DescentBB

Nice.

Heh, thats one way to do it.

Well, it seemed to work well on that machine.

nice.... worked very well.

I need to upgrade to one of THOSE machines!

aw MAN.. and I JUST upgraded my system. Oh well.. I hear CostCo has those systems cheap!

The one and only way to install Vista.

THAT was a big mistake.

He shouldn't have loaded Vista onto the 2nd machine. Are you aware that whenever Vista detects that copyrighted material is being processed it degrades ALL output channels. The first time he attempts to put something copyrighted through that machine, the output will cease to be as fine as it is supposed to be! Thereby destroying the entire point of the 2nd machine.

He is going to be SORRY.

Kilarin wrote:THAT was a big mistake.

He shouldn't have loaded Vista onto the 2nd machine. Are you aware that whenever Vista detects that copyrighted material is being processed it degrades ALL output channels. The first time he attempts to put something copyrighted through that machine, the output will cease to be as fine as it is supposed to be! Thereby destroying the entire point of the 2nd machine.

He is going to be SORRY.

Old news, already debunked:

Will this affect things like medical imagery applications?

"Image constraints only apply to protected content being played and not to the desktop as a whole; therefore, the resolution of other non-protected media, such as medical images, is not affected."

And that's better how ? I still get a shitty picture from a disk I bought if my monitor doesn't have DRM.

It doesn't degrade all image output which is what Kilarin claimed.

DRM is obviously a sticky topic which I have no real expertise in. Industry wants DRM though, Vista provides it. Movie makers don't have to DRM the data, it's their choice. Blaming Vista or iTunes because DRM exists is pointing the finger in the wrong direction (IMO).

Tophar wrote:It doesn't degrade all image output which is what Kilarin claimed.

I was attempting to be silly, but thank you for the factual correction. I hadn't realized the case was overstated.

Still, I'm trying to learn Linux. I see no need to ever own a Vista machine if I can help it.

Granted that DRM is something the industry wants, its something I don't approve of. I certainly don't want it built in to my OS this way.

DRM is bad from many perspectives, but as an amature cryptographer, I hate it most because its just really bad cryptography most of the time.

Topher wrote:

Kilarin wrote:THAT was a big mistake.

He shouldn't have loaded Vista onto the 2nd machine. Are you aware that whenever Vista detects that copyrighted material is being processed it degrades ALL output channels. The first time he attempts to put something copyrighted through that machine, the output will cease to be as fine as it is supposed to be! Thereby destroying the entire point of the 2nd machine.

He is going to be SORRY.

Old news, already debunked:

Will this affect things like medical imagery applications?

"Image constraints only apply to protected content being played and not to the desktop as a whole; therefore, the resolution of other non-protected media, such as medical images, is not affected."

I'm not singling you out in my post here Toph. But, it isn't the DRM issues that really bother me in Vista, I have a DVD player that I watch movies and such on. I would like to give the product a go but the licencing is just too confusing. I have a legit copy of WinXP that I forked over hard earned cash for... I want to get the upgrade but it is not possible to do a clean install of the OS w/o WinXP already being on the machine. And the fact you can only install the OS once before having to go out and buy another copy is just absurd.

I understand MS wants to protect their product from piracy but in doing so they have really pushed a lot of their customers away. As much tweaking as I do with my machine I don't want to have to be bound by some EULA that forbids me from wiping it and reinstalling.

To further derail the topic:

DRM is, at heart, about sales. The music/movie/software industry will listen to their wallets. (Like any smart business person would.) So, if you want DRM to be done away with, speak their language, and don't buy their product. Furthermore, educate the people around you, and convince them not to purchase the products. I doubt you will actually effect change, but it's worth trying.

Topher wrote:DRM is obviously a sticky topic which I have no real expertise in. Industry wants DRM though, Vista provides it. Movie makers don't have to DRM the data, it's their choice. Blaming Vista or iTunes because DRM exists is pointing the finger in the wrong direction (IMO).

Actually, thats half true. MS is partly to blame for implementing it, yes. However, the industry is also partly to blame because they are PUSHING for its incorporation into the OS. (With most of the blame resting square on the shoulders of the industry...)

I think it was Bill Gates that recently commented that DRM in its present forms is usually far too obnoxious and intrusive.

Annoying consumers is not really a good way to encourage them to play by the rules. Especially when hardened pirates can break the protection anyway.

(That funny audio watermark trick comes to mind - it's still possible to digitally isolate and remove it if you're determined enough. The average Joe Schmoe may not be, but those who would make money out of cracking protection schemes - who are the real problem anyway - can still do it! GG MPAA.)

MD-2389 wrote:

Topher wrote:DRM is obviously a sticky topic which I have no real expertise in. Industry wants DRM though, Vista provides it. Movie makers don't have to DRM the data, it's their choice. Blaming Vista or iTunes because DRM exists is pointing the finger in the wrong direction (IMO).

Actually, thats half true. MS is partly to blame for implementing it, yes. However, the industry is also partly to blame because they are PUSHING for its incorporation into the OS. (With most of the blame resting square on the shoulders of the industry...)

I don't suppose any of the blame rests on the bastards who pirate music (probably stepping on most of the toes in here)?

Sergeant Thorne wrote:I don't suppose any of the blame rests on the bastards who pirate music (probably stepping on most of the toes in here)?

Not with me. The only reason why I may or may not pirate music is because there's no place where I can legally buy a song in mp3 or some open format for 99 cents online, which I would gladly do if I could. (Pirating can be kinda a pain in the ass, especially more obscure songs.)

Huh ? emusic.com -- no DRM, < $.33 per, less compressed than iTunes.

Well, plus the monthly subscription fee. I've tried navigating their site in the past, except you can't, until you agree to a free trial in the cancel-any-time tradition. So I can't browse their music selection, but, from what I've heard, it isn't any good. What is your experience with it? I've also heard that their Linux client is pretty crappy too, which is fairly regrettable, considering if this were done right, it would just be done over the Web.

Jeff250 wrote:

Sergeant Thorne wrote:I don't suppose any of the blame rests on the bastards who pirate music (probably stepping on most of the toes in here)?

Not with me. The only reason why I may or may not pirate music is because there's no place where I can legally buy a song in mp3 or some open format for 99 cents online, which I would gladly do if I could. (Pirating can be kinda a pain in the ass, especially more obscure songs.)

Oh, how nice. You don't like the price they want to sell the songs to you, so you go steal them.

What? Who is \"they\"? The point isn't so much that I don't like the prices of the online music stores that have comprehensive selections in non-drm format so much as its that these stores don't exist to begin with.

Consider this:
http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?si ... 06/2014217
Then that:
http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?si ... 09/1653255

As long as the big music corporates think that drm is the solution and not the problem, there probably won't be any stores with good selection.

New marketing stratagy from MS... LOL

http://forum.chip.ro/attachment.php?att ... 1169743745

Jeff250 wrote:What? Who is "they"? The point isn't so much that I don't like the prices of the online music stores that have comprehensive selections in non-drm format so much as its that these stores don't exist to begin with.

So you're trying to tell me that there's absolutely no online store that will sell you music that you can play on your computer, MP3 player or CD player?

If I want a song, I buy it from Yahoo Music (highly recommended) or iTunes (iTunes is a last resort, due to its proprietary nature). Now I own it, and if I need it to be higher quality, or a different format, I can always grab it from All Of Mp3, or rip it from my local library.

TIGERassault wrote:

Jeff250 wrote:What? Who is "they"? The point isn't so much that I don't like the prices of the online music stores that have comprehensive selections in non-drm format so much as its that these stores don't exist to begin with.

So you're trying to tell me that there's absolutely no online store that will sell you music that you can play on your computer, MP3 player or CD player?

No, that's not what I'm trying to tell you at all. The issue with drm isn't as simple as can I find a copy that will play on my mp3 player/computer/etc. at the present moment. I also want something that I know will play on my mp3 player/computer/etc. that I might own five years from now. Again, it's not enough that the store sell "music" but most of the music that I would be interested in buying.

Sergeant Thorne wrote:If I want a song, I buy it from Yahoo Music (highly recommended) or iTunes (iTunes is a last resort, due to its proprietary nature). Now I own it, and if I need it to be higher quality, or a different format, I can always grab it from All Of Mp3, or rip it from my local library.

Sure, this works in a personal ethical sense, but just don't think that this works in a legal sense. If you think by buying a song off of iTunes that you are buying some sort of metaphysical right to "own" or listen to that song, you are surely mistaken! All you are buying is the drm'd copy of the song and all of the restrictions therein!

If that be the case, we best break open the rum, matey. I've payed for the song, and I've payed the right people (I sure hope), I can listen to it whenever I want from there on, and I'd like to see any entity try to stop me.