"A cost analysis of Vista content protection"

Even if you can still hack it to bypass the DRM for protected content, it doesn't change all the rest of the crap, like signed drivers and revocation. If it's true, all this does is prove that all these problems, loss of freedom, and user pain are useless. They're still there, and they don't even serve their intended purpose of protecting content.

Note that this would be highly illegal to post; he could do jail time for telling you how to use your own computer in a way that Microsoft doesn't like... and in theory, you could be put in jail for exercising your own fair use rights. They're not likely to catch you, but even the possibility is disgusting.

Personally, I don't care in the least about the stupid hi-def video. If I could run a DRM-free Vista that would never play Blu-Ray or HD-DVD, I'd be perfectly willing to buy it. It's not about the damn content, at least not for me; I simply refuse to lose ownership of my machine. I reserve the right to use my computer in ways of which Microsoft and Hollywood don't approve.

That's the thing that bothers me. I don't have an HD-DVD or Blu-Ray drive for my PC and have no plans to buy one now or in the forseeable future. The fact is that it's MY PC, not their's and if they want to lock it down to protect the interests of the content industry, then the content industry can subsidize it. Treating every customer as a criminal in wait can't be justified.

I've never managed to play a DVD on an XP machine without encountering serious stuttering issues. I can only imagine how Blu-Ray discs and HD-DVDs are going to look and sound while the system's trying to perform multiple content checks every second in addition to some serious Vista bloatware running in the background.

Has anyone seen the box of Vista? I want to know if there is a label on it warning of the DRM stuff. Granted it won't affect me I'm just curious. Earlier today the whole Sony rootkit thing was settled by the FTC.

Sony BMG started with a class-action lawsuit, continued with a settlement with state attorneys general and ended with the federal government. I use the term "ended" very loosely. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has announced a settlement with Sony: a set of conditions that will change the way Sony BMG markets CDs in the future. The company is now required to clearly label DRM-protected discs and is prohibited from installing any software without notifying and gaining consent from the user (there's a shocker!. Sony BMG is also required to provide exchanges for existing DRM-enabled CDs until June 31, 2007, and pay up to $150 to anyone who spent money trying to remove the rootkit or repair any damage from it.

[i]"Consumers' computers belong to them and companies must adequately disclose unexpected limitations on the customary use of their products so consumers can make informed decisions regarding whether to purchase and install that content,"
[/i] said FTC Chairman Deborah Platt Majoras.

Emphasize mine. While the Vista DRM is only for protected media it is now required for warnings of DRM.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post...

KillerTomato wrote:

I've never managed to play a DVD on an XP machine without encountering serious stuttering issues.

That's weird, because DVD players on modern machines take about 5-10% CPU time to decode video, with hardware acceleration used (which is available on practically all cards). Even without the acceleration, the CPU utilization is way small.

Usually stuttering during DVD playback is caused by the drive operating in PIO mode instead of DMA mode. Might want to get that checked.

I checked the Vista boxes at my Best Buy store today and there is nothing disclosing the DRM or the potential effects it can have on your system. They were demo boxes admittedly, but I think they are labeled the same as the retail packages. I also talked to a couple of my blue shirts (Best Buy for sales guys) and asked them a few general questions about it. Most of them don't know about the DRM and the ones that do either don't know how bad it is or just don't care because "we were told to sell it and we've got a budget target to hit." This is why it will get wide adoption regardless.

shihonage wrote:
KillerTomato wrote:

I've never managed to play a DVD on an XP machine without encountering serious stuttering issues.

That's weird, because DVD players on modern machines take about 5-10% CPU time to decode video, with hardware acceleration used (which is available on practically all cards). Even without the acceleration, the CPU utilization is way small.

Usually stuttering during DVD playback is caused by the drive operating in PIN mode instead of DMA mode. Might want to get that checked.

Thanks, Shihonage - that turned out to be the problem, at least for one of the drives. Apparently, Dell ships some of (all of?) their systems with DMA disabled in the BIOS. Once that was re-enabled, I had to use the instructions on this page to clear out some registry values that prevent Windows from realizing that DMA is an option. The DVD-ROM drive still refuses to use DMA, but the DVD-RW drive works like a charm. Now for the other two Dells in the office...

Here's a recent article by security expert Bruce Schneier about Vista's DRM. I do not believe he is a FUD spreader.

That DRM stuff sounds like a huge hassle... But what does one do? I mean, Ubuntu is all right for office work I guess, but no games...

croaker wrote:

Here's a recent article by security expert Bruce Schneier about Vista's DRM. I do not believe he is a FUD spreader.

LOL!

These features will make your computer less reliable and less secure.

Odd.. my Vista machines seem even more reliable and no more or less secure than what I ran before. Hmm.. if Nvidia got off their ass and wrote a decent driver I'd be rocking and rolling.. my Dell M2010 hasnt crashed since I did my (nightmare upgrade) then clean install

They'll make your computer less stable and run slower.

Hmm..does he mean Nvidia and not Microsoft perhaps? Maybe he should actually USE the OS for a bit instead of simply parroting what he's been reading in the mass media.

They will cause technical support problems

replace the generic "They" with "Vista" and he's dead on.. but then again.. ANY new Operating System will spike various manufacturers technical support. (re: Windows 95 launch) I dont see why Vista would be or should be considered anything different. In 2 years I would love to see some statistics of tech support incident reporting...But for sure given Vista's brutal upgrade policy and process I wouldnt be suprised if Microsoft is getting buried by calls.. but because of DRM.. ahhhh NO!

They may even require you to upgrade some of your peripheral hardware and existing software

IMAGE(http://img266.imageshack.us/img266/5372/omgonozkt6.gif)

Microsoft put all those functionality-crippling features into Vista because it wants to own the entertainment industry.

say what? So.. Vista's DRM will allow Microsoft to buy the entertainment industry?

I am stealing that gif. That is awesome!

Bruce Schneier is the definition of an anti-FUD spreader. He is incredibly well-respected. This guy invents encryption algorithms; he's functioning on a level so far past most of us that we can pretty much just wave as he whooshes by overhead. I don't think he's a Rivest or Shamir, but he's not far off, to my understanding.

I feel incredibly vindicated that he's saying almost exactly what I've been saying. Ignore him at your peril. He doesn't get things wrong very often.

(And that IS a great GIF.... doesn't do anything for the weak points in the post, but the GIF itself is awesome.)

Malor wrote:

Bruce Schneier is the definition of an anti-FUD spreader. He is incredibly well-respected. This guy invents encryption algorithms; he's functioning on a level so far past most of us that we can pretty much just wave as he whooshes by overhead. I don't think he's a Rivest or Shamir, but he's not far off, to my understanding.

I feel incredibly vindicated that he's saying almost exactly what I've been saying. Ignore him at your peril. He doesn't get things wrong very often.

(And that IS a great GIF.... doesn't do anything for the weak points in the post, but the GIF itself is awesome.)

Odd... yes but my so called "weak points" are exactly how Joe Consumer will view this whole "DRM issue" and thus if my experience hasn't been hampered in the slightest by these "perilous" points (lol its a computer) then chances are 99% of Vista users wont be either...and thus wont care or give a damn.

Besides this guys fluff scare article has weaker points than the last one.. there is no concrete evidence of instability...crashes.. etc.. related to DRM. Consumers want facts.. and real issues not these vague scare tactics. Show me benchmarks.. show me real documented issues... because while I'm out yelling at Nvidia about REAL Vista issues (and oh trust me they will get an earful next week at our meeting) this guy is writing FUD.

The proof, GG, is in the Microsoft documentation. You jump up and down and scream and shout and yell "NO NO NO NO NO" and that's ALL you say. Ever. You have claimed that you have "debunked FUD", but you haven't done ANYTHING other than say, in fourteen different ways, "no it's not". We have documentation, and all you have is 'no it ain't!'

You even admit that the 8800 is a complete pile of sh*t under Vista.. doesn't it occur to you that part of the reason for that is the time and money they have to spend on DRM? Money they spend trying to detect if you're a thief is money they can't spend giving you faster drivers... or ones that work at all.

Your claim that Joe Consumer will accept DRM doesn't mean anything. Saying that the masses will go along with the monopoly is not a justification for the monopoly's behavior, it's just an acknowledgment of the monopoly's power.

A lot of very bright people out there, including one of the smartest security guys in the world, say you're wrong. And they've got backup, while all you have is your repeated "no".

The proof, GG, is in the Microsoft documentation. You jump up and down and scream and shout and yell "NO NO NO NO NO" and that's ALL you say. Ever. You have claimed that you have "debunked FUD", but you haven't done ANYTHING other than say, in fourteen different ways, "no it's not". We have documentation, and all you have is 'no it ain't!'

In what universe is that considered proof?.. show me real benchmarks.. real cases where the Protected Content flag caused someone not running protected content to crash..slow down...anything..even remotely bad.. show me something rather than hyperbole and what ifs. cause if you cant then thats the definition of FUD. Bitching about Microsoft documents and the "potential" pitfalls of DRM is like complaining about EULA's.. sure they look bad on paper but so what? how many REAL issues or problems have arised from them? I debunk FUD by actually USING the damn product.. with real world results and concerns. I dont dwell in the land of what ifs and ZOMG OHNOES!!

You even admit that the 8800 is a complete pile of sh*t under Vista.. doesn't it occur to you that part of the reason for that is the time and money they have to spend on DRM? Money they spend trying to detect if you're a thief is money they can't spend giving you faster drivers... or ones that work at all.

So.... ATI? Perhaps it as simple as Nvidia extended themselves to thin on the PS3.. hired to many hardware guys to design the 8800GTX platform? outsourced the driver team to India?. Not everything is someone (Microsoft) elses problem. Or hey! perhaps Nvidia pissed off Microsoft on the Xbox BC 360 issue and Microsoft held back some key document that ATI got.. or just stopped returning phone calls during Vista's development (haha not likely). In any case Nvidia's failings are not anything remotely linked to Microsoft's DRM scheme under Vista.. Nvidia's failings are their own.. and I know for a fact that the Board is none to pleased with the situation and heads rolled this last month.

A lot of very bright people out there, including one of the smartest security guys in the world, say you're wrong. And they've got backup, while all you have is your repeated "no".

Yeah so what I'm an idiot? you dont know me.. and you dont know who I know.. so please spare me this crap.. that so called smartest security guy in the world looked pretty dumb writing that article. For all your bitching about me just saying no you haven't brought anything tangible to the table either. AT least I'm dwelling in the real world of real use... for all I know that guy just wanted his Apple stock to shoot up a few dollars.

Your claim that Joe Consumer will accept DRM doesn't mean anything. Saying that the masses will go along with the monopoly is not a justification for the monopoly's behavior, it's just an acknowledgment of the monopoly's power.

Thats not my claim at all.. read again.. I said that Joe Consumer will react the same way I react to these so called issues.. IF there are no tangible issues when they go to use their Vista PC's then they'll just shrug and say so what?

After all lets get Microsoft working on some real issues.. like getting my Live Marketplace videos synced to my Zune.. and fixing the issue of Live Marketplace downloads and new 360's

BTW let me just add this.

There is no right or wrong here. It is 100% reasonable to have an argument and discussion of DRM and Vista's implementation of DRM. Because certainly there are issues with it and especially once Cable Card Media Centers start showing up. My issue is how the argument is being placed.. trying to frame Vista's DRM as somehow potentially crippling a users regular Vista experience is just dumb.. and IMO false.

Focus on real concerns about ownership and eventual transfer of said DRM content.. to me thats the argument and where I'd like to see Microsoft focused on.

Malor wrote:

The proof, GG, is in the Microsoft documentation. You jump up and down and scream and shout and yell "NO NO NO NO NO" and that's ALL you say. Ever. You have claimed that you have "debunked FUD", but you haven't done ANYTHING other than say, in fourteen different ways, "no it's not". We have documentation, and all you have is 'no it ain't!'

You even admit that the 8800 is a complete pile of sh*t under Vista.. doesn't it occur to you that part of the reason for that is the time and money they have to spend on DRM? Money they spend trying to detect if you're a thief is money they can't spend giving you faster drivers... or ones that work at all.

Your claim that Joe Consumer will accept DRM doesn't mean anything. Saying that the masses will go along with the monopoly is not a justification for the monopoly's behavior, it's just an acknowledgment of the monopoly's power.

A lot of very bright people out there, including one of the smartest security guys in the world, say you're wrong. And they've got backup, while all you have is your repeated "no".

Ok seriously Malor, you need to stop. What GG is saying is 100% correct. You can scream about possibilities all day but until someone actually SHOWS this is happening it doesn't mean anything. What the heck does DRM have to do with Nvidia drivers sucking under Vista? Especially when ATI has good ones? It's Nividia's issue NOT MS.

Every single thing you have citied is FUD about someone's idea of a POSSIBLE scenario. There are 0 actual cases of any of these things happening so far.

I love saying "VISTAAAA" =)

I'm gonna sit this one out. If I get a new machine and it has Vista, cool. Otherwise, I'm not spending money for a 400 dollar upgrade.

Maybe you rich guys can afford it, but, meh, seems like a waste of good hooker & ale money.

Agreed. For now at least.

A triple hitter on the DRM front in the past few minutes.

The original author made a follow up called "AACS DRM tentacles reach far into operating systems".

While Microsoft deserves some of the blame for Vista's troubles with HD content, the bigger story here is the technical nightmare created by AACS and how its tentacles are reaching into the consumer technology we all use daily.

Google then kills it's tv service.

Google just demonstrated how completely bizarre and anti-consumer DRM technology can be. Most importantly, by pulling the plug on its service, Google just proved why consumers have to be allowed to circumvent copy controls.

PC World then does more Vista hatin

Content protection features in Windows Vista from Microsoft are preventing customers from playing high-quality HD audio/video & harming system performance. Vista requires premium content like HD movies to be degraded in quality when it is sent to high-quality outputs, like DVI. Users will see status codes that say 'graphics OPM resolution too high'. There are ways to bypass the Windows Vista protection by encoding the movies using alternative codecs like X264, or DiVX, which are in fact more effective sometimes then Windows own WMV codec. These codecs are quite common on HD video Bittorrent sites, or Newsgroups.
"It's a bit of an extreme claim, but you could say Windows Vista causes global warming, because it's burning so much power with all this nonsense," Gutmann said.
TheGameguru wrote:
"It's a bit of an extreme claim, but you could say Windows Vista causes global warming, because it's burning so much power with all this nonsense," Gutmann said.

I laughed.

Real users are getting bitten by this stuff.

Another quote from Edwin's last link:

While Microsoft's intent is to protect commercial content, home movies are increasingly being shot in high definition, Gutmann said. Many users are finding they can't play any content if it's considered "premium."

"This is not commercial HD content being blocked, this is the users' own content," Gutmann said. "The more premium content you have, the more output is disabled."

GG, your unwarranted sneering is looking more and more ridiculous.

Malor wrote:

Real users are getting bitten by this stuff.

Another quote from Edwin's last link:

While Microsoft's intent is to protect commercial content, home movies are increasingly being shot in high definition, Gutmann said. Many users are finding they can't play any content if it's considered "premium."

"This is not commercial HD content being blocked, this is the users' own content," Gutmann said. "The more premium content you have, the more output is disabled."

GG, your unwarranted sneering is looking more and more ridiculous.

....

Because.. everything on the internet is true! That guy said it!!! I mean.. people cant play back their own HD! he said so!!

But the Ar's article sort of debunked that. Sort of.

Edwin wrote:

But the Ar's article sort of debunked that. Sort of.

details my man..details.. (actually Ars said exactly what I said oh so long ago about HDCP and the real issues..etc.. etc.) but in the face of irrational frothing at the mouth hysteria and FUD its simply details to be ignored.

*shrug* I leave my opinions out and just post the articles.

Malor wrote:

Real users are getting bitten by this stuff.

Another quote from Edwin's last link:

While Microsoft's intent is to protect commercial content, home movies are increasingly being shot in high definition, Gutmann said. Many users are finding they can't play any content if it's considered "premium."

"This is not commercial HD content being blocked, this is the users' own content," Gutmann said. "The more premium content you have, the more output is disabled."

GG, your unwarranted sneering is looking more and more ridiculous.

Can we lock this thread now? Seriously? All it's doing now is allowing comments like this to be posted.

I am confused. Was the guy trying to record HD out-going sound or was he just trying to record any out-going sound at all? I have actually recorded my outgoing sound before on XP and found it useful for some things. Have you all tried to do this in Vista? It's not a major loss to me if it doesn't work in Vista, but I can see how it would be to some people.

The original author (Peter Gutmann) claims people have come to him saying they weren't able to record home movies (import from their HD camcorders) in HD in vista due to the DRM. The Ars reporter wasn't able to replicate the problems with his Sony HD cams.

edit: Two things to note. No actual evidence was given against it as it was just claims of others. The Ars author only did two camcorders so the possibility is there.