Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 8th May 2007 13:19 UTC
Windows Months go, I reviewed Windows Vista, and concluded: "All in all, I am impressed by Windows Vista [...]. Windows Vista is better than XP, and definitely more than just an improved look as many say." After 5 months of usage, it is time to put that statement into perspective.
Thread beginning with comment 238516
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: I agree, fair review
by MollyC on Tue 8th May 2007 19:45 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: I agree, fair review"
Member since:

"I got a phone call from a friend recently. He couldn't play his DRM protected (sic) WMA files. It came up with nice message though asking him if he wanted to buy *his* files again. This was on XP. "

Either there was a bug or your friend maxed out the number of computers that was allowed on the DRM. Normally, you should be able to play the WMA song on a new computer by simply authorizing the new computer to play the song. For example, if you use WMP to play a song, if the computer isn't authorized for that song, WMP connects to the issuer of the DRM license (the place you bought the song from), prompts the user for username/password, retrieves the license and authorizes that computer. But if you've already done this with N computers (where N is the maximum computers that the DRM allows), then you have to deauthorize one of the other computers first.

The example you gave is not particular to Vista, as you even admit that it occurred on XP. And similar also occurs for iTMS songs played on OSX, XP, or Vista.

"Now Vista downscales your content switches off drivers...and remember HD content hasn't even hit Vista."

So Vista is simply implementing the DRM set down by the HD-DVD and BR disc content creators. This allows Vista to legally play protected discs. You'd rather not have that ability? Anyway, the "downscaling" issue isn't relevant right now. HD-DVDs and BR discs do not have the downscaling flag enabled, and won't until at least 2010. By 2010, many will have compliant HDPC (or whatever the acronym is) monitors, so it still won't be relevant even then. Also, OSX Leopard will do the same most likely (Apple is a member of BluRay Disc Association, and as such is even more in bed with the movie creators than is Microsoft).

"And remember like WGA/Activation etc. etc this can change for the worse at any time."

Again, this is not particular to Vista. XP has WGA/Activation.

So, if you would, please answer the GP's question. What is it about Vista's DRM in particular that is obtrusive to Joe User? How will Joe User feel this obtrusiveness in ways that he would not with XP or OSX Leopard?

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[7]: I agree, fair review
by cyclops on Tue 8th May 2007 20:10 in reply to "RE[6]: I agree, fair review"
cyclops Member since:

@MollyC as always a great comment.

Absolutely, I'm glad you you pointed out that DRM is limited to a number of new computers. It highlights one of the things I truly love about DRM. It *only* begins to bite in the long term. I find it truly wonderful that WMP without selecting any option *contacts* someone, how serious is this spyware.

I'm pretty certain that Microsoft implemented DRM in its operating system as it saw fit. Unless your somehow trying to imply that a company that is prepared to happily the ignore the EU laws, is somehow scared of Hollywood...or that HD Blu-ray makers have intimate knowledge of the workings of the Microsoft OS., or they could have offered the consumer the right to *choose* whether to have a consumer OS.

Its true XP had activation, and I'm sure that false positives will continue. I'm sure you are aware of the extra limited imposed on an unactivated desktop....btw what was so great about XP's original spyware

Reply Parent Score: 5