In short, buy windows vista, if you do NOT play video games, or watch dvds, or play cds on your computer.
if you do, then stay as far away from vista as possible.

The following article link was posted on an IT pro website, the content is solely the work of the person that owns the site it is hosted at.

http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.txt

vista is a considerable improvement over xp, but there are apparently some security problems. I daresay those will be patched ASAP. if the rumours are true that vista is largely based on jaguar, then there will be various permissions-related problems that will bedevil new users, and unfortunately they may run up against the conceit that any problems they experience are due to user error.

That was one of the best reads in a long time. Thanks Jaqui.

Miss Nancy,
vista? based on the objectivec based cocoa framework and OPEN SOURCE beos operating system that became Mac OSX Jaquar?
no, the article is on the bugs introduced to protect dvd content creators, cd content creators etc.
it is literally the DRM taken to the extreme that is the focus of the article.
mylemonblue,
no problem, if people don't know the extremes to which the DRM is being taken they can't make an informed decision.

one member over on Daz tried the beta of vista, no POSER, no Daz Studio, no openGL based games.
the DRM / Content Protection stpped him from using them.
no driver updates allowed, they weren't "digitally signed" for vista.

I'm not saying that copyright's shouldn't be respected, but there has to be a point where enough is enough in protecting them.

making people unable to use original discs to view a movie is not an acceptable limitation.

The BIG concern is the impact on non-Windoze, even non-Vista, systems.

Hopefully the Asian manufactures will continue to produce pre-Vista "legacy" designs for use in non-Vista systems, in order to protect the rest of us from the increased costs and lack of choice and/or updates which may well occur from the complexity and sheer make-work US-based computer manufacturers are in for at least in the near term.

And it certainly does the current issue of proprietary drivers for FOSS system no favours.  (But perhaps that was part of the goal?)

Saw an industry report recently that Vista had added $100 to the cost of production of the "average" PC sold in USA - that represents a whopping 25% increase over 2006 costs - for the same user experience.  (Remember that Vista Basic which will undoubtedly often be sold on this level system has none of the new UI features:  it's XP on DRM.)  Clearly some of that was increase OS royalty costs, but this article shows where much of this increase really comes from.

Don't worry, people will upgrade to Vista, they will discover that their Pentium 4GHz is too slow, so will buy the newest Pentium 12GHz that still will be slow but at least usable, time to time will be crying that 200 GHz of their work was lost and blame the HD fabricant, Poser8 doesn't open my pz3 and blame E-Frontier, visiting som site the computer will crash and only able to return to work, after a month after the mother board was replaced by the technical assistence,  but if you ask them about Vista, all will reply, "it's fabulous, it works fine I never had a problem with Vista"

I agree with ricardo on that one. no matter how bad it is for them, tens of millions of them will buy it or download it from bitTorrent. that's the way peer pressure works. OS X was a similar night- mare, monetarily and otherwise, for users and software developers, with similar horror stories from prophets of doom and gloom, but that too has passed, as it was a requirement of apple's business model. now the only way ya can take OS X away from diehard users is to pry it from their ........ well, no need to get too graphic here :lol: but in a few years, folks will be wondering how they ever survived without vista, and why they ever put up with such a primitive system as xp.

Torrent/eMule/Shareaza version will be much better, it will come with many nasty things removed.

"Torrent/eMule/Shareaza version will be much better, it will come with many nasty things removed."

...OR..with some nasty things of their own included.

Is not true, you can trust much more in them than in Microsoft, at least their things work and are free of bugs.

"Is not true, you can trust much more in them than in Microsoft, at least their things work and are free of bugs."

Well, that's good to hear.

Probably a good time to move to open source.  Hopefully one of these days ReactOS (a Windows clone) will be at a stage that it can be used as an everyday operating system, and I'll be able to give Micro$oft the finger once and for all.  (Though you can be sure that M$ is going to try everything they can - legal or otherwise - to put a stop to it.  Earlier this year, an unsubstantiated claim that ReactOS contained Microsoft code caused a massive slowdown of the project as the entire code base had to be audited to make sure the code was "clean").

Meanwhile Micro$oft requires validation for updates and such, meaning that when you run Windows Update it can tell if you're using a pirated, counterfeit, cracked or otherwise non-genuine version and refused to update (or worse).  Also just to be dicks M$ has made it so that things like Internet Explorer 7 won't install on anything other than a geniune Windows operating system.  Wouldn't be a problem for open source however, as the open source community would provide its own updates, as well as necessary software for web browsing, office, multimedia, etc.  (And they would probably work better than the M$ equivalents.  And for ReactOS, the whole idea is that our PC versions of Poser, DAZ|Studio, Bryce, etc, would work just like before.  As of right now, Wine may or may not allow those programs to be run under Linux)

DRM is total crap.  Apparently the RIAA and MPAA are too stubborn or stupid to figure out why someone should want to pay money for something that has been crippled when they can get the same thing for free with no restrictions on use and often of higher quality.  (And as far as I'm concerned the recording industry has no business saying that the latter is illegal, when they are engaging in activities that if not outright illegal, damn well should be - i.e., the Sony XCP Rootkit fiasco).

It isn't even about piracy anymore - it's about power and control.  If these people get their way they will effectively be able to drag society back to the days before the printing press, when the powers that be were able to control what was said and heard.

Quote - Meanwhile Micro$oft requires validation for updates and such, meaning that when you run Windows Update it can tell if you're using a pirated, counterfeit, cracked or otherwise non-genuine version and refused to update (or worse).

This is what Micro$oft thinks, but if the Windows is patched,  cracked or pirated, this new Windows is not more under Microsoft's control.
The same as with the XP's activation code, no pirate XP comes with the activation and Microsoft has no more control.

The Microsoft DRM is the most idiotic thing and it is flawed from the begining beside all the hardware and software proteccions and encryptions, and waste of CPU time.
Microsoft divides materials in copyright protected and not protected and Vista created a pharaonic scheme for protecting the copyrights that has the same use as the pyramids, none!
First at all there are only two means that you can install protected materials in the PC:
1- Purchasing and downloading from the internet.
2- From a DVD or CD**

1- Purchasing and downloading from the internet.**
If  you purchased some movie or audio and downloaded it you are not going to keep it only in your HD, you will want to burn a DVD or CD backup, you will pay and download 4 GB of a video if is not allowed to have it in a DVD copy?, and the copy must have the same quality as the original material, so item #1 is reduced to item #2.
**
2- From a DVD or CD
**And here ends all the Microsoft DRM, how Microsot can know if a DVD or CD has copyright protected data?, Vista is unable to know it, Vista don't read the tracks neither has a magic ball, the only one that can know it is the DVD/CD player that reads the tracks .
The only thing what Vista can do is to query the DVD/CD player is the data is copyright protected, only when the player ask in an afirmative way Vista is able to protect the data flow in your computer.
If you put a copyright protected DVD in the player and the player doesn't inform that is protected, Vista will handle the data as unprotected.
So all the pharaonic protection measures depend only on what the DVD/CD player will report.
You can think that the players will always tell the truth to Vista, but this is wrong. This doesn't mean that the players must necessarly cheat, they only can ignore the copyright information.
Let take a close look at the DVD/CD players, first at all people that are the customers don't like the protections, if they have the alternative to purchase a protected player or an unprotected, they will choose the second option, so the potential market for unprotected players is very much bigger that for protected.
The second an most important fact is who are the DVD/CD player fabricants?, the answer is easy, most of them are Asiatic. They make the players for all the world and not only for the US.
Most of the world don't want or use the copyright protections, if some do it is because in the country exist some law that force to do it, without any mandatory law, the customers will not purchase a protected player.
You can add China that has a population more of a billion, even few have computers even so, is a huge market for the player and of course no Chinese will use any protected player.
You can expect very easily that 90% of Asiatic player will be unprotected, no matter how much Microsoft, RiAA, BMG, Hollywood will scream.
The US probably will make some mandatory law that all the players used in the US must have be protected players, so any Asiatic player exported to the US must be protected.
And here starts another problem exclusive of Americans, these laws will be applied only to legally imported players, you can't expect that can be applied to the illegal, or pirate CD/DVD obbey any law.
So you have two groups of players, players fabricated by American companies or legally imported from Asia and players purchased in a shop in the corner of the street.
Even for legal players this story doesn't end yet. You can see that a player fabricant must have to do two kinds of players: protected or unprotected. And this nobody does!!!, is not economical compatible for a global market. They do only one class of players, the difference is done only by some programing, can be by a printed card jump or dip, or by means of some software code.
If the protection requires some additional hardware the unprotected version comes without this hardware at a lower price.
All the manufactored players are the same and unprotected, they only turn protected when by progarmming once shipped in an official way.
And is not only a question of the fabricant, even the fabricants are many and the players models are many, all of them use the same few chips manufactored by the same semiconductor fabricant, and the programming is in the chip!
If you have the programming code you can turn a protected player into an unprotected player.
My last DVD player (for TV) that I purchased it was some legally imported, you know DVD has regions, so my DVD came programed to the respective region, but within all the papers that came together with the DVD was a small sheet of paper where was the sequence of keys to turn it into RegionX, even I hadn't the work of typing the keys, it was already in RegionX, the shop did this task for me!
In resume, if your player is protected and subjected to Vista and Microsoft is only because you want it.

Check out the section about what happens if your drivers aren't updated, or you have to change out your motherboard etc....

Denial-of-Service via Driver Revocation<br></br><br></br>Nope, I will not be getting Vista..Im happy with what I have.

The best thing that we can do is to get rid of Vista and don't give any kind of support to it.
If people that make Wndows applications stop doing anything that is specific to Vista I want to see what Microsoft will do!
This police will have no negative impact on software makers, first at all it must be remembered that most of Windows users still use Windows 98 and not everyone has a 4Ghz computer, most of the computers used are old and some very old.
If we make some software that doesn't work with Vista we will lose very little, but if our software doesn't work with Win98 we lose a lot.
We can mantein this police for five years and then revaluate it, meantime many Win98 users should have migrated to XP, that also would be something old and the old machines will be 4GHz computers.
So if our software doesn't work with Vista, bad luck for you and better upgrade your computer back to XP

Quote - If people that make Windows applications stop doing anything that is specific to Vista I want to see what Microsoft will do!

Agreed, but unlikely to happen.  M$ can't afford for that to happen.  Plus all the vendors who are having to scratch M$ back to enable this (ATI, Nvidia, Dell, HP, etc., etc.) are going to want their share of the re-buy $'s.

M$ has already decided DX10 will be Vista-only.  At moment not much difference between DX9 and DX10 for most games, but it's an indicator...

Better to hope that enough people get pissed at M$ that they moved to Linux.  But alas, as most peeps don't install new OS's or even upgrades, until Dell, HP, etc., sell Linux-installed to home users this has little chance too.  And for reasons stated above, they'll prefer to sell a bigger faster (CPU at least ;-)) systems with Vista!

A complete Linux system, with most common drivers for any PC, Office work-a-like, GIMP, and most every other general app you'd want fits on an 800MB install CD - and execute from it.  Vista installs 800MB of code for OS (a misnomer in this case) with drivers for just the current system and 1 browser and 1 emailer!  And Office 2007 on Vista will reputedly refuse to install on less than a 1Gb of memory PC!!!

Seriously, the best hope lies with the Chinese manufacturers, that they continue to develop lower cost, simpler, Vista-incompatible boards (for use on our Linux systems), and they succeed with EVD.

But we're stuck 'cos eF shows no sign of moving Poser to Linux...  Unless VMfree turns out to run Poser7.  Perhaps all the out-dated Windows file dialogs have been removed?  And perhaps the OGL preview is compliant enough now?

Quote - M$ has already decided DX10 will be Vista-only.  At moment not much difference between DX9 and DX10 for most games, but it's an indicator...

Something like this happened in the past with video card fabricants.
DirectX is propietary to Microsoft and its use by the video card fabricant must be licensed and cannot be used with something that is not Microsoft.
There's another alternative to DirectX that is OpenGL. OpenGL is an open and free specification from Sillicon Graphics with full available support and tutorials.
Some video fabricants that entered in partnership with Microsoft wrote only  drivers for DirectX without giving any support or releasing any specification for something that was not Microsoft.
Other fabricants instead wrote drivers for DirectX and OpenGL and gave support for Linux, the result was obvious, tell me who will purchase today a video board that hasn't OpenGL?
Even Poser and DazStudio are based on OpenGL and not on DirectX.
Something similar happened with SoundBlaster. Many years ago SoundBlaster was the most popular audio card used by almost all computers and if a card was not SoundBlaster it was SoundBlaster compatible.
One day Sound Blaster become a partner of Microsoft and so, only relesead drivers for Windows and never released any information or documentation for people be able to write drivers for other systems.
What happened?,  tell me today how many computers have a Sound Blaster card?, most of the cards or on board chips are Asiatic!!! Result, who was king lost the kingdom and Sound Blaster lost the market.
If Microsoft decides that DirectX10 will be only for Vista it will mean the end of DirectX that will be replaced by game makers by OpenGL, and for games don't forget Playstation 3........

I heard or read sometime ago about the DX10...something about if you wanted to have it, you must verify your copy of windows, and update to SP2?....I do know I tried to get my DX9 reinstalled because something went wonky with it {all of a sudden} and went to the site, and upon clicking the link to dl it, I was not taken to DX9, but was going to be forced to take DX 10.......I dont like that sort of thing at all...regardless my Windows is what originally came on my computer from factory...but I refused to verify and go to SP2....:glare:

I dont think there are going to be too many happy campers with the route Vista is taking...its wayyy too controlling

People use to upgrade Windows without any reason, if what you have is working why to upgrade? and if it doesn't work it will be worst and slower with the upgrade.
XP64 is all you need for many years and for 32 bits applications almost everything works with Win98, faster and with much lesser risk of virus.

Ahhhh...more Windows bashing.  It happens every time Microsoft introduces a new O/S and it's always fun to watch the torch carrying naysayers run through the village looking for the monster they call Microsoft.

I'd like to know, kawecki, just how you propose to "get rid" of Vista.  Are you going to call the major computer manufacturers and tell them to not include Vista?  Are you going to call every major corporation on the planet and tell them to not migrate their hundreds of millions of users to Vista?  Are you going to e-mail everyone on the planet who is looking forward to Vista to not upgrade because you think it's a bad idea?  I have very bad news for you, kawecki, you're not going to be successful.

Have you noticed how there's never been a mass-migration to Linux?  And do you understand why?

It seems to me the only people who are concered, if you will, are those moaning and bitching about Windows validation.  Now if your Windows is valid, meaning legally purchased, what the hell is the problem?  "Oh, No!  Oh Shit!  My pirated copy of Windows or whatever else I've illegally downloaded is about to be discovered!  I'm going to have to spend my own money now!"

The other concern is DRM.  That one I can understand.  Hell, even Bill Gates thinks DRM is a bad idea...

From Tech Crunch: Bill Gates: "I don’t hide the fact that I think DRM isn’t workable, and actively support DRM-free music alternatives such as eMusic and Amie Street. The rise of illegal or quasi-legal options like AllofMP3 and BitTorrent ensure that users have plenty of options when it comes to DRM-free digital music."

Gates didn’t get into what could replace DRM, but he did give some reasonably candid insights suggesting that he thinks DRM is as lame as the rest of us.

Gates said that no one is satisfied with the current state of DRM, which “causes too much pain for legitmate buyers” while trying to distinguish between legal and illegal uses. He says no one has done it right, yet. There are “huge problems” with DRM, he says, and “we need more flexible models, such as the ability to “buy an artist out for life” (not sure what he means). He also criticized DRM schemes that try to install intelligence in each copy so that it is device specific.

His short term advice: “People should just buy a cd and rip it. You are legal then.”

He ended by saying “DRM is not where it should be, but you won’t get me to say that there should be usage models and different payment models for usage. At the end of the day, incentive systems do make a difference, but we don’t have it right with incentives or interoperability.”

But is the world suddenly going to come to a screeching halt?  Will people refuse to oder that brand new Dell with Vista because of DRM?

No.  They'll order millions of them.

I really think people are in panic mode when they shouldn't be.  Why not wait and see what's really going to happen, instead of relying on some MS basher's blog for (mis)information?  I can quote as many sources who offer valid reasons to migrate to Vista as that idiot who has listed as many sources as he has for his Vista/Microsoft bashing.

And if you're still panicing over viruses, buy a Mac.  They're relatively idiot proof.  If for some reason you can't manage to navigate the Internet or use e-mail without ending up with a virus, then by all means, buy a Mac.

Quote - I'd like to know, kawecki, just how you propose to "get rid" of Vista.  Are you going to call the major computer manufacturers and tell them to not include Vista?  Are you going to call every major corporation on the planet and tell them to not migrate their hundreds of millions of users to Vista?  Are you going to e-mail everyone on the planet who is looking forward to Vista to not upgrade because you think it's a bad idea?  I have very bad news for you, kawecki, you're not going to be successful

Forget Hollywood and return to the real world.
Have you realised that what makes Windows usable are Antivir,  Avg,  SpyBot,  Ad-aware, ZoneAlarm,  Firefox.? and all of them are for free!!
Windows exist not due the major corporations of the planet, it exist thanks to small or tiny companies or by simple people that makes Windows work.
It's only enough that these people stop giving support to Vista to turn Vista into something useless.
It will be the major computer maufactores or the major corporations of the planet that will save the hundreds of millions of users that migrated to Vista when their computers will be flooded by virus, spies and all their work and data destroyed by Vista crashes? I want to see it!

Quote - Have you noticed how there's never been a mass-migration to Linux?  And do you understand why?

And this didn't happened?,  in what planet do you live? > Quote - It seems to me the only people who are concered, if you will, are those moaning and bitching about Windows validation.  Now if your Windows is valid, meaning legally purchased, what the hell is the problem?

The only people that moan and bitch about Windows validation are people that purchased it legally, in the patched version there's no validation, so nothing to moan or bitch!

Quote - The other concern is DRM.  That one I can understand.  Hell, even Bill Gates thinks DRM is a bad idea...

**From Tech Crunch: Bill Gates: *"I don’t hide the fact that I think DRM isn’t workable, and actively support DRM-free music alternatives such as eMusic and Amie Street. The rise of illegal or quasi-legal options like AllofMP3 and BitTorrent ensure that users have plenty of options when it comes to DRM-free digital music."***Gates didn’t get into what could replace DRM, but he did give some reasonably candid insights suggesting that he thinks DRM is as lame as the rest of us.

Gates said that no one is satisfied with the current state of DRM, which “causes too much pain for legitmate buyers” while trying to distinguish between legal and illegal uses. He says no one has done it right, yet. There are “huge problems” with DRM,

**
**Of course that  Bill Gates thinks DRM is a bad idea, DRM was not invented by Micrososft, what is bad if RIAA and Hollywood DRM, What is bad is what Sony-BMG put in their CDs. What is good is Microsoft DRM.
Have you realised what Vista pretend to do is to impose Microsoft's DRM to RIAA and Hollywood?
It was the same as with the internet when Microsoft wanted to impose Microsoft Network to be used instead what is used today for internet.
It was the same when Microsoft violated Sun's license and tried to impose Microsoft's Java, something that still is trying.
It was to same when Microsoft tried to impose site owners their propietary software of course not compatible with Linux. For your limited knowledge is Linux or FreeBEOS that is used by almost all servers!
You see, all these Microsoft temptavives have failled!!, do you think that Vista will be different?

*"It seems to me the only people who are concered, if you will, are those moaning and bitching about Windows validation.  Now if your Windows is valid, meaning legally purchased, what the hell is the problem?  "Oh, No!  Oh Shit!  My pirated copy of Windows or whatever else I've illegally downloaded is about to be discovered!  I'm going to have to spend my own money now!""

*This sounds similar to the argument "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear," to justify police-state enforcement and stomping over people's rights, especially the right to privacy.  As well as Micro$oft (and the entertainment industry) treating their customers like common criminals.  (And for validation, a form of monopolism by actively working to prevent their stuff from running on an otherwise compatible system).

Activation is first and foremost a pain in the ass.  At least several times I have been on the phone for over 20 minutes to activate Windows XP after a clean install.  Fortunately they have given me the activation code each time.  (I have read about instances of legitimate or seemingly legitimate users being denied activation and told to purchase another copy of Windows.

*"The other concern is DRM.  That one I can understand.  Hell, even Bill Gates thinks DRM is a bad idea..."

*Bill Gates is not Microsoft, for one thing.  He doesn't even run the company more.  Even when he was, there was a lot that he didn't have much control over.  Even if Bill personally wished to give Windows away for free, it would never actually happen.

DRM isn't even about piracy.  It's about control and trying to milk as much money from consumers as possible.  If the RIAA had their way if you wished to be able to listen to something on your CD player and on your computer you would have to pay twice for the same content - even though ripping a CD to your computer for your own personal use is supposed to be completely legal.  DRM schemes could very easily abused for applications that have nothing to do with copyright, i.e., vendor lock-in (where a company - i.e., Microsoft, could make it prohibitively difficult or expensive to attempt to switch to a competitor's product, ensuring that the consumer is "locked in" to their products), forced upgrades, and censorship (through revoking of certifications to render a document unreadable, if the government or a large corporation wished to make something they didn't like disappear).

Anyone with any degree of intelligence (who doesn't have Big Brother fantasies) knows that DRM is a load of crap.

With any degree of luck the Hardware Functionality Scan (HFS) bullshit won't be going anywhere as hardware vendors quite naturally are not going to want to play ball (as it will necessarily make far more work for them)

*"XP64 is all you need for many years and for 32 bits applications almost everything works with Win98, faster and with much lesser risk of virus."

XP64 is essentially broken.  Probably intentionally to try to force people to get Vista if they want 64 bits, and submit to whatever crap Micro$oft tries to foist upon them.  (98 is flaky and notoriously insecure - having been built upon the MS-DOG kernel, but 2000 is solid)

This article from Techworld.com seems to expand on the problems this will cause for some rather important medical apps:
"Vista has another playback quality reduction measure. It requires that 'any interface that provides high-quality output degrade the signal quality that passes through it if premium content is present. This is done through a "constrictor" that downgrades the signal to a much lower-quality one, then up-scales it again back to the original spec, but with a significant loss in quality.' If this happens with a medical imaging application then artifacts introduced by the constrictor can 'cause mis-diagnoses and in extreme cases even become life-threatening."
tinyurl.com/y3cug6
Edie

hey,
I'm as pro linux as you can get, and I have managed to avoid slamming MS.
the article I linked to at the start of this thread was written to inform people of the issues, let everyone decide for themselves, just give them the chance to have full information.

I sent an email to the author of the article, his response:

The article was written in the very early stages of testing, since it's release I have heard that MS is working on these issues, but my sources from the industry have not been talking with me so I have no current information.

my new system [ just bought it ] will be MS free forever.
I'll continue to be 100% linux and not have these issues, but not everyone is willing to tell Daz, Autodesk .. etc to take a hike, if you want my money make a linux version of your applications. I am willing to not be spending money for software that doesn't run on my OS. I'll spend money for software that does run on it, like Softimage XSI, Maya.

Even I have Linux I use it very little, I took other approach to solve Micro$oft's crap.
Windows as an operational system by itself has some bugs, but these bugs hasven't too much importance, only time to time they make your application crash without any other big problem.
You can work with Poser all the day without any problem, only you need to restart Poser time to time, but this is due a Poser problem and not due a Windows problem.
What makes Windows a crap is not the operational system, is all the crap that is installed together with the Windows operational system. All this crap is not needed by the operational system, all this crap is not needed for the applications, but all this crap makes Windows a total mess subjected to any sort of virus, spies, malfunctions, slowiness and crashes.
The theory involved is very simple, if you take Windows and you remove all the associated crap leaving alone the operational system, Windows turns into something reliable and fast.
To have an idea of which is the crap that comes together with Windows you have: Internet Explorer, Outlook Express, Microsoft Office, Microsoft network, Messenger, Media Player, active desktop, any active X and a lot of dlls that you don't know for what it are, the only thing that you know if you remove these dlls nothing happens, all works normaly and the computer run faster!
You don't need any of this crap for running your applications and in case you need someone you can install Firefox,  Abode, OpenOffice and so on.
I don't use any kind of firewall or active anti-virus. Anti-virus I only use to scan a suspected downloaded file, files downloaded from Renderosity I never scan!
And I never had any problem with virus or any kind of data destruction.

A lot of this is a case of the tail wagging the dog.  Microsoft wants the PC to take on the role of home entertainment center; meanwhile the content providers have told them that the only way they will allow high-definition content to work on the PC is if Microsoft agrees to implement this draconian copy protection mechanism (an empty threat - unless the entertainment industry is actually willing to cut its nose off to spite its face).  Microsoft itself has little to gain from this, as they aren't the ones producing HD content, and they could end up losing customers and profits if people get angry and switch to Linux or other open-source platforms (or to Apple).  Now they could end up benefiting greatly if the entertainment industry ever actually succeeds in getting open source outlawed, but if it fails as it hopefully will the fallout could be disastrous if Microsoft finds themselves on the wrong end of the fight.

Microsoft knows that you can't stop a dedicated pirate.  From their perspective, product activation was quite successful - they managed to cut down on casual copying, as well as make things at least a bit more difficult for the hackers and pirates, but a dedicated cracker is going to find a way around just about any copy protection scheme you can possibly come up with.

And when you consider the sheer size of an HD-DVD movie, NOBODY is going to be trying to download one of those things - assuming that there is even someone out there with the hard drive space and bandwidth that they are willing to waste in order to share it.  Eventually that might change - I remember the days when downloading a single MP3 took half an hour (and you had to pray that your ISP didn't disconnect you - ahh the memories of dialup) - but I don't see over 8 GB of data ever becoming a trivial amount of data to download for a long time.

Quote - Microsoft itself has little to gain from this, as they aren't the ones producing HD content

The story is not like this, Microsoft has very much to win.
The content providers wants DRM be implemented in home computers, but the Microsoft doesn't implement their DRM in the Windows, Microsoft implements his own DRM in the Windows that is not the same.
What has to win Microsoft is very much,  if Microsoft has success with his DRM he can tell the content providers, "Windows is now protected, if you want that your content be protected you must license our DRM and pay for our service", no money no protection.
The same happened with Microsoft internet servers, if you don't want Linux and want a Microsoft server is not enough to purchase the software from Microsoft, you must pay for the use of any feature of the servers.
Imagine the fortune that will make Microsoft if for any released DVD the content providers must pay something to Microsoft for their protection services!!!!

Quote - From their perspective, product activation was quite successful - they managed to cut down on casual copying, as well as make things at least a bit more difficult for the hackers and pirates,

Success?, activation-free XP appeared before the official release of XP!

Quote - And when you consider the sheer size of an HD-DVD movie, NOBODY is going to be trying to download one of those things - assuming that there is even someone out there with the hard drive space and bandwidth that they are willing to waste in order to share it.  Eventually that might change - I remember the days when downloading a single MP3 took half an hour (and you had to pray that your ISP didn't disconnect you - ahh the memories of dialup) - but I don't see over 8 GB of data ever becoming a trivial amount of data to download for a long time.

I agree, downloading 8 GB is not an easy task and you still have the risk to download some crap instead, but for what have so much trouble, you can buy it in the corner of the street for 2$ and of course DRM free. You even don't need to buy, is just enough to some yours friend have it  so you can make a copy, as the pirate DVDs are DRM free you can make the copy without any problem in Windows Vista itself!!!

Quote - The content providers wants DRM be implemented in home computers, but the Microsoft doesn't implement their DRM in the Windows, Microsoft implements his own DRM in the Windows that is not the same.
What has to win Microsoft is very much,  if Microsoft has success with his DRM he can tell the content providers, "Windows is now protected, if you want that your content be protected you must license our DRM and pay for our service", no money no protection.

The problem with that reasoning is that the DRM already exists for the most part.  The content providers are leaning on Microsoft to provide enforcement for the policies at the kernel and driver level.  (They also did not go to the effort of creating DRM for various platforms and technologies only to abandon it and pay to license whatever Microsoft has to offer.)

Microsoft already makes money from device driver signing (as I would assume that they do not do this for free).  Though with Vista apparently instead of Microsoft certifying to the consumer that they have thoroughly tested the driver and found it causes no problems for one's system they're certifying to the RIAA and MPAA that the driver has been tested and found to adequately enforce their content protection and not leak premium content.  (And with banning unsigned drivers, saying to the consumer that you're not allowed to supply your own driver even).  Though with only signed drivers allowed for the 64 bit versions they could probably charge higher fees for this as the hardware manufacturers would be forced to consent if they wanted their hardware to work with Vista at all.

Vista essentially does not do anything to protect the content, per se, only the interfaces that the content must pass through - from the Blu-Ray or HD-DVD disc to the media player to the video and sound cards and finally to the screen and speakers; requiring every device that handles protected content to assert that it can and will properly protect the content (i.e., the video card may not send protected HD content down the DVI interface unencrypted at full resolution, and Vista establishes a chain of trust to ensure that the video card and other devices are what they claim to be, and that the driver can have its certificate revoked if it is found to compromise the system).  And a device that can't establish that it will properly protect the content, will not receive it.

Nothing for the content providers to license.  Though the hardware manufacturers are going to have to play along (and likely be paying money to have their stuff certified) and probably aren't going to be liking it that much.

Quote - Success?, activation-free XP appeared before the official release of XP!

Success is relative.  If their goal had been to completely stop all piracy of Windows, then clearly they failed miserably.  But instead they had much more attainable goals, which was to eliminate casual copying which made up a large percentage of the unlicensed Windows installations around.  Where as pre-XP you could borrow a Windows installation CD from a friend or coworker and install it, now if you want to get Windows for free you need to apply a crack that has necessarily come from a dubious source (and if I remember correctly SP1 and SP2 undid the work of the cracks that had been available at the time.  To say nothing of the possibility of something detecting the cracked state of your system and notifying Microsoft so they can press charges if they choose.)

Microsoft does nothing for free, for which reason do you think that Microsoft is spending money and men-labor making the DRM protection in Vista?
Microsoft sells Windows and not DVDs or CDs, what is the importance of RIAA for Microsoft?, Microsoft can easily release another Windows without any kind of protection and people will buy it, Microsoft doesn't need any RIAA for selling his Windows.
The only reason by which Microsoft is puting DRM into Windows is for making money  from the content creators. If they don't pay Microsoft there's no reason to exist DRM in Windows, Windows will sell with or without DRM, well... a little less with DRM.

Quote - Vista essentially does not do anything to protect the content, per se, only the interfaces that the content must pass through - from the Blu-Ray or HD-DVD disc to the media player to the video and sound cards and finally to the screen and speakers;

All the protection is done by Vista!!!!,  the only reason that the interfaces must have a hardware proteccion is to help Vista. And Vista use CPU time for making the protection!!!!, so your software will run much slower with Vista.
Without the hardware's help Windows protection would be flawed, anyone would be able to install a device driver that access directly the hardware ignoring all the Vista protection.
Never mind, Vista protection would be flawed anyway, you always are able to create a device driver that bypass all the hardware and software protection.
RIAA and Microsoft lives only in a dream world and don't forget the Asiatics that will flood the market with DRM-less computers.

Quote - The only reason by which Microsoft is puting DRM into Windows is for making money  from the content creators. If they don't pay Microsoft there's no reason to exist DRM in Windows, Windows will sell with or without DRM, well... a little less with DRM.

There is nothing in there that the content providers have to pay Microsoft for.  The content is already protected.  BD+, AACP and HDCP already exist, and none are under the control of Microsoft.  Microsoft apparently wants to merge the home entertainment center with the PC.  The content providers have said no go unless Microsoft can protect the content.

Any digital protection scheme consists of two components - the encryption of the data itself, and policies for allowing the data to be decrypted and presented.  The content necessarily must be decrypted in order to be played, however any device or piece of software capable of decrypting the data has the potential to completely blow away the content protection.

The only way you get a key for decrypting the data is if either you developed the DRM scheme yourself, or obtain a license for it.  In order to obtain the license one has to agree to the licensing terms, which include keeping their key secret and to not leak or otherwise allow unauthorized copying of content.  Under more recent protection mechanisms, it is possible to revoke a key if it is found that the player that uses it is found to violate the license agreement.

Vista's main job is to tighten the channel between the encrypted data and its presentation (and waste much CPU time with its paranoia)

Quote - Without the hardware's help Windows protection would be flawed, anyone would be able to install a device driver that access directly the hardware ignoring all the Vista protection.
Never mind, Vista protection would be flawed anyway, you always are able to create a device driver that bypass all the hardware and software protection.

Which Vista is supposed to prevent.  It will probably be cracked though, just about everything else has given enough time.  (Eventually someone will find a way to force Vista to accept an unsigned driver)

However the whole thing could just as easily blow up in Microsoft's face.

Quote - There is nothing in there that the content providers have to pay Microsoft for.  The content is already protected.  BD+, AACP and HDCP already exist, and none are under the control of Microsoft.

There's no existent protection, only exist some information writen in the DVD, any computer is able to copy or play this protected DVD. To exist a protection the software running the computer must read and process this writen information in the DVD and then tell "you are not allowed to make a copy", but any computer software that ignores this information as Linux or Windows XP, 2000, 98 continue to be able to make the copy.
Content providers only depend on Vista for not allowing making the copies.

Quote - Microsoft apparently wants to merge the home entertainment center with the PC.  The content providers have said no go unless Microsoft can protect the content.

This is something that is not decided by the content providers neither Microsoft, it's only decided by people that use the computer to hear music and Watch videos.

Quote - Any digital protection scheme consists of two components - the encryption of the data itself, and policies for allowing the data to be decrypted and presented.  The content necessarily must be decrypted in order to be played, however any device or piece of software capable of decrypting the data has the potential to completely blow away the content protection.

The data in the DVD/CDs is not encrypted, the encryption is done by Vista when reads the DVD, here is the reason that the DVD players must not have the digital/video output, ifnot you always are able to send this data to any external or internal device.
Vista reads the data and encrypts it in the device driver, then the encrypted data flows in the computer and then is decrypted again, this is ridiculous resulting in a slow computer with degraded quality.
Windows 98 has no CD driver, Windows XP has and Windows Vista will use this driver to encrypt the data, but this is stupid, you always can access the data of the CD sending commands and reading the port 3F0H  (if it in the secondary master IDE).

[quoteThe only way you get a key for decrypting the data is if either you developed the DRM scheme yourself, or obtain a license for it.  In order to obtain the license one has to agree to the licensing terms, which include keeping their key secret and to not leak or otherwise allow unauthorized copying of content.  Under more recent protection mechanisms, it is possible to revoke a key if it is found that the player that uses it is found to violate the license agreement.
This is flawed, the encryption is done by Vista, it doesn't matter how sofisticated is the encryption algorithm, if you write a device driver that ignores the content provider information, Vista will not encode it and treat as the data as unprotected.
You can be sure, soon as Vista appear there also will appear patches available to download every where to turn off Vista's DRM and also DVD burner softwares that will allow you to copy protected DVDs.
Even in the imaginary case that Vista have success with the protection, users that are not able to copy DVDs with Vista can always turn back to XP, 2000, 98 or Linux for making the copy.
You can see that all this will have no effect on piracy, who wants to make illegal copies, watch illegal material or share it through P2P will continue doing without any problem using XP or a patched Vista.
People that don't do this "illegal" activities can continue to using Vista and pay the price of a slow a degraded computer.
In other words ii's only a fantasy of Microsoft and RIAA, a fantasy that the legal users must pay .
Pirates will continuewith their pleasurous life and legal users will have their life turned into an Inferno.

You are absolutely wrong, kawecki.

If the data on the disc itself wasn't encrypted it would be trivial to just read the data straight off the disc (say under Linux which doesn't give a damn about copy protection) and play and copy the data to your heart's content.  The MPAA may be stupid, but they are not THAT stupid.

DVD's are encrypted.  What do you think CSS is supposed to be?  It was a weak and highly flawed algorithm (fortunately for anyone who desired to play a commercial DVD under Linux).  In particular it had the fatal weakness that compromising just a single key compromised the whole scheme.  Of course, DeCSS is illegal under the DMCA, but that hasn't stopped anyone from using it.

The data on Blu-Ray discs is similarly encrypted, only one can assume with a much stronger scheme.  They also learned their lesson with CSS and made it so that they would be able to revoke compromised keys (thus disabling the players that use them; of course there are issues with disabling people's Blu-Ray and HD-DVD players, especially if a certain compromised key is also used in a lot of legitimate players).

Quote - if you write a device driver that ignores the content provider information, Vista will not encode it and treat as the data as unprotected.

If you write a device driver that ignores the content provider information, then Vista will not allow that device driver to be loaded.  (Unless you can forge a signature for the driver, or crack Vista itself.)

Microsoft has also decided that 32 bit versions of Vista will NOT play HD content at all.  For no other reason than they can't lock down the 32 bit platform (i.e., lock out unsigned drivers) without breaking a lot of already existing applications.  So all software Blu-Ray and HD-DVD players will likely be 64 bit, so XP and 2000 are out.  (XP64 maybe, though the software might just refuse to run on anything less than Vista anyway).

Though in practice some hacker is going to rip AACS to shreds, and it won't matter what Vista tries to do anymore (other than trying to get decent performance out of your system :cursing: ).  Any player for Linux will probably be based on said crack, and therefore illegal under the DMCA, not that it is going to be stopping many people.

Anything that tries to get around the copy protection, under any operating system, will necessarily be based on cracking the protection.  Even Vista won't be able to protect against a rogue decoder based on a key that has been stolen or generated from a crack from decoding HD content and stripping away the protection on it.  (Unless Microsoft can find a way to specifically lock out unsigned video players along with unsigned drivers.)

Quote - So all software Blu-Ray and HD-DVD players will likely be 64 bit, so XP and 2000 are out.

HD-DVD players have nothing to do with 64 bits,it doesn't matter what they have inside, and you can be sure that inside a DVD player there is only a 16 bit processor or even a 8 bit, nothing of 32 bits neither 64 bits.
The DVD player is interfaced to the computer by means of a flat 40 wires cable following the EIDE electrical/software specification. You can use the same player with PC 16/32/64 bits, with Windows or Linux. With Mac hardawre and OS and even with Sony Playstation.

Quote - The data on Blu-Ray discs is similarly encrypted, only one can assume with a much stronger scheme.  They also learned their lesson with CSS and made it so that they would be able to revoke compromised keys (thus disabling the players that use them; of course there are issues with disabling people's Blu-Ray and HD-DVD players, especially if a certain compromised key is also used in a lot of legitimate players).

If you buy a DVD you want to play it with your DVD player, with your TV set, with your computer or even play it in your car. I suppose that  you are not going to purchase a special DVD that you only can play it in your computer.
The DVD data is always the same, it's a read-only-device. Your DVD, your TV and your car are not conected to the internet, so the DVD reader's decoding scheme is hardwired, always the same and the same for any DVD. There's no way to enter a license into a DVD player, you only can select the options and scenes.
It doesn't matter how the DVD data is encoded in the disk, RIAA and MPAA must give the player fabricant all the information and keys needed to decode the disk data, if not their product will be useless and the keys and information are the same for all disks and don't change through time.
Even a fabricant that haven't signed their license and so has not this data, he always can take some DVD players some other fabricants and by reverse engineering make his own DVD player product.
Also this information is not a deep state secret and so, it circulates freely around the world.

Note: Almost all the integrated circuits (chips and processors) used by DVD players are made in Asia.

Quote - The DVD player is interfaced to the computer by means of a flat 40 wires cable following the EIDE electrical/software specification. You can use the same player with PC 16/32/64 bits, with Windows or Linux. With Mac hardawre and OS and even with Sony Playstation.

You need the software to decode the data though.

There is no technical reason why such software could not be made for 32 bit versions of Windows or any version of Linux; only the licensing requirements that licensees of AACS are forbidden from writing a BD player or codec that works on those systems because they are deemed "insecure".

Quote - The DVD data is always the same, it's a read-only-device. Your DVD, your TV and your car are not conected to the internet, so the DVD reader's decoding scheme is hardwired, always the same and the same for any DVD. There's no way to enter a license into a DVD player, you only can select the options and scenes.

The manufacturer of the hardware has to license the copy protection platform just in order for the player to be able to read protected discs (which is nearly every disc on the market).

Quote - It doesn't matter how the DVD data is encoded in the disk, RIAA and MPAA must give the player fabricant all the information and keys needed to decode the disk data, if not their product will be useless and the keys and information are the same for all disks and don't change through time.

The fabricant has to agree to certain terms and conditions in order to receive a key; those terms including to keep the key a secret and to go to certain minimum lengths to prevent the key from ever being compromised, and to not use it to build a player that can compromise copy protection.

Under AACS, it is possible to revoke a key by removing it from the keyset from future disks.  Those discs would no longer work with that key (though there is nothing they could do about existing discs).

Quote - The fabricant has to agree to certain terms and conditions in order to receive a key; those terms including to keep the key a secret and to go to certain minimum lengths to prevent the key from ever being compromised, and to not use it to build a player that can compromise copy protection.

As I said before, the key is always the same for any fabricant and any fabricant that hasn't the key can easily get it by reverse engineering from other fabricant product, pay a bribe to some employee or by an exchange of favours between fabricants.

Quote - Under AACS, it is possible to revoke a key by removing it from the keyset from future disks.  Those discs would no longer work with that key (though there is nothing they could do about existing discs).

And you will need to buy a new player!!!!.  Imagine each time Hollywood releases a new movie you have to purchase an new DVD player!!!

All the ideas of Microsoft  about Vista will end as usual in a fracass, you must take into account:

1- Vista will require special hardware and will not be compatible with the existent hardware.
The question is, will the hardware fabricants have interest of making a special hardware for Vista?,  and which will be the price in the afirmative case?
The price of a hardware depend on the level of production, little production price very expensive, huge global production price very cheap.
To achieve a low price a product must be used all over the world by many applications, if Microsoft requires a special hardware to be used only with Vista, this is a limited market for a global production, so the cost will be much expensive.
You can add other requirement and is that Microsoft must aprove and give a certificate to the fabricant, not all the fabricants will be aproved or will have interest on making the hardware, so you can expect a few available fabricants or even only one.
As the number will be very small, the fabricants will raise their price due the higher production costs or the maximization of profits of Capitalism.

2- The second big problem is that Microsoft has problems with XP in Europa and Asia, Microsoft is not allowed to sell there XP as it is, it must sell a different version.
What pretends to do Microsoft with Vista is a clear violation of monopoly, privacy and customer rights laws, so Vista will be not allowed in EU and Asia unless many protection features are removed and documentation released.
The proposal of Vista will be sold only in the US, if Microsoft pretends to sell Vista outside the US it will need to sell a different version there.
The inmediate consequence is that you will have two kinds of harwares for Vista, a special hardware to be used by Vista-US and other hardware much similar or eqaul to the existen one to be used by Vista-not US. This fact will raise even more the price of an US computer able to run Vista.

The obvious result is the answering of this question:
"Do you will pay a very much higher price for a degraded performance computer by the only reason that is able to run Vista?"

Quote - And you will need to buy a new player!!!!.  Imagine each time Hollywood releases a new movie you have to purchase an new DVD player!!!

That probably won't ever happen with CE players.  If someone were to build a rogue player they would probably get into a lot of trouble for it.  And if disabling a key would cause a large number of legitimate players to stop working they probably wouldn't do it either, as the fallout would be too great.

I can actually see them never actually revoking a key over the lifetime of the standard.  And if any key does get revoked it will probably be software for playing HD movies on a PC.  Microsoft has decided it wants to bring HD to the PC.  The content providers said nothing doing unless they can make the PC at secure as proprietary CE devices.  Consumer electronics devices, being completely closed, proprietary systems, are necessarily far more secure than an open platform like the PC.  I say to them take this stuff and shove it.  If that is how you are going to be, I'll use a different device for playing high-definition movies.  Leave my PC alone.

Quote - 1- Vista will require special hardware and will not be compatible with the existent hardware.
The question is, will the hardware fabricants have interest of making a special hardware for Vista?,  and which will be the price in the afirmative case?

That is actually not true.  If it WERE the case it would be Microsoft's suicide note.  Existing hardware will work with Vista - it just won't be allowed to handle certain protected content - and that depends on the content - right now the vast majority of the discs on the market don't even set the ICT (Image Constraint Token) as pretty much all the displays on the market are not HDCP compliant yet).  Vista obeys requirements on what it is and isn't allowed to send over non-HDCP protected interfaces.

If Vista does not run on existing hardware, how are people expected to upgrade?

Quote - You can add other requirement and is that Microsoft must aprove and give a certificate to the fabricant, not all the fabricants will be aproved or will have interest on making the hardware, so you can expect a few available fabricants or even only one.

It has to certify the drivers.  Without the drivers, the hardware is useless anyway.

Quote - The inmediate consequence is that you will have two kinds of harwares for Vista, a special hardware to be used by Vista-US and other hardware much similar or eqaul to the existen one to be used by Vista-not US. This fact will raise even more the price of an US computer able to run Vista.

Again not  the case.  The "special" hardware would be allowed to play certain content at full quality and resolution after establishing (via driver signing) that it would securely handle the protected content.  The "non-special" hardware would not have the data sent to it at all.  (The difference would be the "special" hardware being able to handle the encrypted data and the non-special hardware wouldn't.  Any data sent to the non-special hardware would have to be unencrypted.  Depending on the flags set by the content, it could get that data in reduced qualio)

Vista doesn't need to enforce allowing only certain trusted hardware devices in order to enforce DRM.  The non-trusted devices will not have the capability to decrypt the content.  You would need an HDCP compliant flat panel to display an HDCP-protected movie no matter what platform you were using.  A non-HDCP-compliant display would not be able to decrypt the signal (HDCP requires that protected data sent down the DVI path be encrypted to prevent it from being intercepted).

Any hardware will be able to work with Vista as long as there is a driver for it.  The only question is what Microsoft will allow said driver to do.  (Hardware would effectively only be disabled if there was no working driver available for it.  Completely locking out existing hardware from working at all with the new system would be a very bad business move on Microsoft's part)

I still have no intention of getting Vista anytime soon.

Quote - Existing hardware will work with Vista - it just won't be allowed to handle certain protected content - and that depends on the content -

This contradicts Vista, Vista depends on a special hardware for the protection will be effective, with normal hardware you can always send to it a protected material and the video card will show it and the audio card will play it.

Quote - The non-trusted devices will not have the capability to decrypt the content.

To something be decrypted it must have been encrypted first by Vista, if nothing was encrypted a normal hardware will be able to handle it.

Quote - The "non-special" hardware would not have the data sent to it at all.

But the non-special hardware can have the protected data. You are looking only at the end of the chain, you must consider the whole chain and a chain is broken at the weakest link.

1- The media that has copyrighted material
The DVD disk itself, and it must contain some information burned that tells the copyright information.
A pirate DVD has not any copyright information, so the chain is broken well before Vista enter into action. Vista will handle the pirate DVD as a free material.
2- The physical device that will read the DVD
This part kills Vista and is the weakest link easily to be broken. If Vista is allowed to use a normal and not-special DVD player, the normal player will encrypt nothing and would be able to output the copyrighted data as a normal data.
Even the data is encrypted in the DVD media the player can have a firmware to decrypt the data as is in home DVD players and output to Vista a normal free data and Vista will handle it as copyright free data.
The chain is broken here!!!, further efforts of  Vista are useless and a waste of CPU time.
Yes, the player will be not aproved by Microsoft, will not have the certificate, but the player will be treated as a normal player by Vista, but this "normal" player has the capability to output normal data from a copyrighted media and Vista will never know it!
If Vista is not allowed to use normal and unqualified players to play free data then we end again in expensive and not available hardware and so, Vista is useless.
3- The software path.
This is the only part where Vista DRM will work in practice, the rest is fantasy and myth.
Windows can read the information present in the DVD media and depending on the information Windows can treat the media data as free or copyrighted.
If Vista identifies a copyright information on the disk then it will encrypt the data coming from the normal player and this data will circulate in the computer and hard-disk  as encrypted data.
The piece of software that will be responsable for the identification and possible encryption is the DVD device driver and here the chain is broken again easily. If you replace the Vista DVD device driver by a custom driver or insert another device driver as a filter between the physical DVD player and Vista DVD device driver, the result will be a normal and copyright free data outgoing the device driver.
4- The destinatory hardware
The audio card and video card. This part has no importance, any normal data arriving to the cards will be outputed and if the data is normal the video and audio cards have no way to know if what you are viewing and hearing is copyrighted or not, for them is nothing more that a normal data.

Any hacking doesn't need to discover top secret keys or overcome sophisticated encryption schemes, for hacking you can ignore all this. You only need to inform Vista that what is copyrighted is not copyright and the rest Vista will do it. You only need to change few bytes of code and Vista DRM is gone!!
As a general rule, so spend one month or more in creating a protection for your software and this protection is cracked in only 15 minutes of work.
What a waste of money and men-hour!!!!

Quote - if nothing was encrypted a normal hardware will be able to handle it.

If it isn't encrypted then it wasn't protected content.  (It may have at one point been protected content that was freed from its DRM, but at this point Vista would not be able to tell the difference).

Quote - The DVD disk itself, and it must contain some information burned that tells the copyright information.
A pirate DVD has not any copyright information, so the chain is broken well before Vista enter into action. Vista will handle the pirate DVD as a free material.

A pirate DVD will have the content unencrypted.

All the copyright information is is something that tells whatever is handling the data what it is allowed to do with it.  A device that does not adhere to the policies will not be allowed to have a key, and thus won't be able to do anything with the data anyway.

Quote - 2- The physical device that will read the DVD
This part kills Vista and is the weakest link easily to be broken. If Vista is allowed to use a normal and not-special DVD player, the normal player will encrypt nothing and would be able to output the copyrighted data as a normal data.

Wrong.  The data on the disc itself is encrypted.  Vista handles the decryption and playback; the software application only has to provide remote control (Play, Fast Forward, etc) and will not actually handle any of the decrypted data.

Quote - Even the data is encrypted in the DVD media the player can have a firmware to decrypt the data as is in home DVD players and output to Vista a normal free data and Vista will handle it as copyright free data.

Home DVD players and computer DVD drives are two very different animals.  The computer drive reads the disc and sends the requested data to the IDE controller, which then gives the data to the operating system.  The data sent down the IDE bus is the raw, unencrypted data straight from the disc.

You could patch the firmware to do the decryption for you, but then you could just write a software application to do the same thing.  Either way, you would need a key.

Quote - Yes, the player will be not aproved by Microsoft, will not have the certificate, but the player will be treated as a normal player by Vista, but this "normal" player has the capability to output normal data from a copyrighted media and Vista will never know it!

The only way to do this is by breaking encryption.  Though in the end it probably won't prove too difficult.

Quote - If Vista identifies a copyright information on the disk then it will encrypt the data coming from the normal player and this data will circulate in the computer and hard-disk  as encrypted data.

Perhaps I am not making myself clear - the data on the disc itself is encrypted.  Vista does not read unencrypted data and then encrypt it thinking it will protect the data, it reads in encrypted data and then has to decrypt the data.  The ability to decrypt the data is granted to the system (Vista) only after its author licenses the technology and complies with its terms - which include to comply with all copy protection directives that come with the media being decrypted.

Also the way it is said up, no third-party software for Vista should need a key, and so likely none will ever be granted.  It will also not be possible (using any legitimate software anyway) to play protected Blu-Ray or HD-DVD discs on XP, Win2000, Win98 or even Linux, as in all likelihood the AACS group will not be granting any licenses for any software players.

Quote - The piece of software that will be responsable for the identification and possible encryption is the DVD device driver and here the chain is broken again easily. If you replace the Vista DVD device driver by a custom driver or insert another device driver as a filter between the physical DVD player and Vista DVD device driver, the result will be a normal and copyright free data outgoing the device driver.

First off, the DVD device driver has absolutely no role in this.  Second, replacing any kernel-mode driver with your own would require cracking the kernel to allow it.

Quote - Any hacking doesn't need to discover top secret keys or overcome sophisticated encryption schemes, for hacking you can ignore all this. You only need to inform Vista that what is copyrighted is not copyright and the rest Vista will do it. You only need to change few bytes of code and Vista DRM is gone!!

Until an update or service pack detects the crack and repairs it.

If instead you have a program that decrypts Blu-Ray discs without using any of the operating system's components for it, Vista will never know about it.

Here's an analogy that might help:

Your house (or apartment) is protected by one or more locks (I should hope).  Each of those locks requires a specific key in order to get inside.  You have the keys, and you get to decide who else is allowed to have them (say a neighbor you trust that you give a copy of the keys, say in case you accidentally lock yourself out - or no one has heard from you in several days and someone might be worried if anything has happened to you).  However, by giving someone else a copy of the keys, you have vested a great deal of power in them.  One could use the key to enter your house while you are away and steal your stuff.  Obviously you would not give someone a copy of the keys to your house unless you trusted them not to break in and steal your stuff.  i.e., you would not trust someone with your keys unless you felt that someone was *trustworthy.

*Content protection works in basically the same way.  In order to play protected content, a player (hardware or software) needs to have the ability to decrypt it.  Once it has access to the content, it can do what it wants with it.  So the owners of the protected content are not going to want just anyone to be able to decrypt the content, just like you would not want just anyone to have the keys to your house.  They will only allow a player that they have deemed to be trustworthy to have access to the content.  (Trustworthy in this case meaning that the player has been analyzed and tested to make sure that it behaves as it is supposed to and complies with all instructions on what it is and isn't allowed to do with any given piece of content.  Basically, that the player will not violate the trust that the owners of the content have placed in it by allowing it to play the content).

You would not be able to play a Blu-Ray disc under Windows XP at all, because XP is not a trusted system in this regard and thus does not have the keys to be able to decrypt the content on the disc.  XP doesn't have the capabilities to ensure that the content is protected, so they will not be allowing to have a key.  32 bit versions of Vista will not be allowed to play Blu-Ray discs because the system will not be able to guarantee protection of the content.  The 32 bit version needs to allow for unsigned drivers because otherwise it would break existing applications.  However unsigned drivers can break the protection.  As Vista 32 bit is not trustworthy in this regard, it will not be trusted to handle protected HD content.  (Back to the house analogy, if you have a friend who is loyal but forgetful and would be prone to accidentally leaving your door unlocked or losing the key, you would not want to trust him with the key to your house either).

One could create a software player that would work under XP, if they could get a key for it.  But the entity that owns the protection scheme probably isn't going to want to trust them with it.  Under Vista, a software "player" doesn't need the key because the component that does the decryption is part of Vista itself (thus making Vista the actual player in this regard).  They do not need to trust any other software for Blu-Ray discs to play under Vista, so therefore they won't.  (Generally a device should only be trusted if it needs to be, otherwise it becomes just another point at which the protection should fail.  Back to the house, there is no reason why I should ever need access to your house, therefore there is no reason to provide me with a copy).  Rather than support XP and Linux, and given the fact that it would be impossible to secure those systems anyway, they'll simply tell people to get Vista if they want to watch HD on their computer.

In summary, sticking with Windows XP will not let you watch Blu-Ray or HD-DVD movies free of DRM restrictions.

Not that the stuff with Vista is at all a good thing.  The kernel is even more bloated, both with the media stuff and all the stuff to ensure protection of content, and it degrades performance by checking up on the drivers 30 times every second to make sure that they haven't been in any way compromised.  If the ability to watch HD on my computer is going to degrade everything else, then I'll pass.  (And I can see the possibility of a sort of denial-of-service attack against Vista, getting something to try to play a protected MPEG file from somewhere to cause one's monitor to blink out because Vista won't let it receive the content.  We could all do without that).

Quote - All the copyright information is is something that tells whatever is handling the data what it is allowed to do with it.  A device that does not adhere to the policies will not be allowed to have a key, and thus won't be able to do anything with the data anyway.

If you take any DVD with copyright information, extract it data by mean of any existent sofware with current Windows, Mac or Linux and then you burn a DVD you will have a new DVD with exactly the same movie but without any copyright information or encryption.
Vista will handle this new DVD as a copyright-free DVD, so pirate DVD will be able to run without any problem in Vista.

Quote - Wrong.  The data on the disc itself is encrypted.  Vista handles the decryption and playback; the software application only has to provide remote control (Play, Fast Forward, etc) and will not actually handle any of the decrypted data.

But it doesn't work in this way, what a computer does is read the tracks and sectors of the disk and do what it wants with the sector data. Play, Fast Forward are only software functions.
What software does is to issue a command by the IDE interface requesting the reading of sector #xxxx, then the IDE player will sent an interrupt request to the CPU when this sector is ready to be read, then the software issue a read command to the IDE interface and have the sector data.
This sector data can be a fragment of copyright information, a fragement of a movie video or a fragment of a Poser's pz3. It's the software that decides what to do with this data.

Quote - Home DVD players and computer DVD drives are two very different animals.  The computer drive reads the disc and sends the requested data to the IDE controller, which then gives the data to the operating system.  The data sent down the IDE bus is the raw, unencrypted data straight from the disc.

There are no different animals, they are exactly the same, the chips used internaly are the same.
What is missing in the computer player is the keyboard, lcd panel, programming processor and tv output and is added the ide interface to the existent internal data path.

Quote - You could patch the firmware to do the decryption for you, but then you could just write a software application to do the same thing.  Either way, you would need a key.

The key is hardwired in the home dvd player, it's only a question of design of the computer DVD player.
Some computer DVD players have a digital output, what Microsoft want to be removed. If the DVD player has a digital output it means that its firmware decrypts internaly any crypted content and send it to the digital output, no computer involved in this process!!!
You see, you don't need any key, the player firmware can do all for you, you only need to have to right player for your needs.

Quote - It will also not be possible (using any legitimate software anyway) to play protected Blu-Ray or HD-DVD discs on XP, Win2000, Win98 or even Linux, as in all likelihood the AACS group will not be granting any licenses for any software players.

The major fabricant of DVD players is China and also is the major fabricant of pirate DVD and CD,  and you can add to the list Taiwan, both Koreas and soon India too!
Do you think that they will need any license???, they just ignore the licenses.
As for software, you have P2P or sites for all your needs.
It's supposed that all these measures are against pirates, but you can the that the effect is NILL!
They only effect is over legal uses, that will have to pay the price of computer crashes, degraded performance and a lot of nightmares.

Quote - First off, the DVD device driver has absolutely no role in this.  Second, replacing any kernel-mode driver with your own would require cracking the kernel to allow it.

As in the XPs free of activation code, and they work without any problem.

Do you remember Poser 5?
Poser 5 was released with Microsoft activation code scheme, the result was that Poser 5 never worked, crashed all the time, and few people were able to use it.
Poser 5 only become something usable even with bugs with SR1 where the activation code was removed.
The activation code was responsable for most of the malfunctions of Poser 5, the remaing were Poser's itself bugs.
Meantime only one week later after the first release of Poser 5, a cracked version was available and circulating in P2Ps.

The intention of the activation code was to prevent piracy, but , Poser 5 activation code free soon was freelly available, so the protection was innofensive for pirates, but on the other side the activation code made an inferno the life of people that had purchased legally Poser 5.

Vista's protection doesn't apply to DVD's anyway.  It's mainly for Blu-Ray and HD-DVD, and right now it pays to stay as far away from those two .  Not to mention that they are expensive as hell at the moment - $1,000 for the drive or player, $30 for discs... uh I think I'll just stick with DVD's for now.  (DVD's are for all intents and purposes DRM-free, as CSS is trivial to bypass, legal considerations notwithstanding.  Blu-Ray and HD-DVD are considerably more draconian).

The main reason to be staying away from Vista is the BS factor - specifically one should not be supporting any of this crap.  If the folks at Microsoft had any sense they would realize that this has the potential to be a complete disaster - for them.  (In fact I'm sure that there are a good number that do, but apparently they are being ignored).

The future of Blu-Ray and HD-DVD is still undefined, in day of gloablization and global market it will not be decided by AACS or RIAA, it will be decided by the global market.
Who knows, maybe will appear another format that will be accepted by the whole world and Blu-Ray will end in a grave.
Same happened with Betamax and VHS, Betamax had some technical adavantages, but the global market decided VHS and Betamax was burried.
Hollywood has importance in the global market, with any movie with success they are talking about hundreds of millions, but you must remember the simple Japanese Pokemon and in this case you talk about several billions and not simple hundreds of millions.!!!!

You can add to the story the DVD itself, before the DVD appeared Microsoft working with AACS created the MPEG4 (nothing to do with MPG or MP3, they only registered this name so the newer version of MP3 could not be called MP4!!!!). MP4 was something supposed to be used in the DVD movies, with all the copyright protection included.
What happened with the DVD?, it use MPEG2, that is a free and Open Source format, Microsoft's MPEG4 was cracked and also overcommend by the superior free DIVX (today not so free) or the still free and Open Source XVID.

skuttles quietly in and sits drinks on the table for Kawecki and Talain.....skuttles quietly back out..

Here's late, but personalized Christmas gift from Bill Gates to kawecki...

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000M2WPIQ/o/qid=buzzmanagement

LMFAO!  Sorry, I couldn't resist :)

Ok, I have just read something that I found at the link TD just gave...but are they really only making 20,000 copies of the Vista? If so, ya mean only 20,000 people get this??! How bizzaro is that? :blink: {hopefully thats just the number of signed copies]

Edit to add: Ok, yup, Im nuts, its 20,000 copies of the signed product.....woodeewoo :rolleyes:

Saw a Vista ad just now on the MSN news site:  "Experience the wow factor with Microsoft's new operating system"

The wow factor came early for me when reading that link at the top of the forum.

I only just recently got XP ha-ha

Some years ago when XP was released there was a propaganda in the TV:
"With Windows XP now you are able to play mp3 in your computer"

Google this: Muslix64

That's all I'm saying.