| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 78151 | 2007-04-05 04:39:00 | Another Vista crack: more bad news for Microsoft DRM | Chris Keall (10417) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 538431 | 2007-04-11 12:43:00 | LOL this is hilarious, it even pokes holes in blu-ray ( . cs . auckland . ac . nz/%7Epgut001/pubs/vista_cost . html" target="_blank">www . cs . auckland . ac . nz) warning:long exerpt follows, and all it really highlights is how DRM only serves to create a demand for piracy, and that drm is totally unneccessary (just like one of those "s"s and possibly a "c") Disabling of Functionality Vista's content protection mechanism only allows protected content to be sent over interfaces that also have content-protection facilities built in . Currently the most common high-end audio output interface is S/PDIF (Sony/Philips Digital Interface Format) . Most newer audio cards, for example, feature TOSlink digital optical output for high-quality sound reproduction, and even the latest crop of motherboards with integrated audio provide at least coax (and often optical) digital output . Since S/PDIF doesn't provide any content protection, Vista requires that it be disabled when playing protected content [Note E] . In other words if you've sunk a pile of money into a high-end audio setup fed from an S/PDIF digital output, you won't be able to use it with protected content . Instead of hearing premium high-definition audio, you get treated to premium high-definition silence . Say you've just bought Pink Floyd's “The Dark Side of the Moon”, released as a Super Audio CD (SACD) in its 30th anniversary edition in 2003, and you want to play it under Vista (I'm just using SACD as a representative example of protected audio content because it's a well-known technology, in practice Sony has refused to license it for playback on PCs) . Since the S/PDIF link to your amplifier/speakers is regarded as insecure for playing the SA content, Vista would disable it, and you'd end up hearing a performance by Marcel Marceau instead of Pink Floyd . Similarly, component (YPbPr) video will be disabled by Vista's content protection, so the same applies to a high-end video setup fed from component video . But what if you're lucky enough to have bought a video card that supports HDMI digital video with HDCP content-protection? There's a good chance that you'll have to go out and buy another video card that really does support HDCP, because until quite recently no video card on the market actually supported it even if the vendor's advertising claimed that it did . As the site that first broke the story in their article The Great HDCP Fiasco puts it: “None of the AGP or PCI-E graphics cards that you can buy today support HDCP […] If you've just spent $1000 on a pair of Radeon X1900 XT graphics cards expecting to be able to playback HD-DVD or Blu-Ray movies at 1920×1080 resolution in the future, you've just wasted your money […] If you just spent $1500 on a pair of 7800GTX 512MB GPUs expecting to be able to play 1920×1080 HD-DVD or Blu-Ray movies in the future, you've just wasted your money” . (The two devices mentioned above are the premium supposedly-HDCP-enabled cards made by the two major graphics chipset manufacturers ATI and nVidia) . ATI was later subject to a class-action lawsuit by its customers over this deception . As late as August of 2006, when Sony announced its Blu-Ray drive for PCs, it had to face the embarrassing fact that its Blu-Ray drive couldn't actually play Blu-Ray disks in HD format: “Since there are currently no PCs for sale offering graphics chips that support HDCP, this isn't yet possible” . In fact so far no-one has been able to identify any Windows system that will actually play HD content in HD quality, in all cases any attempt to do this produced either no output or a message that it was blocked by content protection . Even nVidia's latest and greatest device, the G80, can't output 1080p HD video, because once you enable HDCP (which is required by Vista for HD-DVD or BluRay playback), you're limited to 720p resolution . nVidia's older G7x line also has this problem, as does ATI's R5xx . In fact the only graphics device that appears to support full-resolution HD playback, requiring dual-link HDMI, is ATI's not-yet-released R600 . While it's not possible to prove a negative in this manner, it's certainly an indication that potential buyers may be in for a shock when they try and play full HD-quality premium content on their shiny new Vista PC . |
motorbyclist (188) | ||
| 538432 | 2007-04-11 21:43:00 | This is also why I hate Vista . I mean DRM . I mean Microsoft are idiots . So . I buy said 2x Radeons X1900XT In Crossfire . I buy a Blu-Ray drive . I buy Vista Ultimate . I Buy a large TV . I spend a lot of money . And If I can't play my Videos?? What to do??? well, obviously one is going to find a way to bypass the DRM somehow, maybe someone will write a DVD-Decrypter for Blu-Ray . Either way, my point being is that I am forced to "Pirate" or otherwise be "illegal" just to watch stuff I have legitimately aquired . This then DEFEATS THE WHOLE POINT OF DRM AND COPY PROTECTION . Take macrovision for example . If I play a macrovision DVD on my TV, it screws up . This is because I have 2 VCRs the signal has to go through to get to my TV . So macrovision OF COURSE thinks I MUST be wanting to copy the dvd to a tape . well ***??? I mean who would do that anyway?? It would be crap quality!!! If you really wanted to pirated, just rip with dvd decrypter and then burn to new dvd-r . . . If I do said ripping, and then play DVD back on PC with TV out on video card, there is no problem with the 2 VCRs at all . But because macrovision is STUPID, I am again forced to get around it just to watch stuff properly and legitimately . (after all, I bought the damn DVD . I'm going to do whatever I want to play it properly) STEAM is also a good example of anti-piracy gone horribly wrong . Ever try to play HL-2 (note, this is my full, unpirated, legitimately bought, 5-CD version complete with authentic CD-KEY) from a clean install?? you must spend: 1) an hour updating steam three (3) Times 2) half an hour decrypting the game files 3) another hour downloading updates for said game, because you can't just play without updating it 4) all the while, my DSL of 160KB/s bandwidth is not even used and the total speed never exceeded 17KB/s, because Steam's servers are crap . Every other game I can install, and play within minutes . but not anything on Steam . Oh no . because "people might pirate it" . well I have news for you . I recently played HL-2:EP1 . It was good, although a little short . Unsurprisingly I got it from bittorrent . can you guess why???? (Note: I will at some point buy said game, to justify my downloading of it . when I forgive valve for making steam, and feel they deserve my money again) |
Agent_24 (57) | ||
| 538433 | 2007-11-19 14:37:00 | So why is Vista such a target for hackers when it only has about 3% market share? I thought hackers were only interested in operating systems which have over 90% market share such as XP? here (avast.com) is a fresh one!) |
Earl1983 (12088) | ||
| 538434 | 2007-11-19 19:47:00 | But people have always said that hackers won't attack systems with small market share because it is not worth it ... sounds like a load of bollocks to me. Regardless of market share... I think it's more like a MS thing. That's why they're doing it. Just to prove to the masses that despite what MS says... the consumer should think twice about making use of Windows because the OS regardless of version isn't or hasn't been as secure as MS have led us to believe. Cheers |
chiefnz (545) | ||
| 538435 | 2007-11-19 20:24:00 | I'm keen on any hacks that get rid of DRM, because it's a horrible piece of junk | Agent_24 (57) | ||
| 538436 | 2007-11-19 20:55:00 | Either way, my point being is that I am forced to "Pirate" or otherwise be "illegal" just to watch stuff I have legitimately aquired . This then DEFEATS THE WHOLE POINT OF DRM AND COPY PROTECTION . 'copy protected' CD's are another example of this They wont play on my 4 year old CD player (as they dont conform to the original CD spec) So to play them Ive had to copy the CD (ha, take that), then play the copy . Makes copy protection a bit of a joke, so why put in on the CD's Bypassing the copy protection is illegal in some countries, yet in some cases necessary to make the product usable . Copy protected CD's arnt obviously labeled as such, often just a tiny note on the back . |
steveroby (9470) | ||
| 538437 | 2007-11-20 01:05:00 | Regardless of market share... I think it's more like a MS thing. That's why they're doing it. Just to prove to the masses that despite what MS says... the consumer should think twice about making use of Windows because the OS regardless of version isn't or hasn't been as secure as MS have led us to believe. Cheers :thumbs: I'm keen on any hacks that get rid of DRM, because it's a horrible piece of junk I think the success of iTunes Music Store and Amazon.com's DRM free music store is proving to MS and the RIAA that DRM free music will outsell heavily DRMd stuff any day thus making DRMd music pointless. |
winmacguy (3367) | ||
| 538438 | 2007-11-20 02:48:00 | :thumbs: I think the success of iTunes Music Store and Amazon.com's DRM free music store is proving to MS and the RIAA that DRM free music will outsell heavily DRMd stuff any day thus making DRMd music pointless. Agreed. But it would be nice if all the itunes content was available down here and that you could get access to Amazon here in NZ.. |
paulw (1826) | ||
| 538439 | 2007-11-20 03:42:00 | Agreed. But it would be nice if all the itunes content was available down here and that you could get access to Amazon here in NZ.. There is a certain amount of DRM free stuff available to us, other than that you will just have to have a word to the w***ers at the RIAA and the rest of the music industry about making more music DRM free. |
winmacguy (3367) | ||
| 538440 | 2008-01-18 11:13:00 | [edit: spam removed] | blueberry287 (12089) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 | |||||