To avoid having 8573 stories related to Vista atop one another, this item groups some of them. Fortune: "After five years in development, Microsoft's new operating system is finally about to hit the street. Is it a keeper? Fortune's Peter Lewis takes it for a test drive." eWeek: "Some have taken exception with Vista's permission-asking proclivity, but it may be that we've just become too cavalier about making fundamental changes to our systems." eWeek: "We check out the first systems bundling Microsoft's newest OS and tell you what you will, and will not, be getting with Vista." Click read more for, well, more items. This item will probably be updated regularly.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-06
1) I wouldn't mind the new format if Microsoft turned around and said, "this is a great new format, and we'll allow anyone to implement it" - encourage freeware/opensource to implement it, for commercial vendors, they can pay a token amount if they bundle it with their application.
Indeed this is what they are doing by adding it to OSP. It was previously only going to be free if implemented as part of an XPS reader, but that restriction will no longer apply. A device porting kit (DPK) is available for implementing HDP on other platforms.
Links and other details here:
http://blogs.msdn.com/billcrow/
http://news.com.com/Vista+to+give+HD+Photo+format+more+exposure/210...
Member since:2005-07-06
Interesting; as long as Microsoft don't do something stupid in the future, it will be a good bit of competition to Adobe - and quite frankly, the day I see Adobe crushed the better.
Adobe screams on the side lines about 'lack of choice' and yet, like I've said in the past, they've complained about Microsoft and yet they provide their products only for Windows - thus by proxy boosting Microsofts monopoly; like I keep saying, if people want to blame someone for Microsofts monopoly, they can blame the likes of Adobe who don't port their software to non-Microsoft operating systems like Linux or FreeBSD or OpenSolaris.
Member since:2006-02-06
"I don't blame Microsoft for the DRM fiasco; lets remember, its the media, more correctly, the comanies who are members of RIAA/MPAA, put pressure on Microsoft"
The big media concerns 'asked' MS, MS caved in, for whatever reasons.
I say let's blame them both.
Edited 2007-01-30 10:04
Member since:2005-07-06
So Microsoft should screw the end user by saying, "no HD Content for you!" - pulease, and their shareholders would then ask for a lynching of management because they lost the opportunity to become the platform of choice.
And you think that Apple won't turn over for the media companies? Apple is the best example of being the biggest whore for the media companies - yes sir, no sir, three bags full sir is what Steve Jobs chants.
Member since:
2005-07-06
1) I wouldn't mind the new format if Microsoft turned around and said, "this is a great new format, and we'll allow anyone to implement it" - encourage freeware/opensource to implement it, for commercial vendors, they can pay a token amount if they bundle it with their application.
It would be great all around; and hey, Microsoft do want to become an IBM, a 'old grandfather' of the IT industry - its about time they started to act like one and see their innovation as more than just a money spinning tool but also a contribution to the IT world; an act of chariety if one wishes to be cynical.
2) I don't blame Microsoft for the DRM fiasco; lets remember, its the media, more correctly, the comanies who are members of RIAA/MPAA, put pressure on Microsoft; Microsoft want to offer all these things and the MPAA/RIAA turn around and say, "we'll only back you if you do...." and a list of conditions.
If you want to barate someone for that, barate the relevant organisations - with that being said, DRM can be used for more than just music and video; you can use it for protecting documents and a whole raft of other things; its best to define what you have problems with.
Remember, DRM is made up of two parts; the policy and the enforcement; if you have a problem, its the policy you have a problem with, not the DRM enforcement side; it is the policy of the distrbuted file which is defined by the author; they're the ones you should be grinding your axe over, not Microsoft, they're merely providing the platform for its customers to take advantage of.
Its like a person who rent out cars; some have very strict policies, whilst others have very few rules; you choose the vendor who chooses not to have overly draconian DRM policies in their files which they distribute.