Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

is vista hurting innovation - a flame against vista

Last response: in Windows Vista
Share
March 12, 2007 3:28:40 AM

edited july 2007

I am posting this as topic because i no longer no how to post a topic in this forum. . I did not want to bring this topic to the forefront; but was unable to find a way to post a new topic due to the navigation problems on this site. So i went back a long ways to finally find a topic that i posted

Microsoft wields great power in the Nation's economy. Its policies, software, and standards influence numerous business consumers and developers of technology , and, may result in economic prosperity or economic failure, for a number of businesses of all sizes throughout the country, as well as entire segments of an industry. The purpose of the antitrust laws is to refrain from one company controling an entire industry and to encourage compitition; however, in this case microsoft is eliminating compitition and can control or effect all industries that rely on the pc in addition to the pc industry itself. Thus, the decisions and policies of microsoft can have an economic impact on the entire nations economy. I do not mind microsoft having a monopoly but great care should be taken so as to ensure this power is not abused.

March 12, 2007 7:36:08 AM

The article is FUD. Plain and simple FUD. In fact it rambles widely and draws extremely spurious conclusions while espousing obviously biased opinion(s) all based on very, very little hard fact. Here's my take :

"Decreased Playback Quality" - Yes, Vista has the ability to degrade the output of premium content if you don't have a HDMI compliant system and a subscription to the content. Imagine that. You aren't going to be able to watch "premium content" if you don't have a subscription. Sound familiar ? I think it's currently called .... cable TV.

"Elimination of Unified Drivers" - First off, who cares ? I mean were unified drivers some Holy Grail that I missed in the last 25 years ? And I remember when all we needed was a *.inf file for the majority of hardware as the binaries are already built into the OS.

"Problems with Drivers" - Again, don't blame Microsoft for the inabilities of the hardware companies. People want HD and the industry is willing to provide it as a "premium content" on their terms.

"Elimination of Open-source Hardware Support" - Impossible ! The author himself even uses the term "This potential “closing” of the PC's historically open platform..." and in fact he knows that it's not possible as there are too many people already using non-standard OS'es. Even Mac is essentially non-standard. The author states "A quarter of a century ago, IBM made the momentous decision to make their PC an open platform by publishing complete hardware details and allowing anyone to compete on the open market." and yet somehow he seems to completely overlooked the fact that in 1987 IBM attempted to push the PC industry into using a bus that it had devised called the Micro Channel Architecture (MCA). While it was a step forward for technology nobody bought into it as it was proprietary and it took the PC industry (Intel specifically) 5 more years to develop PCI 2.0

"Denial-of-Service via Driver/Device Revocation" - Horse pucky ! Exactly what does Vista have to do with the inability of manufacturers like ATI, nVidia or anyone else, to get HDMI compliant hardware out the door ? And if anybody is attempting to run Vista on an nVidia TNT2 card, they need their head examined !

"Decreased System Reliability" - Nothing shown to be a definitive cause of system instability on the part of Windows Vista. Statements like "There's plenty of real-world evidence to show that this happens all the time" are hardly supporting.

"Increased Hardware Costs" - You know, I can buy an entire computer system for less than what a 16MB SIMM cost me in 1993 ! What does he want ? Everyone to run Via EPIA mini-ITX systems with an OS like Damn Small Linux ? That's not what the public wants !! They want HD video on their computers !! (Please don't ask me why as I have no idea. I have never confused a computer with a TV)

"Increased Cost due to Requirement to License Unnecessary Third-party IP" "Protecting all of this precious premium content requires a lot of additional technology." - Yes but people want it and the industry is not going to stand idly by and let their content and/or patents be used without permission and compensation. We're talking hundreds of thousands of revenue streams here ! Everyone wants a piece of the action.

"Unnecessary CPU Resource Consumption" - Like this is new ? Spyware, adware and all the other crap being foisted onto computers these days combine with the virtually-mandatory security programs to bring systems to a crawl. A Commodore 64 ran fine on 64K of RAM but I doubt most end users today would find it satisfactory.

Near the end of the article the author asks "Why is Microsoft going to this much trouble?" As I've stated somewhere else Microsoft probably doesn't care much about content protection other than :

A) To protect their own IP such as Office.
B) To comply with federal regulation.
C) To avoid probable legal entanglements with content/copyright holders.
D) Perhaps they want to get in on the action as well.

There is no doubt that Microsoft has abused its' power and this was completely substantiated in July, 2001 when DoJ proved in court that Microsoft had indeed acted illegally in maintaining a Windows monopoly. Judge T.P. Jackson stated that Microsoft had ".. proved, time and time again, to be inaccurate, misleading, evasive, and transparently false. ... Microsoft is a company with an institutional disdain for both the truth and for rules of law that lesser entities must respect. It is also a company whose senior management is not averse to offering specious testimony to support spurious defenses to claims of its wrongdoing."

As to Microsoft actually " .. hurting innovation in the pc industry." with their latest version of Windows, I really don't see anything different. They have always been both "hurtful" and "helpful" though of course the first person they want to help is themselves.
March 12, 2007 2:34:22 PM

Quote:
The article is FUD. Plain and simple FUD. In fact it rambles widely and draws extremely spurious conclusions while espousing obviously biased opinion(s) all based on very, very little hard fact. Here's my take :
FUD in your opinion but you're going to explain...

Quote:
"Decreased Playback Quality" - Yes, Vista has the ability to degrade the output of premium content if you don't have a HDMI compliant system and a subscription to the content. Imagine that. You aren't going to be able to watch "premium content" if you don't have a subscription. Sound familiar ? I think it's currently called .... cable TV.
This is not subscription based. HD content (premium) must have a PVP & PAP or more simply put PMP. All premium content must remain encrypted till it reaches your eyes and ears. This means that the components must not permit access to that data stream. To insure this "Tilt Bits" are used. There are many conditions that can cause a tilt bit to be triggered. From tampering to power surges. And yes HDMI or DVI are required and later on DVI will be phased out.

Quote:
"Elimination of Unified Drivers" - First off, who cares ? I mean were unified drivers some Holy Grail that I missed in the last 25 years ? And I remember when all we needed was a *.inf file for the majority of hardware as the binaries are already built into the OS.
MS coined the term 'Unified Drivers' and has replaced that with WHQL. Here the device maker must proove that a given device will not leak HD content and must pay MS to be allowed to play. In order for devices that are part of the PMP (protected media pathway) to be secure knowledge pertaining to the HD part or parts of the device must be closed otherwise new drivers that expose the HD content can be written by third parties. Hence, ATI will submit a video card and drivers to MS who will give ATI "hardware keys" and yes this requires a CHIP and the encryption is owned by MS, Intel, Warner Brothers, Sony, Walt Disney and others. At no point in this will open source have access to these protected devices, hence GOOD BYE OPEN SOURCE.

Quote:
"Problems with Drivers" - Again, don't blame Microsoft for the inabilities of the hardware companies. People want HD and the industry is willing to provide it as a "premium content" on their terms.
Drivers that leak will be revoked and while odds are that revocation will only be used as a last resort this will prevent the playback of HD content.

Quote:
"Elimination of Open-source Hardware Support" - Impossible ! The author himself even uses the term "This potential “closing” of the PC's historically open platform..." and in fact he knows that it's not possible as there are too many people already using non-standard OS'es. Even Mac is essentially non-standard. The author states "A quarter of a century ago, IBM made the momentous decision to make their PC an open platform by publishing complete hardware details and allowing anyone to compete on the open market." and yet somehow he seems to completely overlooked the fact that in 1987 IBM attempted to push the PC industry into using a bus that it had devised called the Micro Channel Architecture (MCA). While it was a step forward for technology nobody bought into it as it was proprietary and it took the PC industry (Intel specifically) 5 more years to develop PCI 2.0
Well the PMP is specific just as AACS is specific and in fact the PMP must be CLOSED. Open source will not be afforded access to the decryption keys so only non encrypted media will be accessable to *nix users. AACS is owned by MICROSOFT and others so open source is DOOMED due to the death grip of MSes monopoly expantion. In order to view HD content AACS keys MUST be present. So when you read WHQL realize that the digital certificate talked about is AACS keys. Those are stored on a chip. This issue alone caused ATI to team up with AMD. ATI advertised HD compliant cards then later on AACS was implemented and required a chip to hold the digital keys so none of the cards advertised as compliant truely were.

Quote:
"Denial-of-Service via Driver/Device Revocation" - Horse pucky ! Exactly what does Vista have to do with the inability of manufacturers like ATI, nVidia or anyone else, to get HDMI compliant hardware out the door ? And if anybody is attempting to run Vista on an nVidia TNT2 card, they need their head examined !
This just re-states the above two sections. Vista is MICROSOFT thus has everything to do with everything about a given PC since it is MSes domain NOW thanks to DRM. DOS is not related to for instance ATI's ability to make, market and distribute a given video card. DOS is related to a product that stops functioning at HD playback due to a key revocation from leakage or large scale hacking.

Quote:
"Decreased System Reliability" - Nothing shown to be a definitive cause of system instability on the part of Windows Vista. Statements like "There's plenty of real-world evidence to show that this happens all the time" are hardly supporting.
Once tilt bits are triggered Say Good night Irene. Since the system has to poll all of the PMP components at a frantic rate it can be said that VISTA is PARANIOD. All of this to protect HD content. Decryption creates lots of overhead hence the multi core CPU.

Quote:
"Increased Hardware Costs" - You know, I can buy an entire computer system for less than what a 16MB SIMM cost me in 1993 ! What does he want ? Everyone to run Via EPIA mini-ITX systems with an OS like Damn Small Linux ? That's not what the public wants !! They want HD video on their computers !! (Please don't ask me why as I have no idea. I have never confused a computer with a TV)
Al things are relevant. Talking about costs let me just go to Froogle and look up an 'BFG nVidia GeForce 8800 GTX OC' and I'm looking at $850.00. Gosh, I'll get two. HD ROMs ring in around $500.00 each at this point. $200.00 ish for a mother board. Is this adding up yet for you? Vista causes a chain reaction regarding PRICE in both hard & software. Here all you need to do is look at the prices on Froogle or Pricewatch. How much is a HDMI AACS monitor??

Quote:
"Increased Cost due to Requirement to License Unnecessary Third-party IP" "Protecting all of this precious premium content requires a lot of additional technology." - Yes but people want it and the industry is not going to stand idly by and let their content and/or patents be used without permission and compensation. We're talking hundreds of thousands of revenue streams here ! Everyone wants a piece of the action.
Microsoft makes the OS and AACS so if you just want your PC for spread sheets that does not matter since the analog hole will be closed over the next few years.

Quote:
"Unnecessary CPU Resource Consumption" - Like this is new ? Spyware, adware and all the other crap being foisted onto computers these days combine with the virtually-mandatory security programs to bring systems to a crawl. A Commodore 64 ran fine on 64K of RAM but I doubt most end users today would find it satisfactory.
HD decryption is un-necessary so it might as well be removed since Muslix64 and the Doom boy's took care of that. I want a faster PC not a bloated PC.

Quote:
Near the end of the article the author asks "Why is Microsoft going to this much trouble?" As I've stated somewhere else Microsoft probably doesn't care much about content protection other than :

A) To protect their own IP such as Office.
B) To comply with federal regulation.
C) To avoid probable legal entanglements with content/copyright holders.
D) Perhaps they want to get in on the action as well.
The US government consulted Bill Gates himself several times during Senate hearings regarding the DMCA. Since then MS, Sony, Intel, IBM, Dell, Gateway, Toshiba, etc; have joined forces and we wind up with AACS LA, DRM, PMP and revocation. If you want to drive a *inux PC then you will be denied all of that "Rich Media Content" (DVD John used a Linux box so this is the payback the open source community gets)

Quote:
There is no doubt that Microsoft has abused its' power and this was completely substantiated in July, 2001 when DoJ proved in court that Microsoft had indeed acted illegally in maintaining a Windows monopoly. Judge T.P. Jackson stated that Microsoft had ".. proved, time and time again, to be inaccurate, misleading, evasive, and transparently false. ... Microsoft is a company with an institutional disdain for both the truth and for rules of law that lesser entities must respect. It is also a company whose senior management is not averse to offering specious testimony to support spurious defenses to claims of its wrongdoing."
This here sort of negates you're whole "This article is FUD" concept since the PMP, AACS, DRM and 'TILT BITS' close the box and force you to run Vista like it or not. Yes, Microsoft is a MONOPOLY and a DANGEROUS ONE at that that is expanding.

Quote:
As to Microsoft actually " .. hurting innovation in the pc industry." with their latest version of Windows, I really don't see anything different. They have always been both "hurtful" and "helpful" though of course the first person they want to help is themselves.
You go from FUD to the fact all in one post. MS's MONOPOLY has to be ENDED for the greater good and to restore confidence in the US Constitution.
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
March 12, 2007 3:37:28 PM

edited july 2007


photographer,

wish someone like thg would do non bias review of this article as I have heard a lot of hype from both sides of the fence ---- thanks for the input photo

March 12, 2007 5:51:21 PM

Quote:
photographer,
wish someone like thg would do non bias review of this article as I have heard a lot of hype from both sides of the fence ---- thanks for the input photo


I'd like to see a more informed opinion as well. Where is Dr. Thomas Pabst these days anyway ?
March 12, 2007 8:22:03 PM

I read that article when it was first released. It's interesting to note that a hell of a lot has been removed from it since then (most obviously the ridiculous assumption that Vista could cause major health risks due to downgraded medical imaging, which really showed that the author has virtuallly no clue what he's talking about).

Luckily, Google's Cache is immune to such embarrasment-saving censorship.

Quote:
Consider a medical IT worker who's using a medical imaging PC while listening to audio/video played back by the computer (the CDROM drives installed in workplace PCs inevitably spend most of their working lives playing music or MP3 CDs to drown out workplace noise). If there's any premium content present in there, the image will be subtly altered by Vista's content protection, potentially creating exactly the life-threatening situation that the medical industry has worked so hard to avoid. The scary thing is that there's no easy way around this - Vista will silently modify displayed content under certain (almost impossible-to-predict in advance) situations discernable only to Vista's built-in content-protection subsystem.


His basic train of logic to start with is that all DRM is exactly the same, and all premium content is handled exactly the same way, and that the image constraint applies to the -entire display-, not just the content in question. This isn't even to mention the various other inaccuracies and errors (such as assuming a medical imaging PC is identical to a desktop PC, and that people would sit around watching DRM video on it..perhaps if they wanted to be fired).

The whole rest of the article can be picked to shreds in pretty much the same way.
March 12, 2007 9:56:02 PM

The man has to write something drastic to get a paycheck.

The medical field uses imaging anyhow to look at the picture fast. If they have any kind of error in the picture of want a better look, they create the old hard style image.. x-rays. I know this because my friend works in IT at a hospital and we talk about how the stuff works.

Computers get locked down via Active Directory anyhow, especially at hospitals due to HIPPA and other such things.

Just goes to show people rambling too often about things they know very little about.
March 12, 2007 10:08:28 PM

Gremmi,

Thanks for the reply --- i remember reading this to --- did not know that this was removed. I credit the author for changing things which may be in error ---- but wish he explain his reasoning behind the deletion so as to keep us all informed

It be nice to hear from hardware manufacturers (ie:sound cards/graphic cards) if any of you are out there ---
March 12, 2007 10:20:26 PM

Quote:
The man has to write something drastic to get a paycheck.

The medical field uses imaging anyhow to look at the picture fast. If they have any kind of error in the picture of want a better look, they create the old hard style image.. x-rays. I know this because my friend works in IT at a hospital and we talk about how the stuff works.


Then your friend should know that most X-Rays are done digitally these days. Not to film. In fact when I went to a sports-medicine specialis, he didn't have any X-Ray film capability at all other than the digital image printed to a transparancy.

Quote:
Just goes to show people rambling too often about things they know very little about.


There are always "grains of truth" even in an article so full of FUD. Essentially some of these people are probably correct in that hardware manufacturers aren't going to support open-source softwares and operating systems such as Linux very well for use in viewing premium HD content. Evidently everyones having a hard enough time developing a platform for Windows and they sure aren't going to try to develop something for an OS that has a new release every 6 months.
March 12, 2007 10:37:03 PM

edited july 2007

The present policy of imposing restrictions and complexity in both the software and hardware basically negates the policy of the past leaving the potential of pc market suspect --- this is my concern.
March 12, 2007 10:37:27 PM

Quote:
The man has to write something drastic to get a paycheck.

The medical field uses imaging anyhow to look at the picture fast. If they have any kind of error in the picture of want a better look, they create the old hard style image.. x-rays. I know this because my friend works in IT at a hospital and we talk about how the stuff works.


Then your friend should know that most X-Rays are done digitally these days. Not to film. In fact when I went to a sports-medicine specialis, he didn't have any X-Ray film capability at all other than the digital image printed to a transparancy.

X-Rays have been done digitally for a few decades now. There are still conventional film shots done as fallbacks, however. Most of the systems in the world are supplied by Fuji, AFAIK, and I know that they still sell the conventional film machines. I don't believe we've personally set any of them up, but we rarely do hospital installs anyway.

Quote:
Just goes to show people rambling too often about things they know very little about.


There are always "grains of truth" even in an article so full of FUD. Essentially some of these people are probably correct in that hardware manufacturers aren't going to support open-source softwares and operating systems such as Linux very well for use in viewing premium HD content. Evidently everyones having a hard enough time developing a platform for Windows and they sure aren't going to try to develop something for an OS that has a new release every 6 months.

Oh, I'm not denying that there are grains of truth to it, just that he's taken those grains and made a big ol' sandwich of untruths around it.
March 12, 2007 10:52:00 PM

What exactly is DRM and how will this affect me in any way?
March 12, 2007 10:56:40 PM

edited july 2007 -- also edited by forum without my consent

Photo, in regards to your comment stating "some of these people are probably correct in that hardware manufacturers aren't going to support open-source softwares and operating systems such as Linux..." There is reason the linux community should be concerned.

Peter guttman's article states ["%u201CIt] --- (note this was added later on after i posted on this site by someone) is recommended that a graphics manufacturer go beyond the strict letter of the specification and provide additional content-protection features, because this demonstrates their strong intent to protect premium content%u201D- also added. What this means to me is that if a hardware vendor would develop a new video card for a linux system without comforming to the new drm requirements (thereby making the product to have a potential to create a hole in dm scheme), the hardware vendor would be blackballed from the rest of the pc market.

why was this post altered by the tgforumz?
March 12, 2007 11:49:57 PM

I would argue that one needs to keep in mind that the PC has become exceptionally more powerful than what we realize.

We are now capable of making our own DVDs, copying them, mass producing them, stealing music, movies, anything digital.

Honesty.. they're trying to protect a business. If it wasn't such a problem, it wouldn't be needed.

Its the first step at them trying to curb an increasingly hard problem to track and fix. The PC is a powerful tool. We're no longer left behind in technology.

Back in the day of VCRs, you had to 2 2 of them and tie your TV and VCRs up for a while just to get a copy. Now, you can do much more in less time and not tie yourself up.

Its a step in the direction of protection though I think they need to find a different solution myself.
March 13, 2007 12:00:48 AM

Aye. The concept of DRM is okay. The implementation is..well..not good.

The general theory behind it is that for years and years, people haven't actually known their own rights regarding their media and what they're entitled to do with it (for instance, copying tapes, then CDs, then mp3s, movies on VHS and later DVD). These actual rights haven't changed much. The only difference is that DRM is an attempt to enforce said rights, with varying success.

It'll probably continue as it is (some companies locking down everything they can, some companies not) for a while, then it'll slowly stabilise, probably more in favour of the companies than the consumer, but it should (hopefully) make it so that your specific rights over the media are at least exercisable.
March 13, 2007 12:25:55 AM

Quote:
Consider a medical IT worker who's using a medical imaging PC while listening to audio/video played back by the computer (the CDROM drives installed in workplace PCs inevitably spend most of their working lives playing music or MP3 CDs to drown out workplace noise). If there's any premium content present in there, the image will be subtly altered by Vista's content protection, potentially creating exactly the life-threatening situation that the medical industry has worked so hard to avoid. The scary thing is that there's no easy way around this - Vista will silently modify displayed content under certain (almost impossible-to-predict in advance) situations discernable only to Vista's built-in content-protection subsystem.

Quote:

...(such as assuming a medical imaging PC is identical to a desktop PC, and that people would sit around watching DRM video on it..perhaps if they wanted to be fired).


Thats the problem, the potential, remove the embedded DRM and the potential is removed.
March 13, 2007 1:30:50 AM

I agree with riser 100%. This really made me think of all the things one could do on a PC.
March 13, 2007 1:48:52 AM

Quote:
I would argue that one needs to keep in mind that the PC has become exceptionally more powerful than what we realize.

We are now capable of making our own DVDs, copying them, mass producing them, stealing music, movies, anything digital.

Honesty.. they're trying to protect a business. If it wasn't such a problem, it wouldn't be needed.

Its the first step at them trying to curb an increasingly hard problem to track and fix. The PC is a powerful tool. We're no longer left behind in technology.

Back in the day of VCRs, you had to 2 2 of them and tie your TV and VCRs up for a while just to get a copy. Now, you can do much more in less time and not tie yourself up.

Its a step in the direction of protection though I think they need to find a different solution myself.
Now hold on Moderator. You just got done bashing me since I dumped my Vista setup. Of the reasons I listed at least 2 were AACS and DRM. These are facts and regardless they make PCs more expensive. So now listening to you in your post one gets the idea that spending more money on a AACS/DRM is OK and from other posts one might get the idea that treating computer users like children is a good thing.

You need to accept something here and all kidding aside, this post of yours cuts to the heart of you. Mass production of media and selling it without the owner’s permission would be PIRACY. Ripping MP3s and loading them on my iRiver is not something that can be a right. It comes down to possession and impossible contracts and intent. As a matter of fact making a copy of a DVD for back-up is not legal in the US. See consumers are being spun like a top. HDDVD uses AACS but then so does MSes Bit Locker. MS is not just responding to Hollywood's needs they have JOINED them. MS created another revenue stream in the fear created by the RIAA and MPAA. In the end all computers are considered PIRATES.

Sure poke fun @ me when I mess up but MS is not qualified to create protection standards or determine in any way what is right or wrong. "Honesty.. they're trying to protect a business. If it wasn't such a problem, it wouldn't be needed" does not cut it and will never cut it. The RIAA and MPAA jump up and down creating smoke and so "WE" should pay more for DRM and AACS.

They should look for a better solution as you say and pass a law that makes it illeagle for non-licenced programers to make software and ban open source solutions. Piracy will be almost completely removed. Imagine how hard cracking CSS would have been if there was no Linux? Things are such a mess that the RIAA is going after 12 year olds and ultimately their parents.

You seem to make me sick since that post was as two faced as can be. MS has an interest in HOLLYWOOD called AACS LA and what it does is puts a PC near our TV and an HDTV near our PC, this limits what we can do unless we are willing to break the law. What may be legal today could become not legal tomorrow. Since Abe Lincoln corporations have been getting over on Americans. So you go and agree that something needs to be done but they just needed to do something different. What like water-boarding or hanging?
March 13, 2007 2:35:47 AM

Quote:
Aye. The concept of DRM is okay. The implementation is..well..not good.

The general theory behind it is that for years and years, people haven't actually known their own rights regarding their media and what they're entitled to do with it (for instance, copying tapes, then CDs, then mp3s, movies on VHS and later DVD). These actual rights haven't changed much. The only difference is that DRM is an attempt to enforce said rights, with varying success.

It'll probably continue as it is (some companies locking down everything they can, some companies not) for a while, then it'll slowly stabilise, probably more in favour of the companies than the consumer, but it should (hopefully) make it so that your specific rights over the media are at least exercisable.
RIAA slams FAIR USE Act no infringing uses of content are still as follows...
Quote:
The 1961 Report of the Register of Copyrights on the General Revision of the U.S. Copyright Law cites examples of activities that courts have regarded as fair use: “quotation of excerpts in a review or criticism for purposes of illustration or comment; quotation of short passages in a scholarly or technical work, for illustration or clarification of the author's observations; use in a parody of some of the content of the work parodied; summary of an address or article, with brief quotations, in a news report; reproduction by a library of a portion of a work to replace part of a damaged copy; reproduction by a teacher or student of a small part of a work to illustrate a lesson; reproduction of a work in legislative or judicial proceedings or reports; incidental and fortuitous reproduction, in a newsreel or broadcast, of a work located in the scene of an event being reported.”
Well, I guess they will not believe that I'm a library when I'm listening to my iRiver. But any way making copies is considerd "INFRINGING" by the MPAA and RIAA since it is not listed with those uses. Ahhh yes then the hackers came like DVD John and now Muslix64 whe said that (and I'm paraphrasing here), "I bought all the stuff but HDDVDs would not play on my monitor so I was pissed off and decided that I would get the movie off of the HDDVD. I found the AACS key plain as day in a memory dump so now I can watch HDDVDs!"

He broke 2 laws according to AACS LA and didn't even leave his house. Circumventing CP and creating a tool that circumvents protection. HDDVDDecrypter wound up on Sourceforge and eventualy was taken down. Muslix64 is still at large LOL So back to here why do I need a computer with "TILT BITS" to protect a scheme that failed the day Muslix64 found the keys in memory? Why do I have to pay for protection that sucks (and was made by MS of all companies)? If I roll with *nix how will I watch HDDVDs on my PC
March 13, 2007 2:57:31 AM

Quote:
Photo, in regards to your comment stating "some of these people are probably correct in that hardware manufacturers aren't going to support open-source softwares and operating systems such as Linux..." There is reason the linux community should be concerned.
It would be against the AACS rules for ATI or Nvidia to give any information out that could cause a 'leak' from the PVP to the analog hole. The drivers for these cards must be authenticated and hence part of the TPM setup that is being phased in with Vista. At a minimum Linux will never be able to have access to the PMP since that takes KEYS so the cards are at least partially closed to open source.

This is the worst thing that could ever happen to open source by the way and here is the action by US government regarding all things digital...
March 13, 2007 3:44:19 AM

Riser, I agee with your statement "Its a step in the direction of protection though I think they need to find a different solution myself".

Gremmi also agree with your statement "The concept of DRM is okay. The implementation is..well..not good. "

Please note I have given few, if any comments, as to being against "the concept of drm to protect copyright content". This is not to say I am for or against drm, but believe there is an underlying issue of far greater concern whether you believe in drm or not. My major concern is that the manner in which drm is being implemented through vista reduces, severly hinders, or eliminates certain existing technology as well as future innovation while reducing consumer choice and increasing costs. It also is creating a policy which encourages microsoft to become more monopolistic and controlling of every area of the pc market including the controlling of hardware.

The killing off of innovation is of more major concern to me than most issues surrounding drm. It would of been better if microsoft would of just came out with something like the xbox for home video viewing rather than complicating the entire pc market in a manner which increases costs and reduces innovation of pc even when protected content is not relavant.

To me, through the introduction of vista, microsoft has defined a market where the pc is used nothing more than as a device for the entertainment industry. Thus, the pc becomes analogous to nothing more than a mere dvd player that is controlled by the entertainment industry.
March 13, 2007 4:01:17 AM

alpha,

you have good points but wish you tone it down a little with the ranting. Things like stating to riser "You seem to make me sick since that post was as two faced as can be" does not really help --- by the time I read through everything you have its easy to loose the point of what you are saying --- and also this dilutes the logical discussion I am attempting have under my topic - dont want it just to fill up with crap. Not trying to disagree with you --- just think you sometimes go off topic or rant to much on things that really dont help with the issues of the topic --- a lot of your posts have good points --- there just lost in all the ranting--- also if you really look at what some people are saying they are not in total disagreement --- like riser said he would like to see a different kind of solution - i agree with this and dont believe riser should be criticized for his opinion---- hope you take what i say constructively.
March 13, 2007 4:34:08 AM

just to keep the topic on track,

i am talking about changes to tgforum posts that occurred well after this post in July 2007. I have edited my own remarks --- but it is only in the hopes that you guys review your own posts as any anti vista post might have been altered; at least mine were.
March 13, 2007 5:15:20 AM

Quote:
alpha,

you have good points but wish you tone it down a little with the ranting. Things like stating to riser "You seem to make me sick since that post was as two faced as can be" does not really help --- by the time I read through everything you have its easy to loose the point of what you are saying --- and also this dilutes the logical discussion I am attempting have under my topic - dont want it just to fill up with crap. Not trying to disagree with you --- just think you sometimes go off topic or rant to much on things that really dont help with the issues of the topic --- a lot of your posts have good points --- there just lost in all the ranting--- also if you really look at what some people are saying they are not in total disagreement --- like riser said he would like to see a different kind of solution - i agree with this and dont believe riser should be criticized for his opinion---- hope you take what i say constructively.
I respect you since you are polite. Riser's post says, "Honesty.. they're trying to protect a business. If it wasn't such a problem, it wouldn't be needed." Here he is talking about MS who is just "protecting" business. I know that army men protect us and that police protect us and our parents protect us but I was not aware that Microsoft recived the force of power to act as a defender of for anything at all? That is what police are for and that is the order of things. In front is the word HONESTLY and it is common to use that when your arguement is weak. It is a polite way to get us to stomach what follows and in this case "the problem" (all of that stealing) and "the rationalization"(they would not bother if it was not necessary).

The question at some point must come up. Was the DMCA enacted to protect society or was it enacted to create new revenue streams for the digital industries? If you think that it protects society as a whole then do tell.
March 13, 2007 6:12:17 AM

Quote:
just to keep the topic on track,

please not that the purpose of my post is get view points on whether vista and drm is hurting innovation in the pc industry. Some of you are ignoring this and just saying that entertainment industry has the right to protect content. However, does entertainment industry have right control every aspect pc hardware and software just because it wants drm even if protected content not being used. Others are trying to argue that dmca or changes in copyright law are needed -- but dont give any comment on how this is or is not hurting innovation in the pc industry. Not saying you cant comment on how you feel about drm or copyright law as I realize the two are somewhat commingled -- but would like to hear comments about how drm is hurting innovation and increasing costs for entire pc industry.
There are three teams. The corporations. The government. Everyone else. Two of those teams rigged the game and the joke is on Everyone else. Everyone else is confused since most are sheep. When a trouble cry comes the sheep just stand there for a fleecing. In the mean time the government builds labrynth walls while the corporations pay the polititions. Eventually the corporations give the sheep stuff to kill time at a fee. The corporations have no competition anymore since they all teamed together so they can charge the otherwise board sheep anything they want. The government fat cats get fatter and the fleecing becomes a blood orgy. A little dramatic but pretty true to form. All monopolies damage innovation by their very existance.

You ask if DRM can harm inovation in the PC industry and you know the answer. The industry is not really about "inovation" it is about MONEY and mountains of replacement parts. The whole world is running out of cheap energy and we must start to conserve. Just when PCs seemed to get greener (lol) all the savings from replacing CRTs with FPs were more then lost by all of the new Processors, Memory, VIDEO CARD(S), mother boards and the lott. I know guys with 750W PSUs and from what I read there are bigger.

On the other thread I mentioned an operationg system called BeOS and this OS was POSIX based and SWEET. Fast, MT, Journaled and had a decient following. MS killed it since MS controlled the OEMs and Be could never get exposure. BeOS was super fast and was great at 3D, audio and video. It cost me $35.00 back in the day. Oh well

I have a ATI X1900 All In Wonder video card. I don't know if you know about that card? In brief it is a Radeon GPU/TV Tuner/Video Capture/DVD Decoder card. Old people like me like it since I can get stuff off of peoples old VHS tapes with it. The card requires Catalyst and something called MMC. So the GPU has drivers for Vista but due to lack of trusted components and an "analog hole" there will be NO MMC for Vista. That card is pretty new too. Oh well
March 13, 2007 8:05:15 AM

Quote:
But any way making copies is considerd "INFRINGING" by the MPAA and RIAA since it is not listed with those uses.


Need I remind you -again- that AACS has managed copies as part of its specification, and that a number of the less demandng DRMs quite happily allow you to copy them to a number of devices (Fairplay, for instance, can be activated on up to 5 separate PCs at once, and can be burnt to a disc (stripped of DRM, I might add) an indefinite number of times?)?
March 13, 2007 8:17:07 AM

Quote:
I have a ATI X1900 All In Wonder video card. I don't know if you know about that card? In brief it is a Radeon GPU/TV Tuner/Video Capture/DVD Decoder card. Old people like me like it since I can get stuff off of peoples old VHS tapes with it. The card requires Catalyst and something called MMC. So the GPU has drivers for Vista but due to lack of trusted components and an "analog hole" there will be NO MMC for Vista. That card is pretty new too. Oh well


This has nothing to do with DRM at all. The reason behind this is because of MMC running as a service. Vista prevents services from accessing Direct3D now. If it ran as a standalone app (something ATi are investigating with third party developers) it would work fine. I have a separate capture card and it works fine at capturing analogue input.

Please try to find out what you're talking about, rather than going "1+1 = DRM ISSUE".
March 13, 2007 8:21:20 AM

Quote:
just to keep the topic on track,

However, does entertainment industry have right control every aspect pc hardware and software just because it wants drm even if protected content not being used.


It should be interesting to see how Hollywood reacts as they are predominantly using Linux.

Industry of Change: Linux Storms Hollywood
http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/5472

TechNewsWorld: Linux in Hollywood
http://www.linuxtoday.com/high_performance/200310020112...

Not only are they using Linux in their render farms but on their desktops as well.
March 13, 2007 8:31:31 AM

Quote:
But any way making copies is considerd "INFRINGING" by the MPAA and RIAA since it is not listed with those uses.


Need I remind you -again- that AACS has managed copies as part of its specification, and that a number of the less demandng DRMs quite happily allow you to copy them to a number of devices (Fairplay, for instance, can be activated on up to 5 separate PCs at once, and can be burnt to a disc (stripped of DRM, I might add) an indefinite number of times?)?We are not talking about the same thing Gremmi. I am talking about HDDVD and you are talking about subscription/pay for play service. It is completely against the law to circumvent disc protection PERIOD. Go to doom9 and find out yourself. If you could simply make copies then what is the whole Muslix64 thing about? Reading all of that is ruff so it is possible that you are confused. Think about it you can't copy AACS unless you circumvent protection.
March 13, 2007 8:34:15 AM

Quote:
But any way making copies is considerd "INFRINGING" by the MPAA and RIAA since it is not listed with those uses.


Need I remind you -again- that AACS has managed copies as part of its specification, and that a number of the less demandng DRMs quite happily allow you to copy them to a number of devices (Fairplay, for instance, can be activated on up to 5 separate PCs at once, and can be burnt to a disc (stripped of DRM, I might add) an indefinite number of times?)?We are not talking about the same thing Gremmi. I am talking about HDDVD and you are talking about subscription/pay for play service. It is completely against the law to circumvent disc protection PERIOD. Go to doom9 and find out yourself. If you could simply make copies then what is the whole Muslix64 thing about? Reading all of that is ruff so it is possible that you are confused. Think about it you can't copy AACS unless you circumvent protection.

I bolded the relevant part you ignored.
March 13, 2007 8:47:28 AM

Quote:
I have a ATI X1900 All In Wonder video card. I don't know if you know about that card? In brief it is a Radeon GPU/TV Tuner/Video Capture/DVD Decoder card. Old people like me like it since I can get stuff off of peoples old VHS tapes with it. The card requires Catalyst and something called MMC. So the GPU has drivers for Vista but due to lack of trusted components and an "analog hole" there will be NO MMC for Vista. That card is pretty new too. Oh well


This has nothing to do with DRM at all. The reason behind this is because of MMC running as a service. Vista prevents services from accessing Direct3D now. If it ran as a standalone app (something ATi are investigating with third party developers) it would work fine. I have a separate capture card and it works fine at capturing analogue input.

Please try to find out what you're talking about, rather than going "1+1 = DRM ISSUE".BS I brought up the card as a demonstration of how Vista and its DRM are counter productive. That card was advertised as HD compatable but without decryption keys there can be no PMP. No the TV was not a HD part but if you added a HDDVDROM you could watch HDDVDS. but I could not get playback from using Power DVD player. MMC support for Vista is dead so you get no HDDVD, no TV, no FM, no Capture. You should find out what you are talking about. I have the card and the HDDVD and I have to do it the Doom9 way. You don't even have a HDDVD drive in your PC do you?
March 13, 2007 8:53:38 AM

Quote:
But any way making copies is considerd "INFRINGING" by the MPAA and RIAA since it is not listed with those uses.


Need I remind you -again- that AACS has managed copies as part of its specification, and that a number of the less demandng DRMs quite happily allow you to copy them to a number of devices (Fairplay, for instance, can be activated on up to 5 separate PCs at once, and can be burnt to a disc (stripped of DRM, I might add) an indefinite number of times?)?We are not talking about the same thing Gremmi. I am talking about HDDVD and you are talking about subscription/pay for play service. It is completely against the law to circumvent disc protection PERIOD. Go to doom9 and find out yourself. If you could simply make copies then what is the whole Muslix64 thing about? Reading all of that is ruff so it is possible that you are confused. Think about it you can't copy AACS unless you circumvent protection.

I bolded the relevant part you ignored.You seem to be a wise ass this morning. I replied.... Show me one single managed copy of a HDDVD or explain what the 30 or so guys on Doom9 are doing since you say they can have managed copies
March 13, 2007 8:57:31 AM

Quote:
BS I brought up the card as a demonstration of how Vista and its DRM are counter productive. That card was advertised as HD compatable but without decryption keys there can be no PMP. No the TV was not a HD part but if you added a HDDVDROM you could watch HDDVDS. but I could not get playback from using Power DVD player. MMC support for Vista is dead so you get no HDDVD, no TV, no FM, no Capture. You should find out what you are talking about. I have the card and the HDDVD and I have to do it the Doom9 way. You don't even have a HDDVD drive in your PC do you?


I don't quite know what your point is there with regards to HD, as it had nothing to do with what we were talking about in this instance (which, to remind your apparent failing memory, is analogue capture). Again, the reason the MMC doesn't work is because it's a service, and services cannot access Direct 3D now. Again, I point out that ATi are working on a solution to this. Again, I point out that I have an analogue capture card which works fine. This is not a DRM issue. This is an issue with Vista security.

And I do have an HD-DVD drive, but thanks for your incorrect assumption there.
March 13, 2007 9:07:07 AM

Quote:
You seem to be a wise ass this morning. I replied.... Show me one single managed copy of a HDDVD or explain what the 30 or so guys on Doom9 are doing since you say they can have managed copies


The current AACS specification is called "interim", which has a number of parts removed due to them being incomplete at time of launch (ICT flagging, managed copy, some iHD issues). Said interim specification is due to cease on March 31st. So no, I can't list a disc at this exact moment in time.

I can however, show you the specifications of Managed Copy.

Chapter 5. Enjoy.

Remember,

Quote:
Think about it you can't copy AACS unless you circumvent protection.


Your words.
March 13, 2007 9:18:55 AM

Quote:
BS I brought up the card as a demonstration of how Vista and its DRM are counter productive. That card was advertised as HD compatable but without decryption keys there can be no PMP. No the TV was not a HD part but if you added a HDDVDROM you could watch HDDVDS. but I could not get playback from using Power DVD player. MMC support for Vista is dead so you get no HDDVD, no TV, no FM, no Capture. You should find out what you are talking about. I have the card and the HDDVD and I have to do it the Doom9 way. You don't even have a HDDVD drive in your PC do you?


I don't quite know what your point is there with regards to HD, as it had nothing to do with what we were talking about in this instance (which, to remind your apparent failing memory, is analogue capture). Again, the reason the MMC doesn't work is because it's a service, and services cannot access Direct 3D now. Again, I point out that ATi are working on a solution to this. Again, I point out that I have an analogue capture card which works fine. This is not a DRM issue. This is an issue with Vista security.

And I do have an HD-DVD drive, but thanks for your incorrect assumption there.K here wise guy....
I posted about my ATI card and about how it is a no go with vista First the MMC center does not work and so that is not good. Second is the analog hole issue and that is not a problem with the TV or other features. Analog holes are the TV outs from the dongle. HDDVD ( I have a LG in this system) will not play on my compliant monitor since the card has RCA out. AACS is HD you crazy person. ATI advertised the card that I bought as HDef compliant. Since the cards lack the decryption keys I have to get a new card (again)
March 13, 2007 9:32:27 AM

Quote:
You seem to be a wise ass this morning. I replied.... Show me one single managed copy of a HDDVD or explain what the 30 or so guys on Doom9 are doing since you say they can have managed copies


The current AACS specification is called "interim", which has a number of parts removed due to them being incomplete at time of launch (ICT flagging, managed copy, some iHD issues). Said interim specification is due to cease on March 31st. So no, I can't list a disc at this exact moment in time.

I can however, show you the specifications of Managed Copy.

Chapter 5. Enjoy.

Remember,

Quote:
Think about it you can't copy AACS unless you circumvent protection.


Your words.No you can't make copies of HDDVDs not now and not ever. AACS might have an allowance but AACS is encryption your ability to make back-ups is nill in the face of the DMCA. Circumventing is also an offence. You can't show examples and then you have the wise ass attitude.

FACTS:
No copies for backup of protected media unless you have permission.

The only thing that could change that would be if the FAIR USE Act was adopted.

My ATI card does not do what it was advertised to do since it lacks decryption keys and MMC will not work with Vista
March 13, 2007 9:33:30 AM

Quote:
K here wise guy....
I posted about my ATI card and about how it is a no go with vista First the MMC center does not work and so that is not good. Second is the analog hole issue and that is not a problem with the TV or other features. Analog holes are the TV outs from the dongle. HDDVD ( I have a LG in this system) will not play on my compliant monitor since the card has RCA out. AACS is HD you crazy person. ATI advertised the card that I bought as HDef compliant. Since the cards lack the decryption keys I have to get a new card (again)


Of course, it could be ATi lying about the card spec.

Incidentally, my GeForce card has composite out, and HD-DVD plays fine for me.

EDIT: Correction. My GeForce has S-Video out with an S-Video-to-composite adapter included.
March 13, 2007 9:37:02 AM

Quote:
No you can't make copies of HDDVDs not now and not ever.


You..are aware that the final specification is going ahead on March 31st, and that it's, at this stage, a suable offense to not include features listed in said final specification to those who have signed up to it? So, give it a few months and we'll see who's correct.

Quote:
FACTS:
No copies for backup of protected media unless you have permission.


So now you're changing your position from

Quote:
Think about it you can't copy AACS unless you circumvent protection.


then? Good! You are capable of learning!
March 13, 2007 9:43:24 AM

Quote:
Of course, it could be ATi lying about the card spec.

Incidentally, my GeForce card has composite out, and HD-DVD plays fine for me.
I saw an article like that on Toms first but after I bought the card and after I lost the packaging & recpt. Regardless, AACS specs became available after the card shipped so DRM is part of the issue along with ATI

What GForce card has a TV tuner and video capture on it?
March 13, 2007 9:50:10 AM

Quote:
No you can't make copies of HDDVDs not now and not ever.


You..are aware that the final specification is going ahead on March 31st, and that it's, at this stage, a suable offense to not include features listed in said final specification to those who have signed up to it? So, give it a few months and we'll see who's correct.

Quote:
FACTS:
No copies for backup of protected media unless you have permission.


So now you're changing your position from

Quote:
Think about it you can't copy AACS unless you circumvent protection.


then? Good! You are capable of learning! ITS OFFICIAL YOU ARE A PRICK and make some managed copies with your HD stuff
March 13, 2007 9:58:46 AM

Quote:
Of course, it could be ATi lying about the card spec.

Incidentally, my GeForce card has composite out, and HD-DVD plays fine for me.
I saw an article like that on Toms first but after I bought the card and after I lost the packaging & recpt. Regardless, AACS specs became available after the card shipped so DRM is part of the issue along with ATI

What GForce card has a TV tuner and video capture on it?

Where did I say it did? I said my card had S-Video out. I have a separate capture card. The S-Video is a TV-Out. By your own definition

Quote:
Analog holes are the TV outs from the dongle.


my system should be incapable of outputting an HD-DVD image.

And what does AACS have to do with your card not supporting HDCP? AACS and HDCP aren't the same things, you know.

Here it is in summary:

You have a card that does not support HDCP (despite ATi claiming it did). Therefore you cannot playback HD-DVD video. Despite this, you claim that it is Vista DRM (as opposed to ATi's messup) blocking output because of your analogue out. I would love to know how you reached this conclusion, given that my system with this "analogue hole" has no playback issues on my HDCP compatible GPU and monitor.
March 13, 2007 9:59:36 AM

Quote:
No you can't make copies of HDDVDs not now and not ever.


You..are aware that the final specification is going ahead on March 31st, and that it's, at this stage, a suable offense to not include features listed in said final specification to those who have signed up to it? So, give it a few months and we'll see who's correct.

Quote:
FACTS:
No copies for backup of protected media unless you have permission.


So now you're changing your position from

Quote:
Think about it you can't copy AACS unless you circumvent protection.


then? Good! You are capable of learning! ITS OFFICIAL YOU ARE A PRICK and make some managed copies with your HD stuff

Nice. Very classy. I believe some moderation is in order here.
March 13, 2007 10:14:54 AM

Quote:
No you can't make copies of HDDVDs not now and not ever.


You..are aware that the final specification is going ahead on March 31st, and that it's, at this stage, a suable offense to not include features listed in said final specification to those who have signed up to it? So, give it a few months and we'll see who's correct.

Quote:
FACTS:
No copies for backup of protected media unless you have permission.


So now you're changing your position from

Quote:
Think about it you can't copy AACS unless you circumvent protection.


then? Good! You are capable of learning! ITS OFFICIAL YOU ARE A PRICK and make some managed copies with your HD stuff

Nice. Very classy. I believe some moderation is in order here.Who would give permission to copy a HDDVD? They can not be copied!
March 13, 2007 10:32:25 AM

Quote:
Here it is in summary:

You have a card that does not support HDCP (despite ATi claiming it did).
Therefore you cannot playback HD-DVD video.

yep

Despite this, you claim that it is Vista DRM (as opposed to ATi's messup) blocking output because of your analogue out.
nope I claimed both were at fault. And if not for DRM the only issue would be no MMC for Vista
I would love to know how you reached this conclusion, given that my system with this "analogue hole" has no playback issues on my HDCP compatible GPU and monitor.
I reached my conclusion that ATI AIW+HDDVD ROM + Vista don't work by not seeing Spider Man on the monitor. As for you being able to watch HDDVD via your RCA out you are a lucky
March 13, 2007 11:08:40 AM

Since I am by definition a hardware "guru" I am duty obligated to ask, did you try with another card that is similar to the one that you have or different movie? And how can you out and out declare something to not work when you only tested on the RC?
March 13, 2007 11:30:32 AM

Quote:
Since I am by definition a hardware "guru" I am duty obligated to ask, did you try with another card that is similar to the one that you have or different movie? And how can you out and out declare something to not work when you only tested on the RC?

RC as in release candidate ??
March 13, 2007 12:24:03 PM

Copying HD DVD is short a time away. As soon as a technology is adopted, you'll get the ability to copy. Its a matter of figuring out which standard is going to take over.
March 13, 2007 12:26:40 PM

Quote:
Since I am by definition a hardware "guru" I am duty obligated to ask, did you try with another card that is similar to the one that you have or different movie? And how can you out and out declare something to not work when you only tested on the RC?

RC as in release candidate ??
Judging by your statements about using an edition that expires, I deduced that it couldn't be the retail version where more drivers and hardware works. Please correct me if I happen to be wrong.
March 13, 2007 1:26:34 PM

Quote:
Copying HD DVD is short a time away. As soon as a technology is adopted, you'll get the ability to copy. Its a matter of figuring out which standard is going to take over.
It is against the law in the US to make copies of HDDVDs and against the law to make decrypted copies of HDDVDs and against the law to make tools who's purpose is to defeat media encryption. Naturally, I know that the ability to make copies exists and works but that does not make it legal. Doom members determined that since the decryption keys exist in memory they are fair game however AACS LA had the tool taken down. Naturally since the guy Muslix64 created a fuss it must have something to do with making copies of HDDVDs and B-Ray discs?? Go to Doom 9's forums and read about it. AnyDVD is already available and copies HDDVDs along with everything else.
March 13, 2007 1:55:23 PM

Quote:
Since I am by definition a hardware "guru" I am duty obligated to ask, did you try with another card that is similar to the one that you have or different movie? And how can you out and out declare something to not work when you only tested on the RC?

RC as in release candidate ??
Judging by your statements about using an edition that expires, I deduced that it couldn't be the retail version where more drivers and hardware works. Please correct me if I happen to be wrong.Riser has censured me on this site and a direct result is that I can no longer speak about so and so or any of so and so's products. Since you asked me and have over 6000 posts and are a GURU I will elaborate but you will have to fill in a few blanks...

During the instalation of V---A U-----te Retail if you do not enter your product key the operating system is installed as a full 30 day trial. All features work as well as auto updating. At the end of 30 days if you choose you can activate or rearm. Rearming is done at a command prompt by entering "slmgr -rearm" w/out quotation marks as administrator. This can be done 3 times and give a user 120 days total trial period for FREE.

I was not sure if I was going to like it and if I did I was not sure what computer I was going to keep it on. Needless to say I didn't to the first part so the second part didn't matter. As for the video issues I obtained two new solutions that eliminate ATI issues but that is hardware and does not matter in the V---A General Discussion section of Tom's ForumZ.

Thanks for your interest and I'm sure that you only wanted to help Mr Ninja
!