buys the $300 desktop on special from Dell, and then wonders why it's the most thrown-together hunk of junk they've ever used.
Yes, but their own developers now have to work with the same format. If there's a lot there that developers have to learn and implement, why would MS' team be an exception? They have to do just as much work as anyone else to implement that spec.
This is why I don't have children. All the people in my life that I care about can get by without me for a day, even my wife. When you have children, however, that's simply no longer the case, and I don't have it in me to care for someone 24/7.
Yes, I'm selfish, but I realize that, and I'm not going to bring someone else into the world who will be hurt by it. At least I'll probably grow out of it before my parents need me to care for them.
Would you feel the same way if MS found a loophole in the GPL that allowed them to start lifting code wholesale?
MS has a certain motivation for developing software, and they protect it through technical and legal means. The Open Source community may have several motivations for developing software, but they all use their licenses to protect that which motivates them. If you don't agree with what they do, then fine, don't use their software, but how is pirating a copy of Vista any different from helping yourself to GPL code without giving anything back? Either way, you're refusing to abide by the terms of the exchange, and basically telling the creator "I'm taking your work, and I don't care what you say about it."
Slashdot Mirror
If I ever encounter a squid that's double my weight and then some, I'm going to let it call itself whatever the hell it wants.
"it never makes sense to burn our food"
Tell that to my father. Love him to death, but damn, can he ruin a steak.
Oh, come on. Do you have even the slightest shred of evidence that Microsoft was involved?
Yeah, but I play Halo with my friends. They're more important to me than a mouse. I can either buy 4 gaming rigs, 4 copies of Windows, 4 copies of Unreal Tournament, and 4 monitors, OR... 1 console, 3 extra controllers, 1 game, and one big-ass TV. Guess which leaves me with enough money to cover the devastation my friends wreak upon my beer stash?
Oh, lord. Paying MS money is now considered cruelty? Not being able to access the Internet is now considered cruelty?
Do you even remember a time when you didn't have Internet access? You sound like a spoiled brat who thinks that the nation should serve at your convenience.
Racism. Really. You think that:
a.) allowing someone to resume their life outside of prison, but with a luxury highly related to his crime to be regulated at the convenience of the government, and
b.) attacking someone's constitutional rights because of genetic factors over which they have no control
are the same thing? How incredibly shallow. Linux isn't some epic struggle - it's just an operating system - and this man is no hero.
The ability to comply is well within his reach... it's called the power button. Not only does it meet the government's requirements, it's absolutely free!
Besides, why should I have to pay via my tax dollars for the development of Linux tracking software so that he can use whatever he wants?
Screw the iPhone. I already have a phone, an iPod, and a PDA. I'd rather have Leopard in June and the iPhone can come out whenever it feels like.
Being vigilant is a pain in the ass. I'm sorry if people don't want to think about what their computer is about to do, but connecting a device containing your sensitive personal data to a worldwide network seems like a pretty bad time to go on mental autopilot.
Sorry, I meant to say "The biggest use of DRM seems to be media players." I started a thought with "opposition", but decided to start from a different angle, and must not have cleared the sentence.
The biggest opposition to DRM seems to be media players. How much pertinent state is there really to save in a media player?
The content providers are going to do whatever they have to to not be in violation of this patent while still delivering DRM-protected content. They simply aren't going to do business without protecting their interests to the fullest extent that the law allows and that the customer accepts. And right now, most consumers seem to be pretty accepting of DRM (see iTunes).
Yes, but if Timbaland hadn't sampled the work, would the money he made have instead been made by Tempest? According to Slashdot logic, "lost sales" from copyright infringement are bullshit; why is "lost income" suddenly okay?
Indeed. We must band together to stamp out pintcrime.
No, it's not.
People want a machine that runs every bit of their software, with every bit of their hardware. Sure, everyone wants to use a web browser and an email client, but that's where common needs end. Some people want to use MySpace or YouTube, and Linux can do that fine. Some want to fill their iPods, which means iTunes had better run in Wine (they're not going to want to track down some other application). Maybe they want to play with the pictures on their digital camera, which means whatever crappy software came with their camera had better run in Wine. Maybe they want to play some games - maybe it's World of Warcraft, maybe it's Half-Life 2, maybe it's The Sims or Bejeweled - and Cedega had better be able to handle those games (including the copy protection) with solid performance and without glitches.
Everyone talks about what people want to do with their PCs, but what's really key is what they DON'T want to do with their PCs, and that is: worry about them. They don't want to maintain them, which is why there's a whole industry of software to do it for them. They don't want to think about what does or doesn't work together, which is why they buy a new machine when their current one is too slow. They just want it to work, and when it doesn't, their first question about your alternative isn't "does it work" - it's "how much would I have to do to make my stuff work?" If the answer is anything more than zero, they're not interested. Every piece of shovelware at Best Buy, every hack-ass remote access client people's employers give them, and whatever the trendy new toy is, on the day it comes out.
The year of Linux on the desktop is the year that everything just works, with no thought whatsoever. I can't stress enough how important that last part is - WITH NO THOUGHT WHATSOEVER. Non-geeks don't want to think about their computer. They just don't - full stop. It's a completely different mentality from people like us, who enjoy thinking about our computers so much that we're discussing it on an internet forum on Saturday night. If there's still a chance that any effort would be required to make a user's stuff work, they won't install it, and no OEM would go out on a limb and install it.
Dude, a slashdotter said he heard a female voice. That's pretty much the same as winning the lottery around here.
"The minute they roll this out you will see studios using HDCP because they can and if you don't have a brand spanking new monitor then there is a nice little ICT to drop your content straight back down to 480p and good riddance - now if I just bought HD content and have hardware perfectly capable of running it without needing an upgrade except to satisfy the Hollywood moguls then I damned well expect it to run and don't like being shafted. "
If that content isn't valuable to you due to the ICT, and you don't want to replace your hardware, then why are you willing to pay for that content? Microsoft's just offering a platform, while the content providers are the ones actually mandating DRM - in the end, if you don't like DRM, don't buy DRM-protected content.
Puh-lease. In the end, the money that pays the bills comes out of our pockets. If MS really were to do something half as crazy as disable access to a user's data just because it was unprotected, they'd find themselves with no customers. The modern computer user wants to check their mail, watch funny videos, and fill their iPod, and they'll use whatever gets that done easiest.
The DRM features in Vista aren't about taking away access to your content, they're about creating a secure platform for providers to offer content on. In the end, no one forces you to buy DRM-bearing content - just stick to CDs, don't buy DVDs, HD DVDs, or Blu-ray Discs, or purchase music from iTunes/Zune/etc.. Sure, it'd suck for me, but that's your choice to make.
In the end, DRM is about enforcing the terms under which providers are willing to license content - it still doesn't force you to buy in. You're free to dictate your own terms - just don't be surprised if no one is willing to cater to you.
And they say elitism is dead.
So because I don't look like the trendy emo kids in the pictures, or because I have a boring, not-very-creative job, I can't appreciate and shouldn't purchase a Mac?
Nope, the customer ultimately buys the $300 desktop on special from Dell, and then wonders why it's the most thrown-together hunk of junk they've ever used.
The effort to create it didn't just magically expand after they documented it, did it?
Yes, but their own developers now have to work with the same format. If there's a lot there that developers have to learn and implement, why would MS' team be an exception? They have to do just as much work as anyone else to implement that spec.
Yes, but schadenfreude is a BAD thing.
This is why I don't have children. All the people in my life that I care about can get by without me for a day, even my wife. When you have children, however, that's simply no longer the case, and I don't have it in me to care for someone 24/7.
Yes, I'm selfish, but I realize that, and I'm not going to bring someone else into the world who will be hurt by it. At least I'll probably grow out of it before my parents need me to care for them.
I doubt it. Microsoft may be ruthless, but they're not stupid.
Would you feel the same way if MS found a loophole in the GPL that allowed them to start lifting code wholesale?
MS has a certain motivation for developing software, and they protect it through technical and legal means. The Open Source community may have several motivations for developing software, but they all use their licenses to protect that which motivates them. If you don't agree with what they do, then fine, don't use their software, but how is pirating a copy of Vista any different from helping yourself to GPL code without giving anything back? Either way, you're refusing to abide by the terms of the exchange, and basically telling the creator "I'm taking your work, and I don't care what you say about it."