Longhorn to Require Monitor-Based DRM 1266
Mr_Silver writes "Engadget has an interesting article regarding a new feature in Longhorn entitled PVP-OPM (Protected Video Path - Output Protection Management) which detects the capabilities of the display devices you are using and manages how (and if at all) content is sent to it. In short, this means that if Longhorn detects that your monitor is not "secure" enough, then your premium video content won't play on it until you buy one that is. Who gets to decide? The content providers of course." From the article: "So what will happen when you try to play premium content on your incompatible monitor? If you're "lucky", the content will go through a resolution constrictor. The purpose of this constrictor is to down-sample high-resolution content to below a certain number of pixels. The newly down-sampled content is then blown back up to match the resolution of your monitor. This is much like when you shrink a JPEG and then zoom into it. Much of the clarity is lost. The result is a picture far fuzzier than it need be."
Outstanding (Score:5, Insightful)
*sigh* (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Outstanding (Score:5, Insightful)
Anyone who doesn't care, which is going to be a lot of people. They'll buy a new PC, which will merely happen to come with this kind of restrictive DRM. But it'll come with an appropriate monitor too, so they'll never notice.
I'm cynical.. (Score:2, Insightful)
Or maybe would it finally pursuade people to migrate onto Mac? (I don't dare to say "linux" yet).
The Solution without a Problem... (Score:3, Insightful)
The solution, as always, is simple. Vote with your wallet for either (a) DRM solutions that make sense, or (b) for solutions that don't take advantage of the richly enabled DRM fabic available to content producers.
If I produce content, I should be able to decide what's done with it (for a reasonable time, anyway). If I want it to be one-peek-per-customer, that's my right, it's my content.
You...just shouldn't be stupid as to buy it
Re:*sigh* (Score:5, Insightful)
TV-out (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Outstanding (Score:4, Insightful)
The problem is, people won't KNOW what it is. They may see "DRM security features" or something like that, and think it is something that actually benefits them.
I know people who think MS products are the bees knees, just because of tech buzzwords and jargon. They'll buy Longhorn and wonder why it sucks - just like Windows XP, ME, 98..
Re:Outstanding (Score:2, Insightful)
May I introduce you to OSX. It even runs on cheap intel hardware......
Choices (Score:2, Insightful)
Company's who wish to provide Hi-Def content to PCs won't want to do it if it gets stolen/copied easily. With a secure copy-protection mechanism, far more companies will be willing to offer content.
This will create a large marketplace with lots of competition because it won't be just the big companies that can swallow the piracy loss entering the market.
So your choice isn't really between viewing this hi-def content as you wish or viewing it on a secure setup. It's a choice between content or no content.
Wouldn't you rather have at least the option of content that you wouldn't normally have?
So please, stop crying that Microsoft is out to get you and that they're infringing on some rights you think you have. Since when did the consumer of a service have the right to dictate how the company in question provides the service? You either use the service, or you don't... if it sucks and nobody uses it, the company will change the service or go out of business. Simple as that.
Microsoft will be creating MORE opportunities for services and products that can't really exist without their technology.
Simple solution (Score:3, Insightful)
Create your own content and sell it to others that with no restrictions.
Maybe if they'd have spent their time wisely.... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I'm cynical.. (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:ummmm (Score:3, Insightful)
Kind of like how now I can play my DRM'd music through my lineout and record it on line-in in any format I choose.
It will be like DeCSS all over again but this time instead of DVD players it will be monitors.
WTF? (Score:3, Insightful)
I think this is pure idiocy. And people thought Apple moving to Intel based processors because of built-in DRM was a step over the edge...
Microsoft making a spectacle of us. (Score:4, Insightful)
"we're not gonna take it. da da da da da-da da. we're not gonna take it da da da da da-da da"
This is a reason to buy Longhorn!? (Score:5, Insightful)
WinFS pretty much seems indefinately stalled.
Avalon seems to be delayed until after release.
The new shell will not be available until the Server release.
But the crippling DRM feature that requires me to have an MPAA approved monitor to get "premium" video quality is right on schedule.
Re:Outstanding (Score:4, Insightful)
I doubt that. It could run on cheap intel hardware, but Apple will restrict to expensive Apple hardware, which consists of cheap Intel hardware.
-Adam
DRMed to death (Score:3, Insightful)
It's one thing when joe-consumer downloads a song from the Microsoft music store, and can't copy it to his iPod. It's one thing when joe-consumer buys a DVD, and has a hard time making a VHS copy because his kids keep scratching the crap out her DVDs. Both of these things the average consumer accepts will not work, because consumers are used to different technologies not playing nicely together. They don't know about DRM, but they do know that they could never get those photos aunt Kathy sent to print on their printer, and figure this is more of the same.
If Morgan Freeman has his way, though, and movies are delivered to our homes by internet, consumers will be calling tech support in droves; "I can't watch my movie? What's wrong?" And those consumers will not be happy when they're told the 19" LCD monitor they bought two years ago needs to be replaced. Consumers DO expect to be able to watch a movie they download.
I think, ultimately, this is a nail in the coffin of the unborn movies-by-internet industry, which is a shame.
Re:*sigh* (Score:4, Insightful)
Keeping an honest person honest is like keeping a tall person tall. The DRM may as well not be on there in the first place. The "honest" folk will do with their content what they would anyway, just as the DRM would allow them to (i.e. not distribute it on a large scale) , and the determined users will crack the DRM and do whatever they want with the content.
This stuff is so basic, why invest time and money in an inherently flawed system when they could *gasp* be pushing the frontiers of technology and inventing some truly useful stuff for us users.
Audio DRM (Score:3, Insightful)
Vote With Your Wallet! (Score:3, Insightful)
Unfortunately, there is such a thing as marketers who create markets where there is none and desire where there should be none. If MS markets this correctly, people will want to give up their freedom.
Re:extreme case of DRM (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Choices (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Outstanding (Score:5, Insightful)
They may see "DRM security features"
I can see the sales people in computer stores tell their customers that these security features make surfing the web and everything safe.
I know it will happen.
Not likely (Score:5, Insightful)
As far as Linux, expect that it won't work at all unless someone can manage to find a crack to unprotect content.
Re:Outstanding (Score:2, Insightful)
But Microsoft is like the Federal Government of computing. The Government is always expanding its power over people and for some reason people continue to vote for the politicians that do this.
Some of the reasons people vote this way: apathy; perceived lack of alternative choice; promises that the increased powers will aid security; other positive actions by/attributes of the politician.
(Microsoft even releases Home and Pro editions of operating systems that are the same in concept and principle and most of the code, and just have different sets of features enabled. It gives the users a choice to make when buying a computer, a radio box to click. Remind anyone of... *begin voice* THE TWO PARTY POLITICAL SYSTEM??? *end voice*)
Pardon my metaphor that has probably overstayed its welcome by this point, but I do think that it provides an understanding of why people stick with a software company that occasionally seems more intent on pleasing other companies than its customers.
Re:*sigh* (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Choices (Score:1, Insightful)
You just answered your own question in the sentence that followed:
You either use the service, or you don't... if it sucks and nobody uses it, the company will change the service or go out of business.
Consumers dictate with their wallets!
Re:Outstanding (Score:4, Insightful)
The world, and Americans in particular, seems addicted to corporation-controlled entertainment, be it music, video, or sports. There are alternatives, but I think you're overly optimistic to think that the public will overcome its addiction simply in reaction to this particular authoritarian measure.
Trying to plug the "analog" hole... (Score:3, Insightful)
Of course, you might have your "trusted" monitor plugged in and simply sniff the signal (via a little box between the monitor and the computer that only "listens" to the outgoing analog signals).
This is not a "real" solution, but yet another clue barrier... So now, if you want to build a VGA video capture device, you need to make it just a pass through that passivly observers and does not participlate as if it was a monitor... Simple.
Re:Outstanding (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:*sigh* (Score:3, Insightful)
And DRM is different in that it attempts to prevent all "average Joes" from just having a look at your stuff (and taking a picture) without actually needing to steal it. Where DRM falls down is that the "determined criminals" will get the picture of the stuff and give copies to all the average Joes, maybe for free, maybe just really cheap.
So, for DRM to be effective, it must be able to keep out the determined criminals. And so far, at least, it has failed to do that.Re:Outstanding (Score:5, Insightful)
Or anyone who doesn't know - ie, pretty much all non-geeks. You think MS is going to plainly and clearly announce this 'feature' on the box (yeah, yeah, who gets Windows in a box)?
Re:Choices (Score:2, Insightful)
What this means is (Score:5, Insightful)
What this means is, WE HAVE TO TELL THEM.
People aren't going to refrain from buying Longhorn. People in a year or so literally won't have a choice; if you want a new computer you'll be buying Longhorn. However, we can make an impact on the secure monitors. It wouldn't be that hard to convince people (friends, family, neighbors, etc) that the new secure monitors and video cards are to blame (which they are, because if the secure monitors aren't picked up then the feature won't be used by content providers). Explain the feature enough that they'd understand it-- perhaps explain that the movie companies and microsoft want to stop you from doing certain things with your computer, and they can only do it if people buy these monitors-- them that and try to get them to pick some other brand.
Longhorn is unstoppable. Microsoft can and will do literally anything it wants. However a consumer backlash against the feature itself is possible as long as the hardware is targetted. Unfortunately I fear the American consumer is so weak right now no one will bother to try.
Re:Outstanding (Score:1, Insightful)
Linux users are used to not being given access to media (thanks in large part to Apple), so we'll get by just fine.
Re:The Solution without a Problem... (Score:5, Insightful)
Let me be the first to disagree with this comment. "Content", whether it be audio, video, art or whatever is a consumer product just like any other. Just because it is digital, does not allow the producer to decide how their product is used. DRM is setting a VERY dangerous precedent. Digital media is sort of unchartered waters for everyone at the moment. So its easy to fall in the trap, and accept these new restrictions as "normal". But what happens when similar principles start spreading to other industries ?
Imagine this...
Want to buy the new Harry Potter book ? Sure ! By buying the book however, you are implicitely agreeing to this EULA, which states that you cannot discuss the contents of this book (plot, characters, ending) with anyone else. After all, the author of the book would not want you to ruin the experience for everyone else. Its only fair !
Want to buy this new GM car ? Sure. But GM is now forcing you to only buy GM branded gaz, oil, tires, etc. Oh and forget about after-market parts. It is now illegal to replace any parts of your car with non-GM sanctionned parts. After all GM made the car, they should have a right to decide how the car is used afterwards, no ?
The new "digital media" era has no right to change the basic producer/consumer relationship which have been established in the last hundreds of years.
Oh and you can try using your "if you dont' like it dont' buy it line". But when huge conglomerates (think sony, bmg, microsoft, etc) control both the content and HOW the content is delivered (or are in a position to influence companies), consumers don't really have a choice and lose out in the end. Do you really think that linux will ever become widespread if you can't play music and watch movies on it without breaking the law ?!
I think we should all stop being so naive...
Re:Will it stop a semi-serious pirate? (Score:5, Insightful)
The keyword is encrypted. It's not just a matter of 'figuring out the protocols', it's also necessary to defeat encryption that is specifically designed to stop folks who are trying to do what you describe.
Is it impossible? No. But it's a lot more complicated then just downloading the protocol, taking a scope to the wires, and hacking together an interface.
Re:*sigh* (Score:2, Insightful)
It's not either/or - it's a sliding scale.
A person who might not rob a bank might lift a $5 bill found in a friend's kitchen.
Whats the point? (Score:5, Insightful)
For instance, they made ATRAC as a secure format for digital music, we all still use mp3. They made
So who wants to bet that this DRM will die still born along with the rest of the attempts to restrict media?
Re:GNUstep (Score:3, Insightful)
Now, there are some people who are going to say, "But I can already check my email with GNUMail!", and to them I say, "Yes." But the fact remains that the NeXT-style vertical menus are too powerful for the average user. Apple realized that, and ditched them. While it is claimed that horizontal menus can be used when using bundles, it is far beyond the capabilities of your typical user to make such a change.
While it would be fantastic if GNUstep and Linux were able to replace Mac OS X for most people, that just isn't the case, unfortunately. They'll still be stuck dealing with crippled Longhorn.
Re:What this means is (Score:5, Insightful)
Problem is, they won't listen. Society tends to be fairly apathetic about this sort of thing.
While not an entirely similar instance, I have been pushing all my friends and family to boycott the RIAA and MPAA based on their recent tactics. Some of them are even file sharers.. Yet they don't care. They will happily shell out 18 bucks for the latest pop CD, even though I have explained to them time and time again that the artist makes practically nothing from CD sales..
I hate being surrounded by apathy. Some solutions are incredibly simple, yet people aren't willing to make just a little extra effort to do the RightThing(tm).
What's next ... (Score:3, Insightful)
First they DRM'd the software... (Score:3, Insightful)
and I did not speak outbecause I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak outbecause I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak outbecause I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me.
First they DRM'd the software and I did not speak out because I used non-DRM'd software.
Then they came DRM'd the OS and I did not speak out because I stuck to non-DRM'd OS.
Then they DRM'd the firmware and I did not speak out because I used non-DRM'd firmware.
Then they DRM'd the hardware and there was no where to run my non-DRM'd firmware, OS and software.
--Me
Re:*sigh* (Score:2, Insightful)
Keeping in theme with your analogy of a locked home. DRM on the locks on my home would allow the home owners association or city government to control when I could go into my house. I agree completely that artists/musicians/whatever should be able to reasonably control their works, but at the same time I bought the CD. As long as I don't distribute the contents of that CD to anyone else why should the musician care. I am listening aren't I?
On paper DRM is a nice idea but no one (to my knowledge) as developed a reasonable way in which to implement it.
Re:Outstanding (Score:5, Insightful)
Not outstanding (Score:4, Insightful)
Unfortunately the choice the public will see is likely to be between:
- Buy Longhorn, and be able to view this premium video content.
- Run Linux/MacOS/BSD and not be able to view this content.
Sure, it may be possible for someone to crack the encrypted path, and distribute unrestricted versions online. But you can't exactly advertise that in your marketing campaign, whereas Microsoft can advertise this premium content as only being available on Longhorn.I think this can only hurt other OSes.
Re:WTF? (Score:2, Insightful)
As far as Apple moving to intel processors because of built-in DRM... prove it. The DRM thing has been speculation, nothing more. Nowhere has anyone with any "insider knowledge" claimed that DRM was the primary reason to switch to intel. Better mobile processors, better price/performance, more frequent updates... these are reasonable reasons to switch to Intel. Do you honestly think Apple has been maintaining an Intel build of OS X for the last couple of years because they secretly knew Intel was going to add DRM to their chips?
I find it funny that the anti-MS people on slashdot cry foul every time their Redmond nemesis uses FUD, but have no problem at all using their own.
Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:RTA: It's not just Microsoft (Score:4, Insightful)
In ten years, through the DMCA, it will be illegal to have an operating system that does not enforce DRM. Anything that does not enforce DRM will be considered a circumvention.
Re:What this means is (Score:5, Insightful)
Both the problem and its draconian solutions depend on apathy.
Here's why this is a GOOD thing: (Score:5, Insightful)
Second of all, this means that in order to access their movie content and so on, you'll have to have one of the "special" monitors, but the system will only work through Windows -- it's primarily a software solution which looks for the monitor feature, and fucks up the imagery if it doesn't find it. So, again, Linux remains unaffected.
Third, if we Linux guys decided to buy something like a future game console or set-top box (we wouldn't run a Windows computer per se, of course, because we're already wonderfully served by our Linux boxen) it would probably have this built-in, and we'd be able to do what we wanted with it.
I'd say it's not a bad idea overall.
Re:Outstanding (Score:5, Insightful)
For instance...right now the average Joe would be more apt to buy a Windows base machine because this is the one that "runs the stuff he wants" like games and other stuff. I've talked to many people to see if they would switch to OSX or Linux and the first things out of their mouths are "but does will it run _____". Once they understand that DRM will constrict everything they do like "hey man, that machine you got if you get a movie and you don't have the right monitor, the movie will look like shit...you have to buy a pre-approved monitor yo which costs more yo" (I threw in the "yo's"...average Joe's use that today).
I don't see this flying well with consumers at all. Because it may come with the appropriate monitor for that manufacturer, it's the CONTENT people that get to decide what is an appropriate monitor. "Oh, we have a partnership with Sony and you have an NEC monitor...sorry, downsampling for you!"
Re:Outstanding (Score:5, Insightful)
All the good stuff they pull out of longhorn, then they keep crap like this? Screw them. The day it stops making my life easier to have a Windows machine lying around is the last day I'll ever use it.
Re:Outstanding (Score:3, Insightful)
The only way to reduce piracy is to provide content in reasonably priced timly manner. While it'll never get rid of piracy, as it seems to be one of the givens like poverty, crime, war etc. All are worthy goals to reduce but in no way will they ever be elimated, and by trying to eliminate them most often you end up making them worse as is the situation with copyright infringement now.
Re:extreme case of DRM (Score:4, Insightful)
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/pro/ [apple.com]
Apple's crazy-stupid when it comes to QuickTime Pro.
Full Screen should NOT be a professional feature!
Re:Outstanding (Score:3, Insightful)
Apple is all about convincing some people that the exact same Taiwanese components are worth twice as much when they have the Apple brand on them. Usually this is done by coloring the case white; in your case, the natural tendency of people to believe that a more expensive product must be better made seems to have done the trick.
I swear the instinct to buy the more expensive option and feel proud of it is one of mankind's strongest instincts. It's the sole reason I have a $1000000 bicycle. It's the sole reason for just about any buying decision my wife ever makes, which is why we have organic milk from Jersey cows fed on Supagrass(tm) in the fridge.
Re:Will it stop a semi-serious pirate? Yes. (Score:2, Insightful)
The big problem in terms of maintaining freedom over your own computer is the BIOS. Nowadays it is compressed and encrypted, so if one day it started refusing to load non-authorised operating systems you could easily have a situation where only longhoard would load, it wouldn't let you load drivers or even read the decoding software instructions to simulate it, etc. So that's the key piece, since if that goes DRM-only then the only options are to a) hack the os or b) emulate the entire computer. But to do (b) you'll have to read keys, etc from hardware which can be made extremely difficult.
Of course hacking longhoard will be easy, for now, but ultimately that's a losing proposition. So people with the skill and that care should contribute to the open bios project [openbios.info].
Re:Outstanding (Score:3, Insightful)
Apple = expensive. You don't really get much besides the hype for the extra money.
Re:Outstanding (Score:5, Insightful)
True, if by "morons" you mean "people who want to get work done with their computer, rather than spend hours fighting with it to get it configured properly".
Re:Awesome ! (Score:3, Insightful)
If you're the kind of ninny that throws things away and buys a new one even though the old
one was still working fine then Congratulations! You're part of the problem.
Not everybody does that, believe it or not. Even if you feel the need to constantly stay on
the upgrade treadmill, you could always donate your old stuff or sell it at a garage sale.
Now, there won't be much use of the old tubes at all since they won't be compatible with the
newest software.
But I know, I know, suggesting that any corporation be responsible for the damage it does
means I'm a communist, or a terrorist, or an America-hater or whatever the new buzzword is.
But will it run ____? (Score:5, Insightful)
Generally, when one asks "Will it run ____?" the blank is filled in with some commercial piece of software, usually a game or a productivity app. And the answer will always be yes: Photoshop, MS Office, Half Life 83, etc. will all run beautifully on this. Probably even the old versions will, since they're not video players. The same will apply to all of the most common media players; in fact, Windows Media Player will run right there.
The most obvious question from the slightly more insightful user is, "Will it play my existing DVDs?", and that's the biggest question mark. If the answer turns out to be "No", if somebody upgrades their laptop and discovers the next time that they board an airplane that they have to read the in-flight magazine rather than watch Tomb Raider 9 3/4, then you're going to see some serious, serious backlash.
I'm going to assume that MS knows that, and so existing DVD formats will probably play exactly as they do now (which does have various protections anyway, though they're easily bypassed.)
Instead, I expect that this will apply primarily to new content (or rather, newly-coded content). For that, question would be "But will it run NFF (New Fangled Format)?" and the answer is "Yes". The flip side, "Will NFF run on my existing box" will be "No", but I think that user backlash on that is smaller than you might expect. They could take it as an opportunity to switch to Linux/OS X/PDP 11, but as long as they're buying a new computer, they could buy one with Longhorn, which will run NFF along with all of their old programs.
The user is kept on the upgrade treadmill because at each step the logical choice will be "forward" rather than "right" or "left". That's partly because they expect that a side-step will just put them on a different treadmill, which is a whole different debate.
So I don't expect this to cause a mass defection from Windows, at least not by itself. Other factors (cheaper Macs, improved Linux, the stunning revival of the Timex Sinclair) will make it hard to tease out whether I'm right or wrong, so maybe all this is moot, but, well, it's Slashdot and I get to shoot my mouth off anyway.
Re:The Solution without a Problem... (Score:4, Insightful)
Obviously you're entitled to your opinion. But let's just be clear that this is not the approach taken by US (or most other nations, AFAIK) copyright law. The entire concept of copyright was based on the idea that content is "different". A book is a product, a CD is a product, a painting is a product. But story, the music, the image, respectively, are not products. They are information. Information can be reproduced with trivial effort. But transcribing a usable, re-usable, distributable copy of the information was, until the advent of the VCR, prohibitively difficult/tedious. Possible, yes, but tedious. What this meant was that few people actually attempted to do such, to circumvent the creator's right of sole reproduction and distribution (AKA copyright). But when they did, there was a legal channel by which the creator could protect his right. "Unfair" forms of reproduction are what copyright was designed to protect. How can an artist make a living from his work if he has to compete with someone else to sell it who doesn't need to spend any time practicing, composing, or performing, and instead can sit and crank out copies all day long.
The digital age brought about the triviality of reproduction and distribution of information. Which means that virtually anyone can now do so with virtually no effort, or even technical knowledge. You don't need to buy heavy equipment or expensive ad space in order to copy and distribute. But that doesn't change the fact that each instance of this is a violation of the creator's sole right to reproduction and distribution. Each instance is an infringement of the copyright.
But that shouldn't be the final word. One must keep in mind the spirit of the law. Was it ever intended to prevent people from obtaining a copy and making use of that copy as many times as they want, in whatever ways they want, short of copying it for further distribution? Arguably, no. I would argue that any attempt to claim that a consumer should pay for each and every use, or even just multiple copies for different presentation devices, is unabashed money-grubbing. It is equivalent, in my mind, to an artist claiming grounds to sue you for reading his book aloud to your children-- or even just to yourself-- in the privacy of your home. Or an author claiming grounds to sue you for playing his song, on your piano, alone, again in the privacy of your home..... Unless you've paid for the license to do so.
I don't think there's a valid argument that this is the type of profiteering that copyright was meant to protect. So the next question is, should we redesign copyright law to serve this purely commercial/economic purpose, as the **AA's seem to want? Or do we lobby to get back to the spirit of the law, and renew the principles of fair use?
It should be obvious by this point where I stand, at least.
Re:Welcome Capitalism (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, the worst enemy of capitalism is capitalism. What that means is that as MS continues to become less and less paltable, competitors will take their place.
People are much more willing to engage in the little 'r' revolution, than to start over with a new system
The unencubered nature of OSS, and the much more limited DRM of apple-like systems will simply be another feature that savvy salespeople will use to push competitors products.
Nobody actually seems to have stopped to think (Score:3, Insightful)
It's evident that there are plenty of people who are now less likely to buy Longhorn *looks around*, but surely making your product unattractive is not really any way to be a capitalistic market gorilla.
So - there must be an upside to this somewhere. Maybe there is, I hate the idea of DRM, but think of the iPod/iTunes. All those nifty litttle DRM devices suddenly spawned an online music market. Maybe when there is a large market of DRM supporting desktops out there, we'll suddenly get some other legitimate services - video on demand, software on demand? Not sure I like it myself, but surely you can all devote a little more thought to it other than "MS Baaaaad"
Re:Outstanding (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Outstanding (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Outstanding (Score:5, Insightful)
This is Yet Another Form of DRM, which in general is a Bad Thing, IMHO. I always hated CD keys for any software that could be used offline (like and OS, or most non-MMO games). When Windows XP went to not only requiring a key, but also requiring an online activation, as well as not letting me change my hardware too much without checking in, that sealed the deal. I only use Linux on all my machines now.
But as to your point: if you'd told people in 1991 that their OS wouldn't let them install without a secret key, and without going online to verify their system, they would've said market forces would prevent such a crappy product from being a success. If you'd told them that it would analyze your hardware, and only let you upgrade a certain number of times or in a certain way before it forced you to check back in with the company who wrote it, they would've called you insane. But here we are, and people are buying it like there is no tomorrow.
So, as much as I'd like to think the consumers will rise up and say "No more! I want to decide when I upgrade my hardware, I want to decide if I have to contact Microsoft, and I want to decide where, when and how I enjoy media I pay for!", there is no indication that it will ever happen.
Of course, I feel the same about iTunes and Apple. Every around here lauds Apple's success at making DRM "work", but I stand by, thinking "It only works if you use an iPod, and if you run Windows or OS X, and only if you want Apple to dictate which devices can play your music." Sure, there is Crossover Office that pseudo-supports iTunes under Linux, and there is JHymn, so you can crack all the DRM on every file you download, but c'mon - why support a product that goes out of its way NOT to support you?
And really, it is kind of sad, because it doesn't do anything to stop pirates (all the songs on iTunes are available on peer to peer networks already, so what are we trying to prevent?), and just hinders me from having a Linux client, playing the songs on my JetAudio X5 or my Neuros, or streaming them to my MythTV box in the living room so we can listen to the music during dinner.
I'm not a huge Star Wars 1-3 fan, but I saw all of them in the theaters. The best line in all 3 was Padme's line in the Senate Hall:
"So this is how liberty dies, with thunderous applause..."
And so it is.
Copy it once, copy it a million times (Score:5, Insightful)
No, copying movies the first time becomes a restricted occupation. Once a single unencrypted copy exists, then making a million more is no more difficult than it is today.
Whip out your favorite P2P client, and search for some copyrighted video. Do you see a hundred different rips made by each of the hundred different people sharing a copy? No, you see one or two of the best rips, each with hundreds of identical copies shared, in part because the swarming download protocols and hashing algorithms fundamentally encourage that behavior.
So what difference will in-monitor DRM make? Instead of having a few zealous groups using software to rip tons of movies that are then shared by millions of people, we'll have a few zealous groups using hardware to rip tons of movies that are then shared by hundreds of millions of people.
Wait - why will there be more people sharing these rips? Because most people will own some of the billions of non-DRM-capable monitors in existance, and the moron DRM-using publishers will have thus made it impossible for them to play a full-quality copy of these videos unless they have an illegal copy. Publishers couldn't do anything more stupid if they put a "Download free movies on P2P! It's the best!" advertisement at the start of every show!
Re:Outstanding (Score:1, Insightful)
monitor.
That's nice. Why don't people just buy new monitors for $200-$300 that have
the capability of displaying the content?
The problem people miss here is that if you do have that capable display (any
decent TV for example), the content plays fine. To hell with restrictions if
you have the right hardware; the high definiton video is available to you.
Why is that always simply glossed over in favour of discussing the down side?
Neko
Re:Outstanding (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:This is a reason to buy Longhorn!? (Score:5, Insightful)
Windows 2000 is plenty good for anyone these days. It's a shame, that 5 years later there's no compelling reason to upgrade.
Re:Will it stop a semi-serious pirate? (Score:2, Insightful)
I believe there are devices that actually could do that - they are commonly refered to as "digital cameras"
Seriously, any image visible to human eye could be copied - this kind of "protection" is dead by design.
Re:First Virus to take advantage of this... (Score:1, Insightful)
Talk about legacy support (Score:3, Insightful)
It's not enough that the majority of installed PCs probably don't have the horsepower to run Longhorn, now M$ wants to force people to buy new peripherals. I hate to compare them to Apple, but I was using the old OS 9 on an old computer that wouldn't run OS X. So, I bought a used B&W G3, plugged in my ADB keyboard and a beige, Performa-era monitor, and installed OS X 10.3 which runs flawlessly. The OS was literally more expensive than the computer.
M$, on the other hand, would force me to buy a new monitor in addition to a faster computer to view content that I'VE ALREADY PAID FOR? Once again, I'm having difficulty seeing Windows as a value added product.
Re:Outstanding (Score:3, Insightful)
Hold a $999 Apple Ibook up to a $999 Hateway El Cheapo Breakum 1000 model from Circuit Sh!tty. Pretty dissimilar, huh?
There IS something to be said for good design and quality control.
Re:Outstanding (Score:5, Insightful)
For instance, I have a G4 tower. It's a fantastic piece of design work, from a technical standpoint. If you want to service the hardware, you just power the machine off, pull the ring-pull, and the side drops open. All the cards are laid out there for you to tinker with. You don't even have to unplug anything. When you're done, lift the side back up and it clicks into place. Push the power button and you're ready to go.
I build PCs, and even though I'm picky about components I've not managed to find anything remotely as good in the PC world. (In fact, if anyone knows of a PC case that's as good, that'll take 3 hard drives, please let me know.) As for consumer PCs--forget it. I had to service a friend's HP Compaq machine, and it was a piece of crap. Cheap plastic, awkward to get to the RAM and drives.
Will this affect 500+ GB .avi Video Libraries? (Score:2, Insightful)
Not I, of course. Just sayin'...
Re:Outstanding (Score:4, Insightful)
That's why Windows Media Player doesn't get used by a lot of people.
Re:Awesome ! (Score:2, Insightful)
I think you answerd you're own question. B&W tv screens is a poor analogy, since they don't look better than a color tv. Maybe when CRT's look as good as LCD's (according to these die-hard CRT fans), then they'll switch, but when the CRT works better for them, why should they be forced to "upgrade" to something that's less useful?
As an aside, I don't really think you can blame MS , but then again, I don't think CRT is dead quite yet either.
DRM-stripping-dongle... (Score:1, Insightful)
Computer: "Hey monitor, are you DRM safe?"
*dongle intercepts and responds on monitor's behalf*
Dongle: "Yes, I'm the new S0ny SE770LCDRM!"
Computer: "Oh, ok, then in that case, here's your
unrestricted HD video feed."
*dongle passes video feed through to untainted hardware*
Besides, you could probably implement it as a hacked device driver, the method by which many hardware dongle software protection schemes have been circumvented.
I'm not scared. I'm bored. I've got my IDE open and my soldering iron warming up as we speak. And I doubt I'm alone on this.
Just look at the superior copy protection of modern video gaming consoles... *cough* modchip *cough*
It seems like all these copy protection efforts do is create niche businesses designed to bypass them. I better file to get a tax license...
Pretty soon, computers will not have a video port, and they'll be bundled with the monitor as an all-in-one unit. Maybe Apple will come out with this... *cough, again*
That's just my stream of thoughts...
-@
That strong instinct... (Score:1, Insightful)
You're absolutely right, it is one of man's strongest instincts right alongside the need to eat, survive and reproduce. It is fundamentally built into the design of human beings by God who designed us with an inherent need to worship, but since He also gave us free will, some of us will choose to worship Him, which was His intent, but unfortunately most of us prefer to worship things instead, and our pride also makes us want to desire to be "worshipped" by our fellow man in the form of impressing them with our buying power and extravagent tastes. What a bunch of depraved losers we actually are. We should all make it a point to spend our money more wisely and if we want to impress someone with our wealth and tastes, we should instead brag about how many how many people we've helped with our money instead of what toys we've bought to gratify ourselves.
Who IS the customer? (Score:2, Insightful)
The whole thing is a war of egos over a market which doesn't exist. Who really wants to intercept video going to their monitor anyway? DVD sales are dropping in general because the sad reality is that for all the movies produced in a year, damn few are worth watching once, never mind more than once. The whole idea probably stems from the idea that if you don't prove you are defending your copyright, you lose it. This is just another frontier on which you have to prove you are defending your copyright. I think it's pretty obvious from X-Box sales that Microsoft isn't going to own the living room in our lifetimes. So they should develop a better strategy for holding the office before somebody makes Linux palatable enough for the masses.
Big OS is the same damn thing as Big government. To get the 1% you want you have to finance the 99% you don't want. If Microsoft is going to keep developing for the interests of people other than the end user, they should really just give the OS out. There has to be an end to how much you can force people to buy upgrades that have nothing they want in them. You may be able to mess with ignorance of the home user, but small business owners tend to get pissed being charged something for nothing over and over. I know a lot of shops that still use old Windows variants and even a few DOS shops. They don't even think about it until they try and add a workstation and get some crap like XP pre-installed.
When DRM starts really hitting users in the face, they will look for alternatives, or just look away. None of this amounts to a serious business model for content providers, because they really haven't been putting nearly as much effort into the content as they have into the delivery systems. Their sloth is coming home to roost, and all the DRM in the world isn't going to save them.
Re:Cost/benefit (Score:3, Insightful)
The problem now is that people have been educated, and don't care.
I don't know how you fight apathy. Education doesn't work. Scare tactics don't work. Protests don't work. Maybe it's time for some good old-fashioned violence, as at least people still seem to pay attention to that, although even that seems to be losing its motivational value.
Re:Outstanding (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't see it working like this. When I was traveling in China, I heard MSFT's FUD being spouted by some teenagers there: "I'd never buy an iPod because it's so limited. Sure, it can play MP3's, and it's a lot nicer than the other players, but it isn't compatible with [DRM'ed WMA files] like everything else. I don't know why Apple doesn't have that level of compatibility."
This is just Microsoft abusing its monopoly power again, to do something that no ethical person would advocate, and something that no other company could organize. And the scary thing is that the consumers are so ignorant, they'll probably think that everyone else is the bad guy for not going along with it.
Jasin NataelRe:Outstanding (Score:5, Insightful)
the capability of displaying the content?
Are you fucking kidding?
I need to landfill my current monitor and spend an additional $200 - $300 (or signifcantly more if it's a good one) just to watch certain content?
100% bullshit.
Re:The Solution without a Problem... (Score:1, Insightful)
The license is premised on the assumption that without the permission it grants you would not be allowed to use the jig. But that seems highly implausible. If you reject the license completely, then wouldn't the default position be that there you are with your new Jig Master Template that you just purchased? And by doctrine of First Sale, you can do whatever you want with it, including throwing it in the garbage, making a jig, making a jog or a tig or a git, breaking into 4 pieces and inserting one of them into your ass, making a basket out of it, or anything else you want.
Have they ever attempted to enforce these terms?
Re:Outstanding (Score:5, Insightful)
Windows Longhorn - now utilizes monitor-based DRM and advanced image resamnpling controls!
and no one would have a clue what it meant, but would get it anyway (or preinstalled, yes)
An anti-linux mechanism? (Score:3, Insightful)
"You may want to include lots of undocumented interfaces for you video card, as that will make it easier to certify your card. Try to conceal the exact functionality from the dirty Linux hippie thieves."
However, I haven't used Linux in a long time, having switched to Macs. Perhaps obfuscation of video hardware is now the norm.
Re:But will it run ____? (Score:3, Insightful)
That could well be. I'm not in a position to say for sure. I'll just trot out the tired old "If you're so smart, how come you ain't rich?"
I'm going to assume that MS will make smart business decisions (which they don't always do, not by a long shot) and try to understand what they're trying to do. Pointing and saying "You're so stupid, of course you should do what I'm telling you to do" seems unproductive until I at least understand what they think they're accomplishing.
Because you don't get rich by losing money, and for all their (copious) fault's they're certianly rich. That only means that they WERE smart, or at least lucky, at some point in the past, but that's as good a data point as any to start from.
Re:Linux WILL play it, WINDOWS WON'T (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:But will it run ____? (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't believe having wealth is a symbol of intelligence. Intelligent people don't need great wealth to make things happen. Personally I like to have enough wealth to be comfortable and to have the tools I need to create cool stuff but I don't want to be rich. I think people like the Amish have the right idea. Keep life simple and concentrate on personal relationships instead of running around like a maniac, making yourself unhappy, trying to make money.
I, for one, welcome this (Score:1, Insightful)
I would love to be able to buy "I'm Alan Partridge" directly from the BBC without having to wait for it to come out on DVD (let alone come out on DVD in the US). I would love to watch the SABC news from south africa, in High Def. I would love to buy out of print records in full SACD quality, but only pay for the B-side.
Imagine an online record store that sold everything on allmusic.com!
http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=10:6
instead of an online record store that looks like a local sam goody (itunes)
One of the major things preventing these products from being available is the lack of a universal, accepted DRM systems.
As far as keeping "backups" of your purchased content, if all of the content is purchased over a network, then certainly if local copies of your purchased content are damaged or lost, then you'd be able to re-download it, the DRM system would easily identify the download as legitimate (because you already paid for that item) (I know itunes doesn't do this, but others do)
And if it all is too cumbursome (which it doesn't have to be e.g. itunes) people will bag it and continue to purchase content by traditional means.
If, however, the product is better quality, more convienient, cheaper, and there is a greater selection, then by all means bring it on.
The public won't use it (Score:3, Insightful)
Most people don't care about watching video on their PC. I know someone who was all excited about his new "Media Center" PC when he got it. Then he discovered he can't play DVDs he recorded on anything else - including his DVD player in the living room. He doesn't talk about it any more, and obviously he doesn't bring over any cool shows he recorded either. The only thing I've ever really said about it is "why do you want to watch TV on a 17 inch monitor?". Now he's got a DVD recorder by the TV. It's just stupid, and when these issues come up, Joe consumer is just going to buy an HD-DVD player and connect it to his TV.
The real key to all this is to spread FireFox. If web sites decide they have to support alternative browsers, there just won't be any DRMed content anyway. The stuff you buy in the store most people don't view on the PC. This is an attempt by Hollywood to eliminate the distribution channels (and costs), but people just don't want to download movies and watch them on a PC - not most people.
We're NOT consumers!!!!! (Score:4, Insightful)
Who the hell cares if you can't see some dumbass movie or the listen to the latest manufactured pop star's video???
I'm gonna be labelled a troll for sure, but hell this mentality burns my butt. The problem isn't DRM the problem is that you all believe you *need* to see the lame things being offered up.
Come on. You got better things to *do* than just be a content "consumer". And for those that don't they deserve all the DRM and rights violations that are happening. Look at where you've been lead to think. If you don't think the content is worth the price they are asking for it then clearly the answer isn't to fight DRM.... the answer is just don't buy it.
Fatal Flaw My *SS (Score:3, Insightful)
MacroVision for VHS wasn't 100% effective either, but it was enough to stop the vast majority of people from copying video tapes.
I can spend a hour trying to find a bad overly compressed screen capture of a movie off BT, or $15 for a new one at Target, or $3 for a rental at BB. Which one is a better use of my time? Which course of action gives me a better movie experience?
All the studios need to do is protect the majority of their market, while not pissing them off by being too heavy handed, and they'll succeed. And don't think for a second they haven't been observing the music/mp3/itunes battles with great interest.
I don't think they're going to make all of the same mistakes, but I do expect them to do what they can to protect their investments.
And if P2P and Freenet become perceived as too much of a problem, those protocols will be monitored, banned, disrupted, blocked, and/or the users fined or jailed. Too many people think that because their computer is sitting down in their basement that their internet access is "private" and unmonitored and untraceable.
I've said before, and I'll say it again. The key here is not to crack and steal their work, but to create and patronize new models and new works. Do the first, and you enter into an arms race. Do the second, and they have no choice but to embrace them... or die.
Re:Outstanding (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Outstanding (Score:2, Insightful)