Vista DRM?

[darkstar782]

I've been kinda anti-Vista for a long time, but I recently found this article/paper that kinda sums up what I have read elsewhere....

Clicky

Thoughts people?

 

[dasickninja]

Just like every other form of the word "DRM" I'll give it three months before it succumbs to the efforts of hackers and crackers. Doesn't make it any less despicable that MS institutes this into the new OS but it doesn't really surprise me because, well, this is Microsoft we're talking about here, and there'll be ways around it for those whoa re so inclined.
Ninja

 

[SciFiMan]

So what's bad about DRM?

 

[dasickninja]

DRM allows the company to be able to lock "questionable" software. You are smart enough to figure the problems that can occur when a company not known for understanding the end user has this power.

Microsoft is that TC will dramatically increase the costs of switching away from Microsoft products (such as Office) to rival products (such as OpenOffice). For example, a law firm that wants to change from Office to OpenOffice right now merely has to install the software, train the staff and convert their existing files. In five years' time, once they have received TC-protected documents from perhaps a thousand different clients, they would have to get permission (in the form of signed digital certificates) from each of these clients in order to migrate their files to a new platform. The law firm won't in practice want to do this, so they will be much more tightly locked in, which will enable Microsoft to hike its prices.

http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html

 

[skynyrd4212]

would this effect the ability to play illegaly downloaded songs?

 

[dasickninja]

Yes.

 

[warthog]

The issue of DRM as a component of PC's and operating systems is based on two assumptions. Firstly that large numbers of people will adopt high definition video. And secondly that they will want to use PC's as media centres.

Markets don't always adopt the highest quality level that is available at an economic price. Consider audio. CD quality has been available to the consumer for nearly a quarter of a century, yet the last few years has seen a move towards the lower quality MP3 format. The market has chosen low bandwidth in preference to quality. In my opinion anyone selling an audio format with higher quality than CD is catering for a very restricted audiophile market.

The same could happen with video. There is a great deal of evidence that young people are watching less television, instead watching DivX compressed video on the internet. It's eminently possible that internet distribution of video will gradually replace broadcast for all but real-time programming like news and sport. If this is the case low bandwidth solutions with sub-DVD quality will succeed. Whilst I'm sure there will always be an enthusiast market for high resolution, I'm not at all convinced that it will become mainstream. Especially if the high resolution options are hobbled with restrictions which limit their usefulness. Will the market really go for quality at the expense of both bandwidth and convenience?

As for the use of PC's for media centres, I completely fail to see the point. I have a dedicated Kiss Technology box which allows me to time shift TV, play DVD's and DivX's and much more. It's cheaper, smaller, quieter and uses less power than a PC. Such boxes will continue to drop in price and I'm sure will be a much more consumer friendly solution than media centre PC's. These are best seen as a temporary hobbyist solution to a problem which the big electronics manufacturers have been rather slow to address.

For my purposes I'm perfectly happy with the quality of CD audio and DVD video. I have no interest whatsoever in paying for something better, especially if it's hamstrung with restrictions which prevent me from using it in the ways I do at present.

 

[makotech222]

well, so far im using windows vista ultimate x86, and ive been playing songs ive gotten off of limewire with itunes with no problem. also, played FMA episodes on windvd no problem.

 

[darkstar782]

None of those have any copy protection.

The issue is (if you read the article) that Vista's 'protection systems', aimed to protect HD-DVD and Blu-Ray, which I for one wont be using on my PC any time soon, eat CPU and GPU cycles, and cause design headaches for hardware increasing costs dramatically, even for those that don't want to play this new content.

 

[starwhite]

Hmmm, well this is how I feel. From my other thread: Please read this:

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=36570


'This is the longest 'Suicide note in history'.

 

[dasickninja]

Hmmm, well this is how I feel. From my other thread: Please read this:

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=36570


'This is the longest 'Suicide note in history'.

Hmm, the Inq. As trustworthy as a back alley Mexican plastic surgeon.

 

[starwhite]

I disagree: I did some quick research on the author Peter Gutmann. This individual was pointing out security flaws and spyware issues years before Microsoft began to even address the issues. Besides, DRM is an intrusive, resource hogging, unwanted feature. I do not plan on ever using Blu ray or HD DVD disks myself because of the issues. If it ever changes, maybe. But the article is certainly worth reading.

 

[Zoron]

"...article is worth reading..."

Are you sure you're talking about the Inquirer?