View Full Version : The Great HDCP Fiasco
Alan's new peice (http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/ati_nvidia_hdcp_support/default.asp). You knew this was coming. :mad:
"When in danger or in doubt,
Run in circles, scream and shout.
Bang your head against the wall.
Make life hell for one and all."
I'm hoping Alan is missing something here with reverse compatibility thru driver and/or bios updates. But then I'm well known as a dewey-eyed optimist. :lol:
At any rate, I'm saving up my outrage for the moment, tho I'll be happy to hear some informed comments on the matter from our journos and others in the know.
That guy is really missing the big picture, and rather late to the plate as well. Here is an article from last year that goes into much better detail on what it will take to acomplish HDCP protected content playback on PCs:
http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=1871&page=1
Kanyamagufa
12-Feb-2006, 17:40
Choice quotes from the firingsquad piece:
We’ve been able to confirm that none of the Built-by-ATI Radeons support HDCP. If you’ve just spent $1000 on a pair of Radeon X1900 XT graphics cards expecting to be able to playback HD-DVD or Blu-Ray movies at 1920x1080 resolution in the future, you’ve just wasted your money.
NVIDIA, being a GPU manufacturer was unable to discuss the plans of board manufacturers. We contacted all six of NVIDIA’s Tier-1 board partners. None of the GeForce 6 or 7 video cards available on the market, including the most recently released GeForce 7800GS, have HDCP support. So if you just spent $1500 on a pair of 7800GTX 512MB GPUs expecting to be able to play 1920x1080 HD-DVD or Blu-Ray movies in the future, you’ve just wasted your money.
Even if it's all true, it's a little blunt...
Still thought it was mildly humorous, even if it's gonna have some consumers literally up in arms...
Another choice bit on retro-fitting thru driver/bios:
Turns out that this was also wishful thinking.
An ATI representative said: “People will not be able to turn on HDCP through a software patch since the HDCP keys need to be present during the manufacturing. We are rolling out HDCP through OEMs at this time but we have not finalized our retail plans yet.”
As I pressed for more information about potential retail plans (i.e. trade-in programs, whether existing boards already have traces for the HDCP hardware where it can be plugged in), I got only a vague response:
“We cannot get into more detail at this time, as any further discussion would get into our trade secrets. However, we do promise to give you a full update on our retail plans once they are finalized.”
I’m not going to speculate on whether ATI’s reticence is because they’re trying to downplay a big fiasco, or if they’re trying to keep their super generous solution secret to throw off the competition. There’s actually no way to know.
Well, what about NVIDIA? They were actually very direct: “The boards themselves must be designed with an extra chip when the board is manufactured. The extra chip stores a crypto key, and you cannot retrofit an existing board after the board is produced.”
Wow. You can pick your favorite expletive.
Another choice bit on retro-fitting thru driver/bios:
I am a bit angry with Ati about this, they claim "DVI 1.0 compliant / HDMI interoperable and HDCP ready" for the x1000 series - I was going to buy a x1000 card for my HTPC (currently using integrated GF 6150) to be able to play Blu-ray and/or HD-DVD when the time comes. (I know that the chips itself might very well be HDCP ready, but I think most people reading the specs will expect shipping products will be able to use HDCP when the time comes).
I know the situation is no better with NVIDIA cards, bu atleast they have made no lcaims about being HDCP ready.
I am going to wait until HDCP capable cards are availeble before I buy a new one, I would like to improve gaming performance on the system - but is low priority and I am going to spend any money on a new card that wont alow me to play HD-movies at HD-resolutions.
digitalwanderer
12-Feb-2006, 20:10
Ouch, just ouch. :(
USB dongles I say.. USB dongles!
$15,000 isn't cheap.
All of these stupid standards should be free. If sony wasn't trying to milk money from blu ray and other doing the same then we would not always be in these stupid messes. If it was completely free then there would be a reason to be upset, but it isn't so I blame intel if they truly are the ones siphoning money from the other manufacturers.
HDCP is nothing more than an artificial limiter. It's like adding a throttle control to a 500hp car so it can only reach 175. Both my perfectly good monitor and X850 XT are not HDCP ready and I don't plan on replacing them any time soon for such a useless feature, so I just won't be buying any HD movies and I doubt many other people will either. Seems their anti-piracy greed is backfiring on them.
$15,000 isn't cheap.
All of these stupid standards should be free. If sony wasn't trying to milk money from blu ray and other doing the same then we would not always be in these stupid messes. If it was completely free then there would be a reason to be upset, but it isn't so I blame intel if they truly are the ones siphoning money from the other manufacturers.
They're only trying to make money like those who pushed for the protection systems. That is the only reason for HDCP afterall.
SugarCoat
12-Feb-2006, 23:54
I am a bit angry with Ati about this, they claim "DVI 1.0 compliant / HDMI interoperable and HDCP ready" for the x1000 series - I was going to buy a x1000 card for my HTPC (currently using integrated GF 6150) to be able to play Blu-ray and/or HD-DVD when the time comes. (I know that the chips itself might very well be HDCP ready, but I think most people reading the specs will expect shipping products will be able to use HDCP when the time comes).
I know the situation is no better with NVIDIA cards, bu atleast they have made no lcaims about being HDCP ready.
I am going to wait until HDCP capable cards are availeble before I buy a new one, I would like to improve gaming performance on the system - but is low priority and I am going to spend any money on a new card that wont alow me to play HD-movies at HD-resolutions.
Quite a few do have it listed as supported under Nvidia's PureVideo specifications. Nvidia's AIBs do represent Nvidia in my opinion. Not to mention there arent anymore BBATI cards since even ones marked as such are manufactured by Sapphire. Everyones hands are just as dirty.
NVIDIA PureVideo Technology
Dedicated programmable on-chip video processor
MPEG-2 video encode and decode
High Definition MPEG-2 and WMV9 hardware decode acceleration (up to 1080i)
Post Processing Features
Spatial-Temporal De-Interlacing (adaptive)
NTSC 3:2 Pulldown / Bad Edit correction
PAL 2:2 Pulldown correction
High quality 4x5 video scaling and filtering
Microsoft Video Mixing Renderer (VMR)
Integrated HDTV output (with HDCP support)
They're only trying to make money like those who pushed for the protection systems. That is the only reason for HDCP afterall.
No, see it is supposedly about piracy.
Since this is the case, Hollywood should have come up with some silly plan and then made it free for anyone to use the protection. Otherwise they are simply gouging in to many places. I am not buying anymore DVDs until bluray and HD gets settled, and that may be years. So only rentals for me I suppose...
No, see it is supposedly about piracy.
Is that sarcasm? I can't tell.
It's not the piracy itself, it's that it supposedly causes them to lose money. Even though they cannot seem to comprehend that duplicating 1s and 0s doesn't cost anything to anyone. Many people who download the stuff wouldn't buy it even if they couldn't download it, either because they simply can't afford it or don't think it worth their money.
Mintmaster
13-Feb-2006, 01:21
I still don't see how the copy protection that HDCP provides will last for long. If the people designing the hardware know how to encode, decode, and handshake between devices, then they must know how to snoop on the communication and decode it.
Anyone know enough about HDCP to tell me why I could be wrong?
Seems like I'll just have to download pirated HD content instead of buying it if I actually want to watch it in HD. It boggles the mind.
EX||illuminati
13-Feb-2006, 02:05
I still don't see how the copy protection that HDCP provides will last for long. If the people designing the hardware know how to encode, decode, and handshake between devices, then they must know how to snoop on the communication and decode it.
Anyone know enough about HDCP to tell me why I could be wrong?
These devices are going to become very popular. http://www.engadget.com/2005/07/15/spatz-techs-dvimagic-killing-on-hdcp/
One of the reasons dvd's were successful was the quality improvement out of the box connected to any TV. With blu-ray and hd-dvd people are only going to see noticeable improvement if they have exactly the correct equipment. In the end I see HDCP doing far more harm then good for everyone, consumers and electronic vendors.
Here's coming to the restaurant. Table for two. Eheh.
"Hi"
"Hi, I would like huh.."
"I'm sorry but as it is I can't serve you. You first need to go to the hat shop next door and buy this wonderful hat with feathers before I can serve you."
"err. I've always eaten here without wearing a hat. Why would I need to buy a hat now ?"
"Sure. There was no technical reasons we couldn't serve you if you had no hat. But we've just signed an agreement with the shop next door that makes it legally impossible for us to serve you if you didn't get a hat from that shop before."
"What the ..! I'm off. I'm leaving to another restaurant"
"Actually all the restaurants in town have signed the same agreement with that hat shop. Really you shouldn't complain. What you should realize is that hat is not really a *hat*, it's more like an *enabler*. After buying this one you'll be able to enjoy any restaurant in town without constraint."
So comply or starve ! ;)
Is that sarcasm? I can't tell.
It was tongue in check to say the least, and sarcasm yes, but the point was it is supposedly to disable unauthorized copying, and if that is their goal hollywood hsould make it free
Not to mention there arent anymore BBATI cards since even ones marked as such are manufactured by Sapphire. Everyones hands are just as dirty.
Umm, no. That just doesn't fly. As a consumer, I don't care who the subcontracter is, I care who's name is on the box. It is just not reasonable to presume that somehow Sapphire built the "BBA" cards that way without ATI's knowledge and approval, and ATI is now "shocked, shocked" to discover it. I'd be stunned if any of our ATI friends hereabouts would suggest something like that. They might have other points they'd like to make about this situation, but you'd have to scrape my jaw off the floor if they pulled that one out. . .
I am a bit angry with Ati about this, they claim "DVI 1.0 compliant / HDMI interoperable and HDCP ready" for the x1000 series - I was going to buy a x1000 card for my HTPC (currently using integrated GF 6150) to be able to play Blu-ray and/or HD-DVD when the time comes. (I know that the chips itself might very well be HDCP ready, but I think most people reading the specs will expect shipping products will be able to use HDCP when the time comes).
Well, the key phrase there is "was going to". Now you're educated. . .and can make that decision with this in mind. . .
Just curious, since this is a serious concern for you. . what do HD/BRD PC drives have to cost (max) for you to be all "itchy trigger finger" about it?
That guy is really missing the big picture, and rather late to the plate as well. Here is an article from last year that goes into much better detail on what it will take to acomplish HDCP protected content playback on PCs:
http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=1871&page=1
Interesting article.
What about this:
The PE is built on certified hardware using certified drivers, and can be invalidated by the presence of 'un-trusted' software, drivers or hardware. What constitutes unsafe software will likely be decided by Microsoft and concerned interests like the RIAA and movie industries.
Whazzat? "Untrusted drivers"? So this gets added to the WHQL process in some fashion? How does the list of trusted drivers get updated? What impact if any does this have for fans of NV beta-of-the-day?
london-boy
13-Feb-2006, 09:51
Heh, THANK GOD i'm on a PC-upgrade break.. for the next 5 years or so... I only buy PCs or PC upgrades every 5 years or so, or when i know that what i'm buying will work properly for a long time, cause it's just stupid to keep upgrading, knowing there could be situations where i woul dbe wasting my money big time.
So for me the next 5 years are all about consoles, and most probably PS3 because of Bluray - i'm cheap u see...
Here's coming to the restaurant. Table for two. Eheh.
"Hi"
"Hi, I would like huh.."
"I'm sorry but as it is I can't serve you. You first need to go to the hat shop next door and buy this wonderful hat with feathers before I can serve you."
"err. I've always eaten here without wearing a hat. Why would I need to buy a hat now ?"
"Sure. There was no technical reasons we couldn't serve you if you had no hat. But we've just signed an agreement with the shop next door that makes it legally impossible for us to serve you if you didn't get a hat from that shop before."
"What the ..! I'm off. I'm leaving to another restaurant"
"Actually all the restaurants in town have signed the same agreement with that hat shop. Really you shouldn't complain. What you should realize is that hat is not really a *hat*, it's more like an *enabler*. After buying this one you'll be able to enjoy any restaurant in town without constraint."
So comply or starve ! ;)The analogy is incomplete.
The couple could go home, produce some hot amateur pr0n in 1080p, encode it with XVid, burn it on CD-Rs and sell them. Without any hats :razz:
Err, I meant they can open their own restaurant. Or someone else with more money or better skills. If enough people are pissed off about a service that is so well within reach as "providing food for guests", someone is eventually going to try their own luck.
When I'm taking a glance at the music business, I see "the industry" pumping out shite and moving towards a well deserved and painful death, but OTOH there are actually many independent bands that do healthy business and at the same time hate DRM just as much as all normal people do. There is life without radio and without the mainstream press.
The movie industry will probably just crash and burn though.
Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.
13-Feb-2006, 11:30
The analogy is incomplete.
The couple could go home, produce some hot amateur pr0n in 1080p, encode it with XVid, burn it on CD-Rs and sell them. Without any hats :razz:
The movie industry will probably just crash and burn though.
They probably can't unless they buy an expensive licence to show that their content is "trusted".
This isn't about priracy, this is about controlling what you do with any content you buy, locking out competitors, and monetizing all the things we take for granted now.
They probably can't unless they buy an expensive licence to show that their content is "trusted".There's nothing preventing you from encoding (and decoding) video at "HD" resolutions without ever being infected with DRM. Just use the right codecs. You can play anything on a PC at least, and stand-alone players that lock "unprotected" content out are just business lost to HTPCs.
This isn't about priracy, this is about controlling what you do with any content you buy, locking out competitors, and monetizing all the things we take for granted now.I don't need to consume movies. And I don't see myself buying any "protected" content, I'll just go to the cinema three times a year or so, as I do now, and be done with it. That isn't saying I'm compensating by pirating movies, I just don't need to watch them. I don't listen to the radio nor do I watch tv, for similar reasons (advertisements, mostly).
I don't want any of that crap in my household.
Will I have to buy an whole new expensive PC to play HD content?
It is time to HDdecrypter :)
$15,000 isn't cheap.
Of course it's cheap. Dirt cheap, even. That 0.005 per copy is less so, but still bearable.
EDIT: talking corporate customers here, of course
Whazzat? "Untrusted drivers"? So this gets added to the WHQL process in some fashion? How does the list of trusted drivers get updated? What impact if any does this have for fans of NV beta-of-the-day?
You read that right..
HDCP is the first real step into trusted computing.
The output device on the videocard encrypts the data before sending it to the external device, which can decrypt it. as far as I'm aware, trusted computing will be all about "certificates" the stuff that makes webbrowsing a hell as it is allready.
So "uncertified" software will constitute anything that might remotely infringe copyrights.
Read, Vista could check upong executing of WMP-HD if there is any uncertified software loaded, screengrabbers, FRAPS. .stuff like that.
so we get a SAFE environment (no more execution of uncertified applications, this will all be checked on-line) and we get a STABLE environment, no more open source programs etc. since these small group based programs simply don't have the funds to acquire installation licenses etc.
Again, WE don't like it..but het.. we see what happens with PCIe and AGP.. it's a bit of a skewed analogy but OEM's will offer it to every customer anyway so the installed base of HDCP ready Home theaters will grow by the millions each month.
This isn't about priracy, this is about controlling what you do with any content you buy, locking out competitors, and monetizing all the things we take for granted now.
That unfortunately seems to be true. It is a sad state of affairs. and yes I realize $15,000 isn't much to a corporation, but the point was it is not cheap to an individual. Hollywood should have designed a system so a regular person who was messing about could still abide by the rules and do so for free if they were really into protecting content. The point being the more widespread the use the better. There is no excuse for them to charge at all for this. The fact that they are going to is like a slap in the face...
Before we get all angry at Nvidia and ATI may I make a small suggestion. Think about this: They may be fighting our battles for us by not including this crap they might make it so those of us with new monitors can still use them, and so the movie studios can't pull this crap. Think about the fact that the only card that does this is a SONY card. That says something about it.
Before we get all angry at Nvidia and ATI may I make a small suggestion. Think about this: They may be fighting our battles for us by not including this crap they might make it so those of us with new monitors can still use them, and so the movie studios can't pull this crap. Think about the fact that the only card that does this is a SONY card. That says something about it.
Because having the consumer DVD/TV people lined up in lock-step, the content providers will quail at the disapproval of the PC enthusiast community? No, I don't think so. I can easily imagine that distaste for the idea is slowing stuff down on the PC side. . .but it has zero long-term effect on the big picture, and I really don't think the IHVs are kidding themselves that it will. It just makes it somewhat more painful for PC enthusiasts to make the transition gracefully.
Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.
13-Feb-2006, 14:54
There's nothing preventing you from encoding (and decoding) video at "HD" resolutions without ever being infected with DRM. Just use the right codecs. You can play anything on a PC at least, and stand-alone players that lock "unprotected" content out are just business lost to HTPCs.
You can now, but you won't be able to in the future. With hardware DRM & OS support only trusting content that has a licence, you won't be able to run anything at HD res unless it's "trusted".
Instead of assuming that anything without DRM is simply not protected as happens now, anything without DRM will be assumed to have been ripped, and will not be "trusted" or in some cases even played at all. At least that's they way things are going, especially if hardware and software makers give in to the media cartels. There may not be a choice if those same media cartels get the draconian laws they want enacted by their paid-for senators.
I don't need to consume movies. And I don't see myself buying any "protected" content, I'll just go to the cinema three times a year or so, as I do now, and be done with it. That isn't saying I'm compensating by pirating movies, I just don't need to watch them. I don't listen to the radio nor do I watch tv, for similar reasons (advertisements, mostly).
I don't want any of that crap in my household.
This is what I think will happen. People will just find other things to do than pay more money to get less from the cartels. There are serious moves afoot to stop you timeshifting, or charge you for doing so, for repeated viewings, viewings at other people's homes, etc. The cartels want to "monetize" every "privilege" we currently enjoy, such as recording a program and then watching it the next day, or skipping through the commercial breaks, or watching at the higher resolution we paid for.
With hardware DRM & OS support only trusting content that has a licence, you won't be able to run anything at HD res unless it's "trusted".
You are confusing the issue here. The content's copy protection is what has to trust the hardware and software, not the other way around.
From a Hexus interview with Godfrey Cheng of ATI late last year:
http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=3702&page=4
<B>Is HDCP in the current driver and working, so you've got content protection out of the box?
We have HDCP working great today but we are rolling it out for OEMs SKUs first. As you may know, we have developed HDCP solutions for the CE market where we have shipped millions of units. By leveraging our CE technologies, we can assure our OEM and retail customers that they will be getting a reliable and tested HDCP solution. We have not finalized our retail HDCP plans yet but we would be able to roll that out fairly quickly should the market want this technology. I predict that it will be fairly common on graphics cards by mid next year.
</B>
While the question/answer was a little too subtle for this non-techie to get "no reverse compatibility for shipping skus" out of, in retrospect possibly the most interesting part was the prediction re HDCP skus by mid-year this year.
Anyone care to take a crack at what he's pointing at there, given that we better understand now that he must mean new skus?
You are confusing the issue here. The content's copy protection is what has to trust the hardware and software, not the other way around.
It's all about status "trusted" or not a simple check for a video channel, if all components are "trusted", i.e. no vga dongle attached or something, then video playback will happen..
a non-trusted system can also be a system that does not have a compliant dell 30" screen
Heh, I don't see where my comment which you quoted has anything to do with what you said, and the requirment is for HDCP support in the display in general and not something that will relegate playback to a particular brand and model. Are you looking for an excuse to justify that fancy monitor? :D
Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.
13-Feb-2006, 17:25
You are confusing the issue here. The content's copy protection is what has to trust the hardware and software, not the other way around.
And if the content has no copy protection? This why they have been talking about "all content must have a licence", even if it is a licence that says "freely distributable". That licence will cost money. Don't forget, the OS of the hardware is the final arbiter of what does or doesn't get played, and the way things are going, it will be a case of "no licence, no play" in order to prevent people simply ripping out content and distributing it without DRM.
Were are you getting this? I don't see anyone talking about "all content must have a licence" (http://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial_s&hl=en&q=%22all+content+must+have+a+licence%22&btnG=Google+Search) and have heard absolutely nothing suggesting people would have to pay to aquire "freely distributable" licences to facilitate playback their own creations.
Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.
13-Feb-2006, 17:55
Were are you getting this? I don't see anyone talking about "all content must have a licence" (http://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial_s&hl=en&q=%22all+content+must+have+a+licence%22&btnG=Google+Search) and have heard absolutely nothing suggesting people would have to pay to aquire "freely distributable" licences to facilitate playback their own creations.
I guess you don't keep up on the DRM and possibilities of the trusted platform concept. That's the way the media cartels want it, because then they can get these capabilities under the radar and activate them later.
You already know that without trusted hardware you won't get full HD/Blu-Ray playback or any playback at all. How are you going to do as a previous poster suggested above, ie make your own HD content and be able to use it if the hardware doesn't see this content as valid, licenced content? If the hardware is happy to play HD content without any sort of authentication, how will it help to stop people who just rip the content out of official discs and distribute it without licences?
Were are you getting this? I don't see anyone talking about "all content must have a licence" (http://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial_s&hl=en&q=%22all+content+must+have+a+licence%22&btnG=Google+Search) and have heard absolutely nothing suggesting people would have to pay to aquire "freely distributable" licences to facilitate playback their own creations.
He's saying that once this is all in place there will be nothing to stop corporations from preventing you from watching, listening or running anything that doesn't have a license.
There's more to the "trusted computing platform" idea than merely the prevention of pirated software. It's purpose is to kill two birds with one stone, the second bird being an end to consumer choice and maximization of profit.
Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.
13-Feb-2006, 19:36
He's saying that once this is all in place there will be nothing to stop corporations from preventing you from watching, listening or running anything that doesn't have a license.
There's more to the "trusted computing platform" idea than merely the prevention of pirated software. It's purpose is to kill two birds with one stone, the second bird being an end to consumer choice and maximization of profit.
It's also laying the groundwork for pay-per-use on everthing - watching, timeshifting, fast-forwarding through commercials, software applications and OS use, etc. It's a business model shift that they think will make them more money if they can get the market to accept it.
So you guys honestly think that corporations are going to make it to where I can't walk into a store and buy a PC that will play the DVD of my sister's wedding without first paying for a license for it? I understand the concern as the industry is relentless with their drive against piracy, but Vista is hardly going to take things that far. Heck, they aren't even requiring the down conversion in standalone players unprotected outputs, but rather leaving it as an optional flag up to the studios to do with as they like.
For Crying out loud, you allready need licenses to watch or listen to snippets of music of artists of NOT so high standards on mtv2.com .. yes DRM on SAMPLES ..
Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.
13-Feb-2006, 20:14
So you guys honestly think that corporations are going to make it to where I can't walk into a store and buy a PC that will play the DVD of my sister's wedding without first paying for a license for it? I understand the concern as the industry is relentless with their drive against piracy, but Vista is hardly going to take things that far. Heck, they aren't even requiring the down conversion in standalone players unprotected outputs, but rather leaving it as an optional flag up to the studios to do with as they like.
Yes. They don't want people to easily produce their own content, because that might threaten their positon as a middleman. You might want to watch your sister's wedding, but the next guy might want to distribute his hit songs or videos, just like the Arctic Monkeys just did. It made them famous got them money and hits, and all without the record companies.
What if what's on your disc is a shakey-cam of the latest blockbuster movie? What is the physical difference between the recording of your sister's wedding and you sitting in a cinema with a camcorder? You think all these DRM systems are going to go into place and the people who forced their implementation are going to still allow shakycams, telesyncs or DVD rips that have been re-encoded to different file formats to play without any problems at all?
One of the P2P companies is already planning on doing this in order at the behest of the media cartels in order to become cartel "approved". All content will have to be licenced. Anything not licenced will be blocked. Anyone (ie Joe Public) wishing to distribute their own content will need a licence saying "this is my content and is freely distributable" and they will have to pay an administration fee at the very least. Don't want to pay to distribute your legally owned content? It gets blocked. The same philosophy will be applied to all cartel approved media - if it's not licenced, it's not played. Legitimacy will have to be proved, not just assumed.
Hold up though, are you suggesting that all this is going to come to pass with the introduction of Vista, or are you just presenting your opinion of the dark and gloomy future in store for us at some uncertain point down the road?
Will I have to buy an whole new expensive PC to play HD content?
It is time to HDdecrypter :)No. It's time that people stop using (I'm not even saying "buying") things they don't like. Hardware assisted DRM is pure evil. People who apathically insist that someone will crack it for them, shrug, and still move to the platform that enables all that shite the week it gets released are only strengthening that evil, by building up the market penetration.
This is a simple carrot-and-stick issue. Vista is holding up two carrots called "Direct3D 10" and "LDDM". Far smaller carrots were sufficient in the past (such as 3DMark05 preview videos encoded in a format requiring infection with DRM software to view). I have little hope left that the ... sheep ... will think before "deciding" this time around.
Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.
13-Feb-2006, 22:11
Hold up though, are you suggesting that all this is going to come to pass with the introduction of Vista, or are you just presenting your opinion of the dark and gloomy future in store for us at some uncertain point down the road?
It's one of the stepping stones. Microsoft wants an uncopyable, online authenticated OS and applications. They already made moves towards changing their business model and have already mooted a possible rental model for their OS and Apps. MS want also want to be centre of the media living room, and they need the media companies on board for that, and the media companies want content control from MS in return.
Why do you think the HDMI encrypted link end-to-end is being implemented? You've seen the greed that is exhibited by the media cartels, complete content control gives them additional mechanisms for charging and they will take it as soon as they can. Given the opportunity to screw more money out of customers as well as prevent casual piracy, the cartels will grab that opportunity with both hands, just as they did with the recent P2P Grokster case, just as they did with the arrival of CDs and DVDs, just as they did with DCMA.
SugarCoat
13-Feb-2006, 22:26
just want to comment that i am completely shocked that even ATI's AIW series got the shaft in support of this. If any card were at least going to have it, i would think AIW's would.
Hold up though, are you suggesting that all this is going to come to pass with the introduction of Vista, or are you just presenting your opinion of the dark and gloomy future in store for us at some uncertain point down the road?
Vista is an experiment; if it gets widely adopted and the masses accept all the DRM laden hardware and software you can be sure all that has been mentioned will come to fruition sooner or later.
So I really need a new TV or monitor if I want to watch movies in the future? What about those thousands of new LCDs which are sold every day? Are they HDCP-compatible?
So I really need a new TV or monitor if I want to watch movies in the future? What about those thousands of new LCDs which are sold every day? Are they HDCP-compatible?
Nothing is compatible yet. it needs to be a fail-safe end-to-end solution, that means, no separate add-on connectors you can buy at a later dat.
And don't think it will be "entertainment" only, it will include software, documents.
Besides, when there is CONTROL there is also FEEDBACK
http://www.againsttcpa.com/
No. It's time that people stop using (I'm not even saying "buying") things they don't like. Hardware assisted DRM is pure evil. People who apathically insist that someone will crack it for them, shrug, and still move to the platform that enables all that shite the week it gets released are only strengthening that evil, by building up the market penetration.
This is a simple carrot-and-stick issue. Vista is holding up two carrots called "Direct3D 10" and "LDDM". Far smaller carrots were sufficient in the past (such as 3DMark05 preview videos encoded in a format requiring infection with DRM software to view). I have little hope left that the ... sheep ... will think before "deciding" this time around.I agree hardware assisted DRM is pure evil. Things like that will enable a Big Brother like scenario.
Well, the key phrase there is "was going to". Now you're educated. . .and can make that decision with this in mind. . .
The point is that I should be educated by reading the specs - not having to find info everywhere else. This is similar to the advertized but non-working purevidio in the original GF6800.
Just curious, since this is a serious concern for you.
It is not that serious a concern for me, I am more anoyed/angry about the fact that you can not trust what the manufactors write in the specs, than I am about any consequenses for me personal (or rather lack of).
what do HD/BRD PC drives have to cost (max) for you to be all "itchy trigger finger" about it?
Not that much, I am most likely not going to buy one of the first blue-ray or HD-DVD drives availeble, but I was planing on using the same graphics card for a few years in the HTPC as 3D performance is no big concern.
The point is that I should be educated by reading the specs - not having to find info everywhere else. This is similar to the advertized but non-working purevidio in the original GF6800.
Don't disagree with that in the least. Marketing folk just don't seem to "get it", in their rush to pound their chest. It wouldn't kill them to have an asterisk or two, or parenthetical on other requirements.
Heh, no asterisk but it is a bulet point under a bulit point:
# Dual integrated dual-link DVI transmitters
* DVI 1.0 compliant / HDMI interoperable and HDCP ready
http://www.ati.com/products/RadeonX1900/specs.html
And I'll bet that is the case; the DVI transmtters are complaint with HDCP standards exactly as advertised while getting the HDCP protected signal onto the card is were the problem lies.
And I'll bet that is the case; the DVI transmtters are complaint with HDCP standards exactly as advertised while getting the HDCP protected signal onto the card is were the problem lies.
Yeah, as far as I know, there is nothing wrong with the connectors/transmitters there is just no encoding in the cards and decoding in the monitors.
btw, aren't the hdmi connectors 10 bit instead of 8 bit like dvi?
vBulletin® v3.8.6, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.