Re: Windows Vista content protection: a big long suicide note (forwarded) - Linux

This is a discussion on Re: Windows Vista content protection: a big long suicide note (forwarded) - Linux ; On Wed, 27 Dec 2006 09:26:54 -0800, "Joel Kolstad" Gave us: > A good example is dual-layer DVD >recorders: There are many single-layer DVD recorders out there that have the >hardware capabilites to burn dual-layer discs, but only a very ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 21 to 34 of 34

Thread: Re: Windows Vista content protection: a big long suicide note (forwarded)

  1. Re: Windows Vista content protection: a big long suicide note (forwarded)

    On Wed, 27 Dec 2006 09:26:54 -0800, "Joel Kolstad"
    Gave us:

    > A good example is dual-layer DVD
    >recorders: There are many single-layer DVD recorders out there that have the
    >hardware capabilites to burn dual-layer discs, but only a very small number of
    >manufacturers ever released firmware upgrades to support this.



    It is more than a mere firmware change, and no, none of the single
    layer burners could do the task. The read head, in particular is
    different as is the commands that address it's motion, it's range of
    motion, as well as the software that goes behind setting focus points
    for the layers, etc.

    PERHAPS a FEW drives made as the dual layer technology was being
    brought online incorporated read/write heads that could do the job,
    but if so, it was by choice, and those burners WOULD in fact be
    updatable in firmware, or a mere software flag at runtime.

    My first laser disc player was a complete zinc cast optical bench in
    miniature, complete with a 6 inch HeNe gas tube laser. There were two
    aim-able mirrors as well as a HUGE main focus lens assembly. This is
    due to the fact that a 12" platter can have a huge amount of wobble in
    it. I have seen read head lens move up and down 3/8 of an inch while
    tracking on the outer areas of a warped-more-than-normal disc. The
    read head optics were in an assembly that looked exactly like a
    speaker magnet and voice coil assembly (I still have it).

    This is one reason why the 12" form factor went away. the bigger it
    is, the more it costs to produce, not to mention warehouse, and ship.

    Today's integrated laser diode/read sensor/ main lens assembly
    "heads" could in no way read twelve inch platters. Smaller is better
    anyway. I'm sure that when holo-disc gets out it will be 3.25" form
    factor... at like a half a TByte each. It's a brave new world. :-]

    I can still remember getting my first full ht 1Gb SCSI drive. I was
    thrilled. I called it my "black hole". I laugh now thinking back on
    the hundreds of dollars I sunk into that. I can get a 300GB SATA 2
    screamer now for less than a hundred bucks!

  2. Re: Windows Vista content protection: a big long suicide note (forwarded)

    Jan Panteltje wrote:

    > On a sunny day (Mon, 25 Dec 2006 22:42:32 -0500) it happened Yousuf Khan
    > wrote in
    > :
    >
    >
    >>The full text is available at the following site (it's kinda long, but
    >>interesting):
    >> http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut00...vista_cost.txt

    >
    >
    > Thank you, that was informative.
    > We will find a way around it and bury Balmer's company in the process.
    >
    > Happy New Year :-)
    >
    > I will post you link to comp.os.linux.development.apps and sci.electronics.design.
    >

    Holy ****!
    I have read only half of that missive, and it seems that we are in
    more of a dictatorship than any paranoid person has alluded to!
    Maybe we need to have those Arab extremists "visit" these idiots.

  3. Re: Windows Vista content protection: a big long suicide note (forwarded)

    On 2006-12-28, Robert Baer wrote:
    > Jan Panteltje wrote:
    >
    >> On a sunny day (Mon, 25 Dec 2006 22:42:32 -0500) it happened Yousuf Khan
    >> wrote in
    >> :
    >>
    >>
    >>>The full text is available at the following site (it's kinda long, but
    >>>interesting):
    >>> http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut00...vista_cost.txt

    >>
    >>
    >> Thank you, that was informative.
    >> We will find a way around it and bury Balmer's company in the process.
    >>
    >> Happy New Year :-)
    >>
    >> I will post you link to comp.os.linux.development.apps and sci.electronics.design.
    >>

    > Holy ****!
    > I have read only half of that missive, and it seems that we are in
    > more of a dictatorship than any paranoid person has alluded to!
    > Maybe we need to have those Arab extremists "visit" these idiots.


    Heaven forbid! All you need is Linux.

    --
    Chris F.A. Johnson, author |
    Shell Scripting Recipes: | My code in this post, if any,
    A Problem-Solution Approach | is released under the
    2005, Apress | GNU General Public Licence

  4. Re: Windows Vista content protection: a big long suicide note (forwarded)

    > Heaven forbid! All you need is Linux.

    Plus information on the hardware to run it (or anything) on - which
    will be missing before we know the way things are going...

    Dimiter

    ------------------------------------------------------
    Dimiter Popoff Transgalactic Instruments

    http://www.tgi-sci.com
    ------------------------------------------------------

    Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:
    > On 2006-12-28, Robert Baer wrote:
    > > Jan Panteltje wrote:
    > >
    > >> On a sunny day (Mon, 25 Dec 2006 22:42:32 -0500) it happened Yousuf Khan
    > >> wrote in
    > >> :
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>>The full text is available at the following site (it's kinda long, but
    > >>>interesting):
    > >>> http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut00...vista_cost.txt
    > >>
    > >>
    > >> Thank you, that was informative.
    > >> We will find a way around it and bury Balmer's company in the process.
    > >>
    > >> Happy New Year :-)
    > >>
    > >> I will post you link to comp.os.linux.development.apps and sci.electronics.design.
    > >>

    > > Holy ****!
    > > I have read only half of that missive, and it seems that we are in
    > > more of a dictatorship than any paranoid person has alluded to!
    > > Maybe we need to have those Arab extremists "visit" these idiots.

    >
    > Heaven forbid! All you need is Linux.
    >
    > --
    > Chris F.A. Johnson, author |
    > Shell Scripting Recipes: | My code in this post, if any,
    > A Problem-Solution Approach | is released under the
    > 2005, Apress | GNU General Public Licence



  5. Re: Windows Vista content protection: a big long suicide note (forwarded)

    Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:

    > On 2006-12-28, Robert Baer wrote:
    >
    >>Jan Panteltje wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>On a sunny day (Mon, 25 Dec 2006 22:42:32 -0500) it happened Yousuf Khan
    >>> wrote in
    >>>:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>The full text is available at the following site (it's kinda long, but
    >>>>interesting):
    >>>>http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut00...vista_cost.txt
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>Thank you, that was informative.
    >>>We will find a way around it and bury Balmer's company in the process.
    >>>
    >>>Happy New Year :-)
    >>>
    >>>I will post you link to comp.os.linux.development.apps and sci.electronics.design.
    >>>

    >>
    >> Holy ****!
    >> I have read only half of that missive, and it seems that we are in
    >>more of a dictatorship than any paranoid person has alluded to!
    >> Maybe we need to have those Arab extremists "visit" these idiots.

    >
    >
    > Heaven forbid! All you need is Linux.
    >

    No; that will *not* solve the problem.
    The DRM BS is affecting *all* hardware, meaning that if you want to
    use it in a reasonably effective manner (or maybe even *use* it at all),
    then the software must be re-written for each and every piece of
    hardware, and the writer must then purchase a licence and sign
    non-disclosure agreements to get the encryption and decryption engines etc.

  6. Re: Windows Vista content protection: a big long suicide note (forwarded)

    On Thu, 28 Dec 2006 22:55:53 +0000, Robert Baer wrote:
    .....
    > The DRM BS is affecting *all* hardware, meaning that if you want to
    > use it in a reasonably effective manner (or maybe even *use* it at all),
    > then the software must be re-written for each and every piece of
    > hardware, and the writer must then purchase a licence and sign
    > non-disclosure agreements to get the encryption and decryption engines etc.


    Me things it might be good to hang on to those old drives around the
    house-- we may not like the new drives yet to be released. I might just
    buy a few cheap DVD drives, IDE drives, before the makers funk with them
    for Vista; current and older drives should continue to work with linux I
    should think, right?


    --
    If you have walked all these days with closed ears and
    mind asleep, wake up now! -- Gandalf


  7. Re: Windows Vista content protection: a big long suicide note (forwarded)

    On Tue, 26 Dec 2006 10:53:37 +0000, Jan Panteltje wrote:
    ...

    My posting signature says it all (wake up world, dump Windows, rebel
    against Microsoft, MS is really pissing me off these days):

    If you have walked all these days with closed ears and mind asleep, wake
    up now! -- Gandalf


  8. Re: Windows Vista content protection: a big long suicide note (forwarded)

    On Thu, 28 Dec 2006 18:11:06 -0600, Beowulf wrote:

    > On Thu, 28 Dec 2006 22:55:53 +0000, Robert Baer wrote: ....
    >> The DRM BS is affecting *all* hardware, meaning that if you want to
    >> use it in a reasonably effective manner (or maybe even *use* it at all),
    >> then the software must be re-written for each and every piece of
    >> hardware, and the writer must then purchase a licence and sign
    >> non-disclosure agreements to get the encryption and decryption engines
    >> etc.

    >
    > Me things it might be good to hang on to those old drives around the
    > house-- we may not like the new drives yet to be released. I might just
    > buy a few cheap DVD drives, IDE drives, before the makers funk with them
    > for Vista; current and older drives should continue to work with linux I
    > should think, right?


    What works now should continue to work in the future, unless something
    breaks or you're using a MICRO$~1 product. ;-)

    Cheers!
    Rich



  9. Re: Windows Vista content protection: a big long suicide note (forwarded)

    JoeBloe wrote:
    > On Wed, 27 Dec 2006 09:26:54 -0800, "Joel Kolstad"
    > Gave us:
    >
    > > A good example is dual-layer DVD
    > >recorders: There are many single-layer DVD recorders out there that have the
    > >hardware capabilites to burn dual-layer discs, but only a very small number of
    > >manufacturers ever released firmware upgrades to support this.

    >
    > It is more than a mere firmware change, and no, none of the single
    > layer burners could do the task.


    Actually Joel is right on this one. While certainly not all single
    layer burners can be upgraded, that's not what Joel said. He merely
    said "many" which is 100% true (note that "many" does not mean
    "majority" since even 1% of all single layer burners will be in the
    range of millions). On the other hand, you assertion that "none" can be
    upgraded is definitely 100% false.

    > The read head, in particular is
    > different as is the commands that address it's motion, it's range of
    > motion, as well as the software that goes behind setting focus points
    > for the layers, etc.


    I think you meant to say the "write" head since almost all single layer
    burners are designed to "read" double layers.

    > PERHAPS a FEW drives made as the dual layer technology was being
    > brought online incorporated read/write heads that could do the job,


    Not "perhaps", it happened. The "few" (in terms of percentage) that
    were released qualifies as "many" (in terms of total numbers).

    > but if so, it was by choice, and those burners WOULD in fact be
    > updatable in firmware, or a mere software flag at runtime.


    This is what Joel said. They would be updatable but the manufacturers
    decided not to release the update firmware. Instead they merely
    released the old hardware with new firmware (and maybe some hardware
    adjustment/improvement) at much higher prices.


  10. Re: Windows Vista content protection: a big long suicide note (forwarded)

    On Tue, 26 Dec 2006 10:53:37 GMT, Jan Panteltje
    wrote:

    >On a sunny day (Mon, 25 Dec 2006 22:42:32 -0500) it happened Yousuf Khan
    > wrote in
    >:
    >
    >>The full text is available at the following site (it's kinda long, but
    >>interesting):
    >> http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut00...vista_cost.txt

    >
    >Thank you, that was informative.
    >We will find a way around it and bury Balmer's company in the process.


    ---
    Looks like it's already started, LOL!

    http://www.radio2mp3.com/?hop=myhelphub


    --
    JF

  11. Re: Windows Vista content protection: a big long suicide note (forwarded)

    "slebetman@yahoo.com" wrote in message
    news:1167359976.639790.122690@s34g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
    > Actually Joel is right on this one. While certainly not all single
    > layer burners can be upgraded, that's not what Joel said. He merely
    > said "many"...


    Thanks for the vote of confidence. :-)

    In general I think the promise of, "upgradable firmware to protect against
    obsolescence!" is largely marketing fluff: Occasionally major functionality
    upgrades do occur, but in general there are just a few bug fixes and minor
    tweaks added if *anything* happens -- I've owned more than one piece of
    hardware where there were never any upgrades released.

    Starting to get wildly off-topic here:

    To a certain extent this is a reflection of our "throwaway" society, and
    while I can see the long-term problem with that approach, one could also
    argue that fully expecting to buy a new PC, cell phone, etc. every couple of
    years does stimulate technological R&D and the economy.

    In Penn & Teller's TV show, "Bull****!" one episode makes the point that a
    landfill 35 miles square (~80% the size of Rhode Island) by 200 feet deep
    could contain *all* the trash projected to be generated within the U.S. over
    the next millenium.

    ---Joel



  12. Re: Windows Vista content protection: a big long suicide note(forwarded)

    Joel Kolstad wrote:
    >
    > "slebetman@yahoo.com" wrote in message
    > news:1167359976.639790.122690@s34g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
    > > Actually Joel is right on this one. While certainly not all single
    > > layer burners can be upgraded, that's not what Joel said. He merely
    > > said "many"...

    >
    > Thanks for the vote of confidence. :-)
    >
    > In general I think the promise of, "upgradable firmware to protect against
    > obsolescence!" is largely marketing fluff: Occasionally major functionality
    > upgrades do occur, but in general there are just a few bug fixes and minor
    > tweaks added if *anything* happens -- I've owned more than one piece of
    > hardware where there were never any upgrades released.
    >
    > Starting to get wildly off-topic here:


    This is the Usenet. That is to be expected.

    > To a certain extent this is a reflection of our "throwaway" society, and
    > while I can see the long-term problem with that approach, one could also
    > argue that fully expecting to buy a new PC, cell phone, etc. every couple of
    > years does stimulate technological R&D and the economy.


    I was reading up on the various technologies used for flat panel TV
    sets. In the description of LCD sets, one of the cons was that the life
    of the set was governed by the life of the cold cathode lamps. Huh!? I
    had a 2.5" LCD TV that I managed to 'rescue' by replacing the lamp (they
    are a couple of bucks ordered online).

    So these wizards are telling us to take an otherwise operational TV set
    (>$1000) and throw it out when what should be a trivial part to replace*
    burns out??

    * No doubt, the lamps aren't in some sort of user accessible lamp holder
    and would require some (shudder!) soldering.

    --
    Paul Hovnanian mailto:Paul@Hovnanian.com
    ------------------------------------------------------------------
    Hanlon's Razor:
    Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by
    stupidity.

  13. Re: Windows Vista content protection: a big long suicide note (forwarded)

    In article <459AFE8F.2EA15DA9@hovnanian.com>,
    "Paul Hovnanian P.E." wrote:

    > * No doubt, the lamps aren't in some sort of user accessible lamp holder
    > and would require some (shudder!) soldering.


    Probably (much) worse than that. They are probably made to deliberately
    be difficult to access - buried amid glued/plastic-welded parts done
    that way partly to be cheap to assemble, but at least partly (if not,
    cynically, entirely) to assure that repairing the thing will not be
    economical. I've certainly seen that approach in computer peripherals
    that are designed to fail.

    Sure, they have to replace a few sets under warranty that would
    otherwise be repairable, but they don't have to worry about anyone being
    perfectly happy with their 10 year old TV in the future business model
    of selling a new TV every 3 years, and keeping the warrantee down to a
    year or less.

    One more reason to blow up the TV (and not replace it).

    --
    Cats, coffee, chocolate...vices to live by

  14. Re: Windows Vista content protection: a big long suicide note (forwarded)

    On Tue, 02 Jan 2007 16:53:35 -0800, "Paul Hovnanian P.E."
    Gave us:

    >Joel Kolstad wrote:
    >>
    >> "slebetman@yahoo.com" wrote in message
    >> news:1167359976.639790.122690@s34g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
    >> > Actually Joel is right on this one. While certainly not all single
    >> > layer burners can be upgraded, that's not what Joel said. He merely
    >> > said "many"...

    >>
    >> Thanks for the vote of confidence. :-)
    >>
    >> In general I think the promise of, "upgradable firmware to protect against
    >> obsolescence!" is largely marketing fluff: Occasionally major functionality
    >> upgrades do occur, but in general there are just a few bug fixes and minor
    >> tweaks added if *anything* happens -- I've owned more than one piece of
    >> hardware where there were never any upgrades released.
    >>
    >> Starting to get wildly off-topic here:

    >
    >This is the Usenet. That is to be expected.
    >
    >> To a certain extent this is a reflection of our "throwaway" society, and
    >> while I can see the long-term problem with that approach, one could also
    >> argue that fully expecting to buy a new PC, cell phone, etc. every couple of
    >> years does stimulate technological R&D and the economy.

    >
    >I was reading up on the various technologies used for flat panel TV
    >sets. In the description of LCD sets, one of the cons was that the life
    >of the set was governed by the life of the cold cathode lamps. Huh!? I
    >had a 2.5" LCD TV that I managed to 'rescue' by replacing the lamp (they
    >are a couple of bucks ordered online).
    >
    >So these wizards are telling us to take an otherwise operational TV set
    >(>$1000) and throw it out when what should be a trivial part to replace*
    >burns out??
    >
    >* No doubt, the lamps aren't in some sort of user accessible lamp holder
    >and would require some (shudder!) soldering.
    >



    Not if one is running MicroSoft Visual Soldering for Windows Vista!
    Hehehehe.... ;-] These kids today have it made... The little
    punks!

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2