This isn't new, you've been able to enforce time limits since DRM v1 for Windows Media. Windows Media downloads have also been available in Europe for a couple of years, including an all you can eat, time limited service. It's still going, unhacked.
When freeme came out a patch was available in about 48 hours which still hasn't been broken. So that's about 2 years no hack.
Of course, Microsoft has cleared up most the UI policy issues (by stuffing everything into Internet Explorer, apparently) so you'd think it'd be a moot point
But one thing Microsoft got right (office aside) is that since Windows 95 there has been a style guide. Not everyone uses it of course, Adobe being the immediate culprit that springs to mind, but MS Press published a book on Windows UI design and MSDN included copies. The guidelines covered pretty much everything, from menu layouts, common dialogs, the spacing between buttons, gaps between text panels and buttons and so on.
When developers start to stick to guidelines the packages that don't use them look odd and feel odd and eventually got folding in because people expect applications to work in certain ways. UI consistancy is not down to the OS manufacturer, it's done to developers who want to stick with guidelines, as opposed to either not caring or wanting to do something their way.
Competing UIs are arguably not a good thing for end users, frankly they don't care, they just want consistancy on their computers, something Linux just doesn't offer.
Setup reasons for a start. If it only has WiFi, and your access point has WEP enabled (and if it doesn't, why the hell not?), how is the enclosure going to get the key to connect? You're going to have to plug it into a wired LAN (or crossover cable) to allow it to get an initial IP, fire up your web browser, browse to it, set the WEP key, let it connect then remove it from the wireless LAN.
As an aside, whilst this is funky, no RAID is a drawback for me. That and my firewall at home is in transparent mode as I had a nice block of routable IP addresses that seemed more than enough 2 years ago when I just had 3 servers and a desktop. Now I have 3 servers, the xbox, the firewall, the wireless access point, 3 laptops in day to day use, another laptop which gets used by guests and if I add a NAS whammo, one IP left. It's going to be a pain to setup NAT *sigh*
Run C# code directly, the same code being ever more integrated into yukon.
Same code, but different security model/sandbox. The CLR in yukon does not have access to the file system, sockets, winforms, services, the registry or anything else a virus is going to need. It's limited to communicating with the SQL process and manipulating data within a database. Nothing more.
I find it hard to believe that we're going to have OS-level DMA transaction code written in Java or C#.
Who says that's what it's for though? Consider a large set of legacy libraries, doing data munching, or file IOs or other stuff which could be rewritten, but no-one has the time or the documentation. Now, whack it into a CLR object, then call it from whatever language you like. You've suddenly migrated your old codebase.
Just because you use C doesn't mean you HAVE to talk to the hardware.
Well if producing a CLR version is proof of life (and how exactly do they provide C pointers when every object is supposed to be by reference anyway) then COBOL is alive with Fujitsu COBOL.Net, and Fortran has 2 zombies, with ftn95 and Lahey/Futisju Fortan
Who would have though that a mainframe manufacturer would keep prompting dead langauges? <g>
And there's the painful part. It's IP addresses. What was wrong with using an FQDN, as SPF does?
I use two SMTP servers, one for my normal every day use, and one for my phone (damned phone company forces you to use theirs). SPF allows me to add smtp.orange.net as a valid from address and I don't have to worry about what that resolves to. With the MS solution I either have to query all the IPs the FQDN belongs to, or pass control over using <indirect>orange.net</indirect> and rely on my mobile phone company having an up to date entry of their own
Of course all of this is useless unless your mail server supports it. Not everyone uses sendmail or Exchange.
True, I see how this may help stop some spam, but it also means (if I understood the article correctly) that everyone can find out where I mail from... and in some instances that could be a problem too.
I don't think so. What people can find out is what IP addresses are valid when sending email from a domain. Nothing more. All they are doing is a lookup on the connecting IP against the FROM: domain. Hell, that information is in your headers anyway. (Well unless you're using a remailer)
though most development platforms these days have trivialized the difficulty of implementation.
And there's the rub. It's so damned easy to parse XML these days, why reinvent the wheel having to parse a comma delimited file, a fixed width file, a bizzare internal format?
Where in your linked document does it say that all BBC content is supposed to be free?
It doesn't. Nor is that document the BBC's public service agreement, it's an update to the original document (copies of the new Charter (Cm 3248) and Agreement (Cm 3152) are
available from HMSO, priced 4.50 each!)
Your assertation that all content be free is bogus. Otherwise the BBC could not sell content abroad, provide DVDs and Videos of shows, partner books and so on. They do.
The only thing the BBC has to do is (apparently)
"To provide, as public services, sound and television broadcasting services (whether by
analogue or digital means) and to provide sound and television programmes of information, education and entertainment for general reception in Our United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man and the territorial waters thereof, and on board ships and aircraft".
There's nothing about content being "used by other people" either. Copyright exists on BBC produced programmes, or BBC commisioned programmes.
Hardly the type of thing you can tell a label to use when the first paragraph on the page is
Apple claims that use of this file could enable third parties to violate copyrights in Apple's software. If you are unsure about the legality of using and distributing this code in your country, please consult your lawyer before downloading them
Now to be really unpopular (and get modded as a troll, happens every time I state this opinion). In my opinion, as someone who spent 2 years working with DRM (yea yea, hiss boo, burn the heretic), Microsoft's DRM was more "open". They give their SDK away, no licensing fees. I spent the last year trying to get Apple to provide the iTunes DRM code. Doesn't happen. As a third party the only way to produce Apple DRM music is to give control over distribution, pricing, bitrate, marketing and everything else to Apple. Microsoft just give you the SDK and you run with it however you like.
As if my weekly calls with my mother aren't hard enough with "Are you eating right". Now I'll get "Haven't you washed and ironed that shirt. Why haven't you put those books away."
Well if you want a J2ME equivilant, then there is the.net Compact Framework. Already built into the latest PocketPCs and Microsoft "Smart"phones, as well as CE.Net 4.1 which is marketed for embedded systems
It depends on how they coded the license, but in all probability no (unless they turned the backup license facility off and you need to recover your licenses after a hard disk crash).
Windows Media licenses can be permanent, time limited or limited by number of plays. From the files I've seen Napster licenses are permanent. So if Napster dies, your licenses still work.
Slashdot Mirror
This isn't new, you've been able to enforce time limits since DRM v1 for Windows Media. Windows Media downloads have also been available in Europe for a couple of years, including an all you can eat, time limited service. It's still going, unhacked.
When freeme came out a patch was available in about 48 hours which still hasn't been broken. So that's about 2 years no hack.
But one thing Microsoft got right (office aside) is that since Windows 95 there has been a style guide. Not everyone uses it of course, Adobe being the immediate culprit that springs to mind, but MS Press published a book on Windows UI design and MSDN included copies. The guidelines covered pretty much everything, from menu layouts, common dialogs, the spacing between buttons, gaps between text panels and buttons and so on.
When developers start to stick to guidelines the packages that don't use them look odd and feel odd and eventually got folding in because people expect applications to work in certain ways. UI consistancy is not down to the OS manufacturer, it's done to developers who want to stick with guidelines, as opposed to either not caring or wanting to do something their way.
Competing UIs are arguably not a good thing for end users, frankly they don't care, they just want consistancy on their computers, something Linux just doesn't offer.
Setup reasons for a start. If it only has WiFi, and your access point has WEP enabled (and if it doesn't, why the hell not?), how is the enclosure going to get the key to connect? You're going to have to plug it into a wired LAN (or crossover cable) to allow it to get an initial IP, fire up your web browser, browse to it, set the WEP key, let it connect then remove it from the wireless LAN.
As an aside, whilst this is funky, no RAID is a drawback for me. That and my firewall at home is in transparent mode as I had a nice block of routable IP addresses that seemed more than enough 2 years ago when I just had 3 servers and a desktop. Now I have 3 servers, the xbox, the firewall, the wireless access point, 3 laptops in day to day use, another laptop which gets used by guests and if I add a NAS whammo, one IP left. It's going to be a pain to setup NAT *sigh*
That should read
Alex St. John, the founder of foistware / spyware software publisher, WildTangent Inc"Ah Davros you have captured me at last. If only my stilletto heels hadn't snapped as I was running up the stairs away from your Daleks".
Same code, but different security model/sandbox. The CLR in yukon does not have access to the file system, sockets, winforms, services, the registry or anything else a virus is going to need. It's limited to communicating with the SQL process and manipulating data within a database. Nothing more.
That's one of the nicest things about .net (imo), the cross language object support. Need Perl? Whack up a Perl object, then use it in C#
Who says that's what it's for though? Consider a large set of legacy libraries, doing data munching, or file IOs or other stuff which could be rewritten, but no-one has the time or the documentation. Now, whack it into a CLR object, then call it from whatever language you like. You've suddenly migrated your old codebase.
Just because you use C doesn't mean you HAVE to talk to the hardware.
f95 do? Don't like that version? Try this instead.
Who would have though that a mainframe manufacturer would keep prompting dead langauges? <g>
Whilst Algol isn't there, Oberon is, as is Ada, a shareware version of Forth, Haskell, Eifell, Pascal, Perl, Python (twice) and SmallTalk
Off topic, but you say the wrong thing. Next time go see Jerry Springer, The Opera. Worth it for the tap dancing KKK chorus line alone.
But you're already doing an DNS lookup to get this anti-spam entry ....
I use two SMTP servers, one for my normal every day use, and one for my phone (damned phone company forces you to use theirs). SPF allows me to add smtp.orange.net as a valid from address and I don't have to worry about what that resolves to. With the MS solution I either have to query all the IPs the FQDN belongs to, or pass control over using <indirect>orange.net</indirect> and rely on my mobile phone company having an up to date entry of their own
Of course all of this is useless unless your mail server supports it. Not everyone uses sendmail or Exchange.
True, I see how this may help stop some spam, but it also means (if I understood the article correctly) that everyone can find out where I mail from... and in some instances that could be a problem too.
I don't think so. What people can find out is what IP addresses are valid when sending email from a domain. Nothing more. All they are doing is a lookup on the connecting IP against the FROM: domain. Hell, that information is in your headers anyway. (Well unless you're using a remailer)
And there's the rub. It's so damned easy to parse XML these days, why reinvent the wheel having to parse a comma delimited file, a fixed width file, a bizzare internal format?
Where in your linked document does it say that all BBC content is supposed to be free?
It doesn't. Nor is that document the BBC's public service agreement, it's an update to the original document (copies of the new Charter (Cm 3248) and Agreement (Cm 3152) are available from HMSO, priced 4.50 each!)
Your assertation that all content be free is bogus. Otherwise the BBC could not sell content abroad, provide DVDs and Videos of shows, partner books and so on. They do.
The only thing the BBC has to do is (apparently) "To provide, as public services, sound and television broadcasting services (whether by analogue or digital means) and to provide sound and television programmes of information, education and entertainment for general reception in Our United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man and the territorial waters thereof, and on board ships and aircraft".
There's nothing about content being "used by other people" either. Copyright exists on BBC produced programmes, or BBC commisioned programmes.
Apple claims that use of this file could enable third parties to violate copyrights in Apple's software. If you are unsure about the legality of using and distributing this code in your country, please consult your lawyer before downloading them
Well I guess Apple is more up front then. You can't play with them without agreeing to hand over all control to them. Which is worse?
You can't? So what's this then?
Now to be really unpopular (and get modded as a troll, happens every time I state this opinion). In my opinion, as someone who spent 2 years working with DRM (yea yea, hiss boo, burn the heretic), Microsoft's DRM was more "open". They give their SDK away, no licensing fees. I spent the last year trying to get Apple to provide the iTunes DRM code. Doesn't happen. As a third party the only way to produce Apple DRM music is to give control over distribution, pricing, bitrate, marketing and everything else to Apple. Microsoft just give you the SDK and you run with it however you like.
And as for calling potential dates ....
Well if you want a J2ME equivilant, then there is the .net Compact Framework. Already built into the latest PocketPCs and Microsoft "Smart"phones, as well as CE.Net 4.1 which is marketed for embedded systems
It's obviously a Chinese economic attack :)
Windows Media licenses can be permanent, time limited or limited by number of plays. From the files I've seen Napster licenses are permanent. So if Napster dies, your licenses still work.
But hey, lets not let facts enter into this <g>
That's not an OD2/Gabriel store.
Interesting that WOMAD doesn't sell its own music on-line, it's order a CD only. Doesn't he trust his other companies?