Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 2nd Feb 2009 21:23 UTC
Windows Windows Vista has never exactly been a favourite subject among company IT people. Migrating from Windows XP to Windows Vista isn't exactly a worry-free process, and machines that run Windows XP comfortably may have trouble powering Windows vista. As such, adoption of Vista has been slow. Two years after Vista's release, the OS is still struggling in the enterprise sector, according to a Forrester report.
Thread beginning with comment 346965
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[8]: Hmm
by lemur2 on Tue 3rd Feb 2009 22:31 UTC in reply to "RE[7]: Hmm"
lemur2
Member since:
2007-02-17

" "Using Vista".
Read on, as I did the experiment again using Vista... Same result. "

Fair enough. It worked for you in that situation. I have directly encountered some situations where the same thing did not work for others. It seems to depend on the source, or something.

Where is my retraction, BTW, for your false accusation?

Alternatively ... can you please point out exactly where you thought I told a lie?

Or am I going to have to put "Thom the slanderer" as my signature everywhere?

Edited 2009-02-03 22:35 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[9]: Hmm
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 3rd Feb 2009 22:41 in reply to "RE[8]: Hmm"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Alternatively ... can you please point out exactly where you thought I told a lie?


Sure!

You stated that it is debatable whether or not non-DRM media is affected by Vista's DRM. That debatable bit is the obvious lie, as not only have several people here shown that your example poses no problems whatsoever, but it has also been made clear that mp3 isn't even capable of carrying DRM in the first place.

You are the one making the false accusation here, so bring up the proof I'd say. Until then, it's just a false accusation without any proof (other than some anecdotal "friend"), which is no better than a lie.

Give me the proof. Surely, such a case of WMP/Vista adding DRM to ripped mp3s should be all over Google, right?

Good luck, sport!

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[10]: Hmm
by lemur2 on Tue 3rd Feb 2009 23:21 in reply to "RE[9]: Hmm"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

"Alternatively ... can you please point out exactly where you thought I told a lie?
Sure! You stated that it is debatable whether or not non-DRM media is affected by Vista's DRM. That debatable bit is the obvious lie, as not only have several people here shown that your example poses no problems whatsoever, but it has also been made clear that mp3 isn't even capable of carrying DRM in the first place. You are the one making the false accusation here, so bring up the proof I'd say. Until then, it's just a false accusation without any proof (other than some anecdotal "friend"), which is no better than a lie. Give me the proof. Surely, such a case of WMP/Vista adding DRM to ripped mp3s should be all over Google, right? Good luck, sport! "

Of course it is debateable ... one can debate anything at all, at any time one pleases. One can even debate something that one doesn't actually believe in ... in fact, doing that is part of the skill of debating.

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=define%3A+debate&meta=

You really should look up the meaning of words before you fly off the handle like that, Thom.

The .mp3 codec itself AFAIK does not support DRM ... but that doesn't mean that Vista cannot produce a file that it calls an .mp3 file, and which encrypts or otherwise adjusts the internal binary data in such a way that it can be reporduced faithfully only on other Vista systems with a certificate, or on the original Vista system that encoded it without having a certficate. The .mp3 format allows for "metadata" within the file, AFAIK, that is not actually the content.

http://www.digitalpreservation.gov/formats/fdd/fdd000106.shtml

"May contain: Images, encrypted information, etc."

That seems to be the case of what happened where someone has asked me about why they can't play on their cars .mp3 player files that they made from a CD using Vista, but they can play ones they made in the same manner but using XP.

PS: see the words "may contain"? That doesn't mean "does contain" ... it means it is optional. Therefore, counter-examples of producing some .mp3 files using Vista that worked on other systems does not invalidate the observations that some people have had examples where .mp3 files they made using Vista would NOT play correctly on other systems. It is not a mutually exclusive either or ... it is a "may contain" encryption information. Or may not. Optional.

As for the case of someone sending me a file that required me to have Vista and obtain a certificate form Microsoft in order to play it ... I have just now recalled that it wasn't encoded as an .mp3 file at all, but rather it was a .wmv file. My apologies there ... that detail I did actually forget about.

Edited 2009-02-03 23:35 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2