But DRM will always be cracked. So....
Big Vista DRM issues.
- Thread starter SPM
- Start date
It's still the debil, the very debil itself!
The crackers are just the warriors of light fighting back the dark tide of ebil...
The crackers are just the warriors of light fighting back the dark tide of ebil...
Agree.
Theres always Linux.
Actually, thats not true. Linux isnt yet, primetime for the desktop. When it is, I will agree with you 100% there.
1) The RIAA/MPAA has been trying to force through a law that would mandate that all computing devices in the US have DRM built in whether or not the computers will every be used for playing music.
2) The RIAA/MPAA has already pushed through DMCA laws in the US, and they are trying to use WIPO to impose it on the rest of the world. Rather than make the act of piracy itself illegal, DMCA makes it illegal to discuss or publicise the encryption and protection techniques scheme - even from a security or a legitimate data recovery point of view, without the risk of being sued. This contravenes basic freedom of information rights.
3) As we have already seen the government has already seen fit to grant the music industry tax collector status on blank audio cassettes on the basis that all it's citizens are criminals.
I will be required to buy Vista or give up computers when Microsoft decides to drop support for Windows XP around 2010, unless Linux takes over the desktop, all because RIAA/MPAA in collusion with Microsoft says so.
So you are saying I should give up using Bluray or HD-DVD drives on computers if I don't want to play protected music or movies and don't want DRM with it. This is precisely what I was complaining about. As for non-DRMed Bluray or HD-DVD drives, and non-DRMed computers, just wait and see, RIAA/MPAA will be lobbying to have them banned when they find that their weak protection schemes can be cracked using non-DRMed drives on non-DRMed computers.
You are saying that if I don't want DRM, I don't have to buy a computer, which is precisely the choice I am objecting to.
Since Microsoft has a desktop monopoly, and Microsoft will be forcing everyone to shift to Vista by dropping support for Windows XP in the future, I don't have any other choice.
I have no problem RIAA/MPAA protecting content, but they have no business distorting the entire computer industry and the majority of users around a minority issue. A better way of providing protected media content is to keep DRM within a closed box and off the computer - for example a Bluray or HD-DVD player, which can be controlled by a computer, but will only send unprotected content to the computer itself. Users seem to prefer ipod style embedded media devices anyway. The computer's video output would go through the Bluray or HD-DVD player and then to the HDTV display. Protected content would go direct from the Bluray player to the HDTV. This has a better chance of not being hacked, and if it is, your computer is stable, won't get shut down, and you computer data will be recoverable. Software based DRM doesn't work, unless there is no access to the system, and if anyone disputes this, there are hundreds of thousands of Windows viruses and exploits that say otherwise - Vista DRM will be hacked even if Vista tries to completely deny user access to the system.
what i am saying is dont buy movies or music from the Industries at all. Ya have a life, fuck CD music or lame ass movies with stupid actors ect... Even if they took all the DRM off you would still buy it right?
You would still be puting money in the "mans" pocket... get the fuk over it already. My god you whine on and on. What the hell can you do? NOT buy it or buy it. Even if it didnt have the evil DRM you would NOT buy or buy it. I say shut the fuk up and dont buy it.
You would still be puting money in the "mans" pocket... get the fuk over it already. My god you whine on and on. What the hell can you do? NOT buy it or buy it. Even if it didnt have the evil DRM you would NOT buy or buy it. I say shut the fuk up and dont buy it.
Without the f'ing, this is what I was trying to say.
Nobody is forcing you to buy a damned thing. You don't need movies. You don't NEED a bluray drive. You don't NEED a computer. You don't NEED a lot of things in your life -- cars, houses, video games, sunglasses, hell you don't even really need clothes. Now, society may look upon you differently if you don't wear clothes, so I'd suggest not going to that extreme...
Still, there's nothing that says you need any of this crap you're whining about. Don't want to pay "the evil empire" for stuff you don't need? Well boy do I have a suggestion for you! It's called... DON'T EFFING BUY IT!
You want to make sure the likes of the MPAA and RIAA don't have this kind of control? Then stop spoon-feeding them money. That's all there really is to it. In case you'd like to know -- the last time I bought a DVD or a CD was over seven years ago. And no, I'm not a torrent downloader either... I live five minutes from the office, so I can bear some AM talk radio during the tiny commute. And as for TV watching, the only channels I pay attention to are A&E, Discovery, TLC and Food Network.
Guess what? I'm not buying music or movies, and I'm not downloading them illegally either. And yet somehow, I'm still quite happy with my life.
Give it a shot sometime if you are feeling randy...
Thanks a Albuquerque.
Now I am sure I dont need anymore free and repetitive advices to not buy a DRM enabled hardware and software.
And yes I will keep my clothes, my car, my house and all my other properties because I dont have to identify myself to their manufacturers everytime I use them. Or pay them any extorsive pay-per-use
Now I am sure I dont need anymore free and repetitive advices to not buy a DRM enabled hardware and software.
And yes I will keep my clothes, my car, my house and all my other properties because I dont have to identify myself to their manufacturers everytime I use them. Or pay them any extorsive pay-per-use
This is a detailed and interesting white paper which suggests that if you are keen on playing multi-media, you should avoid Vista. It is a must read for anyone intending to buy graphics/sound cards/BD/HD-DVD drives for use on Vista. (http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html) The author is a well qualified, reputable and independent security expert (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Gutmann) on Vista's DRM issues.
Microsoft saw the need to respond in the media. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6286245.stm
Microsoft saw the need to respond in the media. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6286245.stm
Last edited by a moderator:
Accord1999
Newcomer
There's a lot of mistakes, such as:
-SACD doesn't play on any PC, not just Vista and doesn't output on SPDIF even with HT equipment
-the Samsung 275T supports HDCP and therefore would support protected media with Vista and the right video card
-the Samsung 460PN also supports HDCP (and it was first released in June, 2005 so it's obsolete )
-ASIO support sound cards in Vista already exist
And that's just the first section
Once again, a ton of nonsensical bull that has nothing to do with MS or Vista.
Why is it that everyone is in such a hurry to hate on Microsoft when the problem isn't even coming from them? Once again, I feel the need to type this in all upper case and in big stupid bold print...
ANY OS THAT WILL EVER PLAY "NEW GEN" DRM CONTENT WILL HAVE THESE EXACT SAME ISSUES. PERIOD. END OF F'ING DISCUSSION. If you somehow fail to understand this, then you fail at common sense. All this Nazi-esque DRM enforcement isn't coming from Microsoft, it's coming from the people who developed the media standard. Feel free to hate on DRM all you want, but blame the people who are truly responsible -- Microsoft is doing what is required to allow them to play this content. If and when Apple decides to add this support to OSX, they're going to have the exact same requirements as Vista.
Heh, Defender was one of the first things I disabled just 'cause I felt it'd slow things down.
Depends on what classes software with a "severe" or "high" rating. If its dvd decrypters or p2p programs then it is the worst feature ever. If its spyware infested programs, then its fine by me. Certainly would be useful for people not so good with computers, who complain that their computer is not working and when you get there to sort it out they have every spyware infested program ever made installed.
Come on...you`ve got to be kidding me-now it`s the evil Windows Defender deleting shit?I have a proposition for all of the people spending so much energy with VistaO NO BUY IT!Stick with XP. Can your righteous hatred, and use the new-found saved energy in the gym. It`ll make your life better, longer and fuller. And no one, I mean no one, will delete your barbells without telling you first. There, you`ve just found a new, far better hobby.
You are aware that there is a timer crack in circulation, right?That is quite used by a lot of dudes, right?That installs a friggin driver, which Defender doesn`t quite delete...if it can`t friggin delete a very obvious, known-name, crack-driver, will it really delete your pr0n collection and your magnum opus without telling you?
Hate MS for having chosen to gut Vista in order for it to cater to everyone and their dog, thus leaving out a lot of features that beta-testers said were disorienting or some-such crap. Hate MS for not enforcing Aero and 64-bit support as that would`ve moved the industry forward quite a bit IMHO. Hate MS for the annoying Noob-protection called UAC(which, btw, is easily disabled). Those are legit arguments, far more legit than some arcane bullshit spewed by the newly found cohorts of experts on the web. Sensationalist crap makes hits/rating/whatever, spew some doom and gloom crap and booyah, you`ve got those...screw actually researching or backing up your statements.
O NO BUY IT!Stick with XP. Can your righteous hatred, and use the new-found saved energy in the gym. It`ll make your life better, longer and fuller. And no one, I mean no one, will delete your barbells without telling you first. There, you`ve just found a new, far better hobby.You are aware that there is a timer crack in circulation, right?That is quite used by a lot of dudes, right?That installs a friggin driver, which Defender doesn`t quite delete...if it can`t friggin delete a very obvious, known-name, crack-driver, will it really delete your pr0n collection and your magnum opus without telling you?
Hate MS for having chosen to gut Vista in order for it to cater to everyone and their dog, thus leaving out a lot of features that beta-testers said were disorienting or some-such crap. Hate MS for not enforcing Aero and 64-bit support as that would`ve moved the industry forward quite a bit IMHO. Hate MS for the annoying Noob-protection called UAC(which, btw, is easily disabled). Those are legit arguments, far more legit than some arcane bullshit spewed by the newly found cohorts of experts on the web. Sensationalist crap makes hits/rating/whatever, spew some doom and gloom crap and booyah, you`ve got those...screw actually researching or backing up your statements.
Microsoft may not be behind the media cartel's version of DRM and they may not have a choice if they want that media to play on their os however Microsoft does have DRM of its own, don't get confused here. Anyone remember the Palladium project? Of course now it has been disguised under a multitude of names created by marketing.
There are quite a bit of extra "features," if you will, in Vista not seen in XP that allow MS to monitor and lock down its software, much of which can be considered draconian. The RIAA and the MPAA have their own little plan going while MS is fighting on another front. Much of Vista is designed to take control away from the consumer and add furthur profit enhancing methods beneficial to MS. There is another reason Vista is available in five versions other than to simply offer 'more options' to the consumer.
As far as the oft repeated advice of 'don't like it, don't buy it' should we really sit down and either take it or give up those things entirely? Martin Luther King didn't just sit idle when he didn't like something. When you want change you have to speak up and make it change, don't expect that to happen by being an inactive bystander. Sure money speaks words, but so do words themselves.
I don't much care for the company personally.
There are quite a bit of extra "features," if you will, in Vista not seen in XP that allow MS to monitor and lock down its software, much of which can be considered draconian. The RIAA and the MPAA have their own little plan going while MS is fighting on another front. Much of Vista is designed to take control away from the consumer and add furthur profit enhancing methods beneficial to MS. There is another reason Vista is available in five versions other than to simply offer 'more options' to the consumer.
As far as the oft repeated advice of 'don't like it, don't buy it' should we really sit down and either take it or give up those things entirely? Martin Luther King didn't just sit idle when he didn't like something. When you want change you have to speak up and make it change, don't expect that to happen by being an inactive bystander. Sure money speaks words, but so do words themselves.
pascal said:
I don't much care for the company personally.
Last edited by a moderator:
Subtlesnake
Regular
Can you be specific? Palladium/TCPA just resulted in BitLocker and a new Cryptographic API.
Some folks on this forum seem to be very touchy about any criticism of Microsoft, even when it is legitimate. Despite what a couple ot other posters have claimed, the original article is very specific and very detailed, and accurate:
http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html
is correct of all counts and has been verified point for point by Microsoft. This is not surprising since much of the author's information was pieced together from WinHEC http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html#sources
The author Peter Gutmann is a professor at Auckland University Department of Computer Science with PhD in computer science, and is a security expert. http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/
Since he has no links to commercial interests, I can't see any reason why he should show any bias, and he is certainly well qualified.
Hmmm I wonder if this is why Vista is so resource hungry - it certainly can't be the 3D desktop since Linux runs Compiz/Beryl which does more graphically on a low end desktop with a low end 3D graphics card without a problem.
Here is another confirmation. Vista it seems is bad for games.
Here is another http://forums.gametrailers.com/showthread.php?t=64419
and another http://www.keeforce.com/events.cfm?eID=58
and another http://techgage.com/article/windows_vista_gaming_performance_reports
Here is an article referring to a Microsoft "blog" confirming the original article.
The issue of whether DRM is morally right or not has been thrashed to death in other places. However that is not the thread I started is about. I douldn't care less about whether others want to pay for protected movies or music.
My concern is whether I am going to have to pay for cripling my PC or cripple/disable other content even if I dont want to play protected movies on my PC. My concern is also whether it is worth spending money buying an expensive graphics card and HDMC monitor only to find they are turned into paperweights later because the driver has been revoked because the driver has been revoked and the manufacturer can't be bothered to update it - after all why should they bother to keep it updated once it goes out of production and they aren't going to make any more money out of it? Should I pay to have my PC crippled so that I can watch movies on it, or should I get a closed box like a dedicated movie player or a PS3 which don't need to be crippled because the content handling hardware is completely inacessible to all user space applications, unlike a PC where hardware access is shared between protected content and user applications and relies on software lockout based on signing drivers and revoking drivers that have security holes. Bear in mind also that HD movie encryption is not enforced yet, so the issues Gutmann was talking about will get worse when it is enforced. Another question is whether DRM will be abandoned later because of customer hostility, and anti-trust violation issues (itunes has been declared illegal in Norway and France because it falls foul of competition laws hence Steve Jobs sudden change of heart) - are we paying money for this technology which is going to be defunct later. http://www.theregister.com/2007/02/09/steve_gordon_drm/
http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2490
This is a computer graphics forum, and I would have thought these would be the kind of thing that might concern others on this forum as well.
Accord1999
Newcomer
and very inaccurate, what with numerous mistakes in just the first section.
A Microsoft hate would be enough.
Just like Vista.
And yet with decent drivers like AMD's Catalyst 7.1, you might even get a speed increase in Vista.
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/windows_vista_performance_amd_catalyst_7.1/page4.asp
There are many things happening in the background within Vista. There is a process and attached service that continually runs to make hardware and software (more specifically driver) checks on a regular basis and which is independant of the already present DRM checks; they cannot be disabled without crippling the entire os. The sole purpose of these is to make sure the os has been "authenticated" and "activated." Several people have been presented with the activation screen after simply updating their motherboard drivers and the same can be said if you replace a significant piece of hardware or the system determines you have activated one too many times. Microsoft will and has claimed that these and many other attributes of WGA, Volume Activation, DRM, etc. have no effect on system performance but anyone who knows how computers work will realize that anything that scans and checks will use up cycles and memory, especially multiple instances at a ridiculous 30 times a second. Is it any wonder they finally decided to clean up the D3D api just for Vista and add a rendered UI to offload much of the work to the GPU and graphics memory? It took a big following of Firefox to finally get Microsoft to update a piece of their software after years of sitting idle afterall. Whether or not it would be difficult to port DX10 to XP as Microsoft suggests, I suspect it would run even better in XP than it ever will in Vista as long as the latter has to deal with all the extras.
