Anyone for Vista?

Quote:

---

Content protection features in Windows Vista are preventing customers from playing high-quality video and audio and harming system performance, even as Microsoft neglects security programs that could protect users, computer researcher Peter Gutmann argued at the USENIX Security Symposium in Boston Wednesday

---

This struck me as rather interesting because of the reputation of the person concerned. Peter Gutmann is a World renowned IT researcher (Gutmann method of data erasing) and not some zealot fanboy file sharing drone.

I think that makes his comments rather damaging to Microsoft?

Article is here:

http://www.networkworld.com/news/200...c=rss-security

:cool:

Apparently it's true. Vista really sucks as a media center OS.
The DRM in so baroque that no one knows how it works. M'soft
is in a tough spot. They must build in the DRM or their
insect overlords in Hollywood will revoke their oxygen supply.

It seems they feel there is no money in a computer OS,
the real money is in entertainment, and they're gambling to
make the Windows OS into a major player there.

I think that if DRM becomes the law of the land, media will
go to dedicated devices, and Microsoft will lose the entertainment
market. If DRM goes down in flames, all their efforts to comply
are wasted. No matter what, consumers are not happy
if things don't just work.

Hey Hey,

I've got to agree with nihil that Gutmann is someone of stature, but I can't help but wonder if he's like so many others who've done a single thing and now look for public facing opportunities to get his name out...

My problems with what he says:

HDCP is no secret... If you want HD Content to come off your PC you require HDCP, most HD Content requires somethings specific these days... in the case of Vista, they decided on HDCP.

The 'tilt bit'.... since I haven't researched it I can't argue without a doubt, however everything I've read on the subject is that the hardware has the option of setting it... In case a "hardware hacker" was trying to dump the premium HD content displayed on screen from video memory to a 3rd party device...

Point that he's trying to "get into the press", he complains that you're PC can't enter power saving mode while playing a video... I say.. who cares?

His "security measures that they left out in place of protecting HD Content"

- Page File Encryption
- Protected Content Domains to keep Malware Out
- Anti-Debugging Techniques to keep Root Kits Out...

Let's see...

- BitLocker provides Page File Encryption in Vista (since they realized EFS had that limitation in earlier versions of Vista)
- UAC + Defender do a damn good job of keeping the malware out, especially with the IE 7 improvements.
- With the concept of a hypervisor root kit, they would have only limited root kits, and would have had screams from everyone in the world for introducing anti-debugging techniques into a product.

So I don't see anything useful in what he says.

Hmmmmm,

Quote:

---

but I can't help but wonder if he's like so many others who've done a single thing and now look for public facing opportunities to get his name out...

---

I see what you are saying, but don't think so. As far as I can see he is a dedicated, lifetime career academic type? Also his choice of venue wasn't really high profile consumer and press publicity?

The technicalities don't particularly interest me, as I am an old fashioned type and probably closer to Peter's age group that you are. I would buy the proper equipment to play it on. I can, however see how this would annoy people in New Zealand and Australia. They probably use this kind of technology privately to send stuff back to the old country?

It is a quite damning indictment of the "Microsoft Security Model" and their business model and priorities. I am sure that the linux fanboys are p1$$ing themselves............... even MAC may manage a slight smile, but they are as inextricably in the pockets of Hollywood as MS are :D

It still does not stop the Universe from expanding, and the galaxy Andromeda from its crash-course into the Milky Way...
I had Vista...hated it.

Tim

The article is just a summary. The earlier technical paper is
more interesting.

http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut00...l#introduction

...sounds like another case of Sacred Cow Syndrome.

Being a Vista 64bit Ultimate user, I can personaly agree that Vista has some limitations, there's alot of codecs I cannot use, like the Winamp Video Codecs and I also have problems with my soundcard drivers, luckely Asus released a beta driver, so I finaly got some support for the Digital out port, but its not fully supported yet :(

But remembering back to Windows 95, 98, NT4, 2000 and XP there was problems in the beginning with those aswell, so its just a matter of choose the right time to upgrade..

But for my part.. Im switching back to my debian / xp setup in a week or so cause I am so tired of the whole (This software requires ATLEAST 2000 SP2 or XP SP2 to function, please check your system and try again) wtf!

I've run into that quite alot not, with simple programs, not complex hightech thingamogogs.. O_o

Another interesting read is from FSF : http://badvista.fsf.org/what-s-wrong...-windows-vista

Quote:

---

I am so tired of the whole (This software requires ATLEAST 2000 SP2 or XP SP2 to function, please check your system and try again) wtf!

---

I think that you mean Windows 2000 SP4 ?

All the software vendor is saying is: "We do not support our product running under an operating system that is no longer supported by its vendor" Which I would translate as: "If it works on anything else, lucky you.............. if it doesn't don't bother to call"

That makes perfectly logical business sense.

All they have done is covered their a$$es by forcing you to read their disclaimer. To circumvent the check is generally pretty trivial, but makes you accept total responsibility for the consequences.

Helpdesks are pretty expensive to run and are a total drain on profitability ;)

Quote:

---

Helpdesks are pretty expensive to run and are a total drain on profitability

---

Yeah, but you could sell the tapes to Saturday Night Live?

rcg,

If 10% of the garbage had any shame, I would go for straight blackmail

MuHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHa!!!!! :lildevil:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nihil

I think that you mean Windows 2000 SP4 ?

All the software vendor is saying is: "We do not support our product running under an operating system that is no longer supported by its vendor" Which I would translate as: "If it works on anything else, lucky you.............. if it doesn't don't bother to call"

That makes perfectly logical business sense.

All they have done is covered their a$$es by forcing you to read their disclaimer. To circumvent the check is generally pretty trivial, but makes you accept total responsibility for the consequences.

Helpdesks are pretty expensive to run and are a total drain on profitability ;)

---

No, then I would have wrote SP4.. and your right, but its a shame when you upgrade your OS, suddenly 47% of your licenced software wont work anymore, and updates... "maybe next year bub!"

This is the main reason why I like Debian, if something not working, I report it to the mailinglists or.. write my own patch for it and send that to the mailing lists so others can benefit..

Hmmm,

Quote:

---

No, then I would have wrote SP4.. and your right, but its a shame when you upgrade your OS, suddenly 47% of your licenced software wont work anymore, and updates... "maybe next year bub!"

---

Quote:

---

(This software requires ATLEAST 2000 SP2 or XP SP2 to function, please check your system and try again) wtf!

---

You are not making sense. If the software doesn't work it isn't going to tell you what OS to run, it just won't work :rolleyes:

Also, I do not believe that you will see software requiring Windows 2000 SP2 and Windows XP SP2. That makes no logical or commercial sense at all, as it would require supporting 3 service packs for Windows 2000, two of which are not supported by Microsoft.

As for "47% of your licenced software wont work anymore" that would mean that you have changed your operating system. Vista is a different operating system from other versions of Windows, that followed a logical progression:

..........-95 - 98 - 98SE - ME
......../ ...........................\
3.1x .................................XP
........\ .........................../
......... -NT4.0 .....-.... 2000


Vista is quite different, as it only really offers some legacy support functionality. That is why you can only "upgrade" it from XP or 2000 for starters.

If your software is of the licenced commercial variety, there are two possibilities:

1. You can upgrade it to the new OS.
2. The supplier goes out of business.

I also wonder how much of your problem is due to trying to run 32bit applications in a 64bit environment?