More on Windows Vista - worst OS yet?
Bookmark this page:
 Yahoo!
 Google
 Windows Live
 del.icio.us
 digg
 Netscape
|
|
Posted by Homer J Simpson on January 29, 2007, 5:32 pm
Please log in for more thread options Microsoft's rebuttal of the paper on Vista's DRM (http://www.geekzone.co.nz/juha/2069) The reply to Microsoft's rebuttal (http://www.geekzone.co.nz/juha/2105) ==================================================== Gutmann Reloaded and My Vista HD Fiasco Windows, posted: 26-JAN-2007 15:35 Peter Gutmann isn't taking Microsoft's rebuttal of his paper on Vista's DRM lying down. Instead, he's put up an addendum to his original paper, unravelling the bits that he terms as "PR spin". Reading Gutmann's response, it looks like the debate is far from over and Microsoft has more explaining to do on the DRM. Unfortunately for Microsoft's Dave Marsh, Gutmann's read the official documents carefully. There are several areas such as the Hardware Functionality Scan (HFS), echo cancellation features and graphics hardware being used for video decoding where Marsh originally said one thing - which Gutmann picked up on when he wrote the paper - and another in the rebuttal. So which is right? It's hard to say, and it looks like testing the different assertions is the only way forward. On the question of CPU usage with DRM, I can be of some assistance to Peter and others curious about it. Here's a screenshot of Task Manager showing the Media Foundation Protected Pipeline EXE (lovely name) module in Vista, as I'm loading protected HD content: It's chewing up some memory, not that much, but it doesn't register for CPU usage. The module isn't loaded when playing unprotected content. I will do some more testing here once I get some fresh HD content. As it happens, I've got some older HD content, namely Coral Reef Adventure which was given to me last year. It has two Microsoft Windows High Definition format WMV files on the second disc, one in 1,280 by 720 resolution and another in 1,440 by 1080. The discs seem to have been made in 2003 and I put the second one into my Sony DVD drive (no, it's not HD-DVD or BluRay capable) under Vista to see what the film would look like. At the first attempt, I got a black screen as the disc tries to autorun a start.hta file that Vista doesn't like. I don't know why Vista doesn't run it but neither does XP so... straight onto the WMV files I go, and click on the 720 resolution one. Windows Media Player 11 starts up, and I get the Media Usage Rights Acquisition dialog: Ahhh... but the disc is already in the drive? I click on the "1. licenseserver.com" button to refresh, but no MUR is Acquired by WMP11. The same happens when I try to run the 1080 file as well - I can't get beyond the Media Usage Rights Acquisition dialog. If I try to play the disc with PowerDVD, I get a static screen telling me the content is in Windows Media HD, and that I should... insert the disc into the drive. Right. Thinking I may have to play the file from elsewhere but have the disc in the drive, I copy both the WMV files to my hard drive and try to run them from there. No luck, the process still gets stuck on the MURA dialog. The Synccast.com site linked to in the dialog provides no help so I check the properties of the WMV file, to see if there's any further information about the license: Hmm, nothing at all? Surely there should be something telling me what the terms of the license are? Then I try the first disc, with the standard resolution DVD, just to make sure that playback is actually working on my Vista installation. Immediately, I slam into the idiotic DVD regional content crapola: Arrrgh. Time to give up with Vista and try XP again. I click on the 1080 WMV file, the MURA dialog pops up... nothing happens. A case of broken DRM preventing me from watching the content then? As a last effort, I take the disc out, check it isn't scratched or damaged otherwise, and put it back in. This time both the 720 and 1080 files run and I get to see coral seas in glorious colour (HD video is pretty spectacular). XP played back the HD content, protected by Microsoft's own DRM but Vista didn't. It's just the one film so this isn't conclusive by any means, but it is disappointing nevertheless. However, the DRM disappointment extended to XP as well. The properties for the film (visible when it's playing) say this about the Media Usage Rights: Hold on, so in just over a week's time I can't play the file any more? And, I can't back up the MURs for it either. Excellent illustration of the evils of DRM, that. By Juha Saarinen | ||||
|
Posted by on January 30, 2007, 7:03 am
Please log in for more thread options Says it all: http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.txt (I think he's in medical field somehow) | ||||
|
Posted by The Real Andy on January 30, 2007, 5:19 pm
Please log in for more thread options
On 30 Jan 2007 12:03:44 GMT, pbFJKD@ludd.invalid wrote: >>Microsoft's rebuttal of the paper on Vista's DRM
>>(http://www.geekzone.co.nz/juha/2069) >>The reply to Microsoft's rebuttal (http://www.geekzone.co.nz/juha/2105) >
>Says it all: > http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.txt > >(I think he's in medical field somehow) Its just some deluded rant. Unless you are using Vista for some type of fraudulant activity, it is fine. I am using it now on my 3 year old PC and it is faster than XP, is nicer to use, plays all my music (downloaded mp3's too) and plays my videos/dvd's. I didn't really need to upgrade, but since I write software for a living i though it would be wise to keep up on current software trends. | ||||
|
Posted by PeteS on January 30, 2007, 5:30 pm
Please log in for more thread options
The Real Andy wrote: > On 30 Jan 2007 12:03:44 GMT, pbFJKD@ludd.invalid wrote:
> >>> Microsoft's rebuttal of the paper on Vista's DRM
>>> (http://www.geekzone.co.nz/juha/2069) >>> The reply to Microsoft's rebuttal (http://www.geekzone.co.nz/juha/2105) >> Says it all:
>> http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.txt >> >> (I think he's in medical field somehow) >
> Its just some deluded rant. Unless you are using Vista for some type > of fraudulant activity, it is fine. I am using it now on my 3 year old > PC and it is faster than XP, is nicer to use, plays all my music > (downloaded mp3's too) and plays my videos/dvd's. I didn't really need > to upgrade, but since I write software for a living i though it would > be wise to keep up on current software trends. Hmmm At one time I thought you were actually a neutral observer. Deluded rant? Hardly; the writer raises some reasonable questions that should be properly answered. Given your responses on the earlier thread, I must assume you make a living doing code for Microsoft OSs'. For full disclosure, I have written code for a number of systems, including Win3.0 -> XP and even CE (ugh for a lot of reasons), but far
more pleasantly for Solaris, Irix, LynxOS and Linux (Note that 3 of
those are proprietary) apart from custom systems. Let's take something else here: << Unless you are using Vista for some type of fraudulant activity, it is fine.>>
Really? You don't mind that an OS is calling home without your consent and when it chooses, because you have only very limited rights under the license agreement? (read it, it's quite enlightening). Here's my view; it's my computer, and the system will do as I wish, when I wish and how I wish. It will not 'call home' anywhere unless I permit it and if it can't it will continue to function (Vista won't as I am sure you are aware). Wow - there's a concept; I buy something and I get to use it as I will. Nope - seems you are a shill. Shame really. Cheers PeteS | ||||
|
Posted by The Real Andy on January 31, 2007, 5:18 am
Please log in for more thread options
wrote: >The Real Andy wrote:
>> On 30 Jan 2007 12:03:44 GMT, pbFJKD@ludd.invalid wrote:
>> >>>> Microsoft's rebuttal of the paper on Vista's DRM
>>>> (http://www.geekzone.co.nz/juha/2069) >>>> The reply to Microsoft's rebuttal (http://www.geekzone.co.nz/juha/2105) >>> Says it all: >>> http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.txt >>> >>> (I think he's in medical field somehow) >>
>> Its just some deluded rant. Unless you are using Vista for some type >> of fraudulant activity, it is fine. I am using it now on my 3 year old >> PC and it is faster than XP, is nicer to use, plays all my music >> (downloaded mp3's too) and plays my videos/dvd's. I didn't really need >> to upgrade, but since I write software for a living i though it would >> be wise to keep up on current software trends. >
>Hmmm > >At one time I thought you were actually a neutral observer. Deluded >rant? Hardly; the writer raises some reasonable questions that should be >properly answered. Spend some time using it, then tell me otherwise. The paper has been refuted by many who are much wiser than me. >Given your responses on the earlier thread, I must assume you make a
>living doing code for Microsoft OSs'. Actually, the last 6 months has been coding in MS VC6, hardly something to be proud of. >
>For full disclosure, I have written code for a number of systems, >including Win3.0 -> XP and even CE (ugh for a lot of reasons), but far >more pleasantly for Solaris, Irix, LynxOS and Linux (Note that 3 of >those are proprietary) apart from custom systems. I have also done programming from 3.0 through to vista, plus MS DOS. Also done CE and XPe. I recently took a look at CE6 too. I have also written software for Linux, Palm, and endless amounts of embedded devices. I admit I have never done anything on solaris or other unix OS's. >
>Let's take something else here: > ><< Unless you are using Vista for some type of fraudulant activity, it >is fine.>>
>
>Really? You don't mind that an OS is calling home without your consent >and when it chooses, because you have only very limited rights under the >license agreement? (read it, it's quite enlightening). Are, you are misinformed. If you have ever dealt with MS they don't actually care a lot about you as a single person. It calls home ONLY with your permission. They care about big business and mass fraud. Do you thing they will sue you? You are worth nothing to them. BTW. If you don't want it to call home for activation, then phone them. The only time they ask a question is if it has been activated before, and trust me, it does not take a lot to convince them why. >Here's my view; it's my computer, and the system will do as I wish, when
>I wish and how I wish. It will not 'call home' anywhere unless I permit >it and if it can't it will continue to function (Vista won't as I am >sure you are aware). >Wow - there's a concept; I buy something and I get to use it as I will. read above. >
> >Nope - seems you are a shill. Perhaps. >Shame really.
Perhaps. >
>Cheers > >PeteS After all the bullshit, if you pay me to write in whatever language, on whatever system, based on my skill, then I don't give a shit what OS/language it is. Naturally I am going to chase the business where the money is, and unless you are stupid and blind then obviously MS is where the money is. I don't care if it is better or worse, it is what works for me in the given situation that is what counts. If you ask my opinion, then I am going to give it to you, based on you business, not what I personally think. If you blatantly bag one product based on the misinformed opinion of another person, then you will see my passionate side. Like yourself, I have worked in both camps. I don't make opinions on products that I have never used. Ask me about the .net compact framework and it wont be good ;) | ||||
| Similar Threads | Posted |
| Windows Vista - worst OS yet? | January 10, 2007, 7:54 am |
| More on Windows Vista - worst OS yet? | January 29, 2007, 5:32 pm |
| Windows vista | March 17, 2007, 2:58 pm |
| Re: Free Windows Vista Download | April 29, 2007, 1:39 pm |
| Does Protel 99 SE work with Windows Vista ? | May 28, 2007, 10:27 pm |
| Re: Does Protel 99 SE work with Windows Vista ? | May 30, 2007, 10:01 pm |
| Protel 99 SE and Windows Vista: Library problem? | April 26, 2008, 2:48 pm |
| Re: Windows Vista content protection: a big long suicide note (forwarded) | December 26, 2006, 5:53 am |
| OT: The year's worst pun | May 2, 2005, 1:22 pm |
| The 10 Worst Congressmen | November 12, 2006, 4:13 pm |
| The Worst Congress Ever | November 12, 2006, 4:13 pm |
| Bush: one of the worst disasters to hit the U.S. | September 8, 2005, 1:54 pm |
| Worst power supply ever? | September 14, 2005, 9:44 pm |
| The Psychology Behind the Worst Possible President | January 18, 2007, 1:24 am |
| Worst data sheets? | July 19, 2007, 12:44 pm |
>(http://www.geekzone.co.nz/juha/2069)
>The reply to Microsoft's rebuttal (http://www.geekzone.co.nz/juha/2105)