Topic: Vista copy protection is defended  (Read 10264 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Tus-XC

  • Capt
  • XenoCorp® Member
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2785
  • Gender: Male
Re: Vista copy protection is defended
« Reply #40 on: February 04, 2007, 09:13:18 pm »
I'm judging them by their history.  If they are guilty now as I suspect it will be years before that evidence comes out even if a trial were begun today.  So we only have the past plus their current visible actions to judge by.
Well based upon their current actions concering vista i would say that they are having the same compatability issues they have dealt w/ in every single upgrade.  I know that some software that runs in 98 dont' run on xp, same thing went for vista.  I have had expiernce with installing stuff onto vista, most of it works.  Some of it however acts up a good deal.  It could be that microsoft is doing it on purpose or it could be that the company just took to many programing short cuts and now their proggy won't run on vista as those same shortcuts don't work anymore. 

Consider that they were ordered as part of their punishment for the actions they were convicted of to publish certain programming APIs.  They were given 5 years.  Those years are past and they haven't complied.  They are now talking of how the 2 year extension they were given may not be enough.  In that time they have written a whole new OS version but can't figure out how to document the APIs that are used in it?  That to me shows that they are not complying with the law and are still continuing their pattern of crimes.  They are also overdue in providing similar material in the EU (the reason for the big fines in the last year).   More of that continuing criminal pattern.

Patterns that don't neccesarily coralate to vista, releasing an api is not the same thing as a compatability issue w/ a program, an issue that i do believe apple has patched already.

In the last year they decided to make a specification of their new XML format for Office 2007, they have managed to write ~7,000 pages and get it through the ECMA standards group and are now trying to get it fast tracked through ISO.  Yet in over 5 years they couldn't document their APIs?   To me that smacks of defying the court system and they should be harshly punished for willfully disobeying the courts.
again how does this correlate to vista and to compatability issues.  All i see is you trying to justify your position that microsoft must be doing something, because look, they did this, when that item doesn't deal with an issue that has plaqued windows in every upgrade, maintaing backwards compatability.


The reason i've been posting the way i have is because frankly all you do is post the same old retoric about microsoft.  Nothing new, just the same rants.  Frankly its tiring and just slightly hyporcritial when all you bash is one or two companies, but then won't take the same time and effort into finding flaws in the ones you place on the petistal (ie for you thus far it seems if it ain't open source, it must be bad or the company making said software must have some malicous intent behind it(this is a broad analogy)).  I can understand you hating microsoft.  But i personally think you are letting this hatred go to far and letting it bias you opinions and your research to an extent where they begin to loose crediability.  for example, that last post you made was probably the first one i've read all the way through in a while, as most of the time i can pick up what you are saying by the first sentence or two, because what you are saying is the same stuff you have been repeating for months.

I'm sorry if i'm being harsh, but i felt you needed a bit of an explanation to why i've been singling you out in this thread and in the other thread.
Rob

"Elige Sortem Tuam"

Offline jualdeaux

  • The Quiet One
  • Global Moderator
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2758
Re: Vista copy protection is defended
« Reply #41 on: February 05, 2007, 02:48:36 pm »
Nem. Can you upgrade a Linux install, any of them, and be sure that every program you have installed on there previously will work with the new OS version?


Can you give one example where the Linux kernel, GCC, X11, Gnome or KDE were deliberately changed to break compatibility with a given program? 

Can you give one example where a Microsoft owned program was broken by a Windows or DOS upgrade without the fix being available before the OS was released?

Microsoft has been proven (Windows - DR-DOS and MS-DOS - Stacker)  to have done that and has at least discussed doing it on other occasions (Window - Palm OS).  Microsoft gave Novell the run around on taking part in the Windows 95 beta (info came from the current Comes vs Microsoft trial in Iowa).  Amont other things they wanted the names of every programmer and every site they sent Novells own beta software to.  Nice to be able to use your monopoly clout to get your competitors lists of major customers and software developers so you can target them for special "attention".  Would you give your competitor the list of your primary customers and developers when they explicitly state that they won't give you the equivalent?  Abusive, illegal monopoly behaviour as judged by multiple courts.

The development system for Linux distributions is different.  The core elements are all available for anyone whether yourself or a major corporation (even Microsoft) to take part in or just test through all phases of development.  The major distributions (such as Redhat and SuSE) do their beta work equally publically.  No one is excluded from being able to fully test their software before it goes gold.  Has a Linux distribution broken compatiblity with old software?  Yes (Redhat using a cutting edge GCC variant with some "issues"), was it publically known before the release?  Also yes.  Was there information available to allow fixes to be generated by the software creators before the final release of the distribution?  Yes again. 

There is the difference, why it is done and how publically its done.  Linux has done so in the open for technical reasons, Microsoft does it in the dark to destroy or damage competitors.

Did Apple have access to each of the many versions of Vista for testing or just a generic beta?  I never heard that the many variations had public betas so I doubt it.  So even if their software worked with the generic beta they couldn't know about the multiple final versions.

You see it isn't that Vista breaks some compatibility with the past it is that once again Microsoft is doing so to a major competitor.  Software that Microsoft itself should have been testing to make sure it worked.  In fact there is every reason to believe that Microsoft employees did test it and should have reported it as a bug.  ([spoiler]source link "About 80 percent of Microsoft employees who have a portable music player have an iPod," said one source, a high-level manager who asked to remain anonymous. "It's pretty staggering."  Done as a spoiler as it is evidence not part of the argument itself.[/spoiler])

What Microsoft has illegally done in the past has happened again.  Could it be an accident?  Yes.  Is it an accident that they should have prevented?  Also yes.  Because of their past behaviour they look guilty, just like any other serial criminal where a crime may have occurred and evidence links to them.  I doubt their innocence because so many times before it has been proven the blood is on their hands.


Not to be picky, but you never answered my question.
Only in America .....do we use the word 'politics' to describe the process so well: 'Poli' in Latin meaning 'many' and 'tics' meaning 'bloodsucking creatures'.

Offline Nemesis

  • Captain Kayn
  • Global Moderator
  • Commodore
  • *
  • Posts: 12485
Re: Vista copy protection is defended
« Reply #42 on: February 06, 2007, 07:43:26 pm »
In the last year they decided to make a specification of their new XML format for Office 2007, they have managed to write ~7,000 pages and get it through the ECMA standards group and are now trying to get it fast tracked through ISO.  Yet in over 5 years they couldn't document their APIs?   To me that smacks of defying the court system and they should be harshly punished for willfully disobeying the courts.


again how does this correlate to vista and to compatability issues.  All i see is you trying to justify your position that microsoft must be doing something, because look, they did this, when that item doesn't deal with an issue that has plaqued windows in every upgrade, maintaing backwards compatability.


The correlation is quite simple.   If Microsoft had followed the court orders in both the U.S. and E.U. on documenting those APIs then Apple could have been aware of changes to the APIs and corrected the iPod software.  Microsoft however has not complied with either court order in a usable form despite having had over 5 years in the U.S..  in the E.U. they claim to be unable to write the documentation.   When it comes to documenting their office format they can produce the documentation in months.  Why have they not been able to produce usable documentation for any of their APIs as ordered by courts on 2 continents?  Why can they produce reams of documentation that they want to produce and nothing usable as ordered by the courts?

The reason i've been posting the way i have is because frankly all you do is post the same old retoric about microsoft.  Nothing new, just the same rants.  Frankly its tiring and just slightly hyporcritial when all you bash is one or two companies, but then won't take the same time and effort into finding flaws in the ones you place on the petistal (ie for you thus far it seems if it ain't open source, it must be bad or the company making said software must have some malicous intent behind it(this is a broad analogy)).  I can understand you hating microsoft.  But i personally think you are letting this hatred go to far and letting it bias you opinions and your research to an extent where they begin to loose crediability.  for example, that last post you made was probably the first one i've read all the way through in a while, as most of the time i can pick up what you are saying by the first sentence or two, because what you are saying is the same stuff you have been repeating for months.


When Microsoft complies with the law and stops illegally destroying competition then I will have nothing to complain about on that topic and won't. 

When they stop forcing DRM into the system and claiming more and more rights over my computer and stop trying to write new laws for themselves by changing their EULA on the fly then I will stop complaining about that.

Notice I complain about specific actions and back them up.  You'll also notice that I have defended and yes even complimented Microsoft on occasion.  If you look back through the forums you will see me use the phrase "Kudos to Microsoft" when they did something right.  You'll also see me insisting that a poster who claimed Microsoft had stolen code back it up with evidence or state it as opinion.  So if you look you'll see I don't just "bash" Microsoft, I also compliment them when they earn it and defend them when accused without evidence.

You'll also notice if you reread my postings here that I point out that the iPod incident is suspicous and seems to carry on the pattern of changing Windows to hurt competitor.  I acknowledged repeatedly that it could be inadvertant.  Is it wrong to report suspicious behaviour in a serial criminal that continues to ignore court orders?  Is it wrong to consider that they are likely continuing that illegal behaviour when there has been no sign of remorse, repentence or reformation in them?

I'm sorry if i'm being harsh, but i felt you needed a bit of an explanation to why i've been singling you out in this thread and in the other thread.


I also wonder why so many are willing to just ignore the fact that Microsoft is not in compliance with the law on the documentation of APIs.  Remember that this is supposed to be the "fix" for Microsofts illegal behaviour.  So long as they don't comply with the court orders they are still continuing that behaviour and continuing to profit from it. 

I like to see competition in the market place.  Microsoft has (illegally) destroyed many of their competitors and have not done as ordered by the courts to allow that competition to rebuild. 
« Last Edit: February 06, 2007, 07:54:46 pm by IKV Nemesis »
Do unto others as Frey has done unto you.
Seti Team    Free Software
I believe truth and principle do matter. If you have to sacrifice them to get the results you want, then the results aren't worth it.
 FoaS_XC : "Take great pains to distinguish a criticism vs. an attack. A person reading a post should never be able to confuse the two."

Offline Nemesis

  • Captain Kayn
  • Global Moderator
  • Commodore
  • *
  • Posts: 12485
Re: Vista copy protection is defended
« Reply #43 on: February 06, 2007, 07:52:38 pm »
Nem. Can you upgrade a Linux install, any of them, and be sure that every program you have installed on there previously will work with the new OS version?

Acutually I did and you quoted it.

Quote
Has a Linux distribution broken compatiblity with old software?  Yes (Redhat using a cutting edge GCC variant with some "issues"), was it publically known before the release?  Also yes.  Was there information available to allow fixes to be generated by the software creators before the final release of the distribution?  Yes again. 

That acknowledged that compatibility can be broken between Linux versions.  It also pointed out ways it is different from how Microsoft does it.

I also pointed out how it was different for Linux to break compatibility with the past because everyone can see that break happening if they wish to.  They can also take part in deciding if and how it happens.  Finally they have full information as it is developed to make their software compliant with the changes in Linux. 

When Windows compatiblity is broken can competitors of Microsoft rely on being able to do any of those things?  Know the break is coming, take part is the decisions and be fully informed as it occurs so they can be ready with a new version when it does?  I don't believe so.

Open and transparent VS a closed, proprietary,  abusive monopoly.

Note that the U.S. courts defined Microsoft as "an abusive monopoly" not me.  I merely agree.
Do unto others as Frey has done unto you.
Seti Team    Free Software
I believe truth and principle do matter. If you have to sacrifice them to get the results you want, then the results aren't worth it.
 FoaS_XC : "Take great pains to distinguish a criticism vs. an attack. A person reading a post should never be able to confuse the two."

Offline Clark Kent

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6070
  • Gender: Male
Re: Vista copy protection is defended
« Reply #44 on: February 07, 2007, 07:20:26 am »
So, what about all the music I have on one computer with all my iTunes music downloaded from CDs?  If I decided I just wanted to do a file transfer over to another computer that I owned under Vista, rather than load each CD individually, would it tell me I was pirating music?  What about if there is a crash and I try to load my music from a backup DVD?
CK

But tell me, can you heal what father's done?
Or fix this hole in a mother's son?
Can you heal the broken worlds within?
Can you strip away so we may start again?
Tell me, can you heal what father's done?
Or cut this rope and let us run?
Just when all seems fine, and I'm pain free, you jab another pin,
Jab another pin in me
-Metallica

Offline Commander Maxillius

  • You did NOT just shoot that green sh-t at me?!?
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2299
  • Gender: Female
Re: Vista copy protection is defended
« Reply #45 on: February 08, 2007, 04:35:05 pm »
So, what about all the music I have on one computer with all my iTunes music downloaded from CDs?  If I decided I just wanted to do a file transfer over to another computer that I owned under Vista, rather than load each CD individually, would it tell me I was pirating music?  What about if there is a crash and I try to load my music from a backup DVD?

You don't know until you try it, and to do that you'll need to risk losing your files.  If your stuff is backed up on a HD, watch the indicator light and if it doesn't go as fast as it should, yank the connection and if possible reload the lost files.  If it's on a DVD, hope you don't have a RW version because otherwise your data's safe.


All this makes me VERY happy I switched to Macintosh.
I was never here, you were never here, this conversation never took place, and you most certainly did not see me.

Offline RazalYllib

  • Imperial Romulan Information Service-senior advisor
  • Lt.
  • *
  • Posts: 784
  • Gender: Male
    • IRIS
Re: Vista copy protection is defended
« Reply #46 on: February 08, 2007, 07:00:23 pm »
My 2 coppers...

As far as I know, once something has been "digitized" there is zero technical limitation, given the proper motivation, to making a bit for bit copy. That is the very nature of digital medium makes this possible...perfect reproduction bit for bit no error possible by design. Easy pickings for those who make their day to day living from pirated material are motivators for individuals to crack something. In the due course of time, the problem will still remain because the battle between copyright holders and pirates is tit for tat and in some ways unwinable on either side, just continuous back and forth wasting resources that could be used elsewhere.

There is no real protection from a dvd pirate going down to wally world, picking up the first day release of a feature, placing in the tray of commercially available dvd player and taking the digital output signal and re-encoding on the fly with zero loss of signal. Takes a bit of doing and the right tools all available right now off the shelf as it were; plus a working knowledge of electronics to disassemble a dvd player and solder the connectors, it can be done...no license needed when u bundle it back up and encode. Furthermore, Vista will be unable to stop the playing or reproduction of said copied media due to fact that it is encoded in an open standard where there is no DRM for backwards compatibility.

As for the mp3 thing...any lossy compression of music is evil...any promotion of any codec that is inherantly lossy is a clear sign of mental abberition of a most severe sort and if you really feel that way, I would suggest you urgently seek proffessional help.

What they need to do is make 500gig players and you load your whole collection as wav and you never have to sacrifice sonic perfection for space ever again.

The DRM process is bothersome ...if you can kill it to optimize cpu resources that you as the end user want to use for other tasks, such as high end gaming, or say CAD or home rendering if that is your thing, I really see no impact, but if you cannot kill, disable such garbage as needed it is bad for the end user due to the fact that it limits their choices by sucking up cpu cycles on garbage.

Thats my take on it. With XP I can trim the total commit charge down really small on my low end boxes and it makes a big difference when gaming on them. If Vista will not let me do that, I want no part of it. The DRM is non issue for me, I dont pirate and the only music I dl is free deadstuff in open circulation. Occassionally I will watch a DvD but usually just for the features on DvDs and the like, but not as a matter of routine.

 
Comes a time when the blind man takes your hand
Says "don't you see?"
Gotta make it somehow
On the dreams you still believe
Don't give it up
You got an empty cup
Only love can fill
Only love can fill

Offline Just plain old Punisher

  • Vice Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 36927
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm not facist, I just like wearing jackboots
Re: Vista copy protection is defended
« Reply #47 on: February 08, 2007, 07:34:35 pm »
So, what about all the music I have on one computer with all my iTunes music downloaded from CDs?  If I decided I just wanted to do a file transfer over to another computer that I owned under Vista, rather than load each CD individually, would it tell me I was pirating music?  What about if there is a crash and I try to load my music from a backup DVD?

You don't know until you try it, and to do that you'll need to risk losing your files.  If your stuff is backed up on a HD, watch the indicator light and if it doesn't go as fast as it should, yank the connection and if possible reload the lost files.  If it's on a DVD, hope you don't have a RW version because otherwise your data's safe.


All this makes me VERY happy I switched to Macintosh.

Bah! I hope you enjoy your tofu in hell you dirty mac hippy!!!

j/k

"Sex is a lot like pizza.  If you're not careful you can blister your tongue". -Dracho

Offline Clark Kent

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6070
  • Gender: Male
Re: Vista copy protection is defended
« Reply #48 on: February 09, 2007, 11:25:06 am »
So, what about all the music I have on one computer with all my iTunes music downloaded from CDs?  If I decided I just wanted to do a file transfer over to another computer that I owned under Vista, rather than load each CD individually, would it tell me I was pirating music?  What about if there is a crash and I try to load my music from a backup DVD?

You don't know until you try it, and to do that you'll need to risk losing your files.  If your stuff is backed up on a HD, watch the indicator light and if it doesn't go as fast as it should, yank the connection and if possible reload the lost files.  If it's on a DVD, hope you don't have a RW version because otherwise your data's safe.


All this makes me VERY happy I switched to Macintosh.

You keep saying things like this that make me wonder- you do remember that I run two macs at home, and one of them is my primary machine, don't you? 
CK

But tell me, can you heal what father's done?
Or fix this hole in a mother's son?
Can you heal the broken worlds within?
Can you strip away so we may start again?
Tell me, can you heal what father's done?
Or cut this rope and let us run?
Just when all seems fine, and I'm pain free, you jab another pin,
Jab another pin in me
-Metallica

Offline Nemesis

  • Captain Kayn
  • Global Moderator
  • Commodore
  • *
  • Posts: 12485
Re: Vista copy protection is defended
« Reply #49 on: February 10, 2007, 08:09:33 pm »
An example of Microsoft finally doing the right thing.  As the Texans say "he needed killing "

The Tombstone and Epitaph
« Last Edit: February 11, 2007, 09:15:46 am by IKV Nemesis »
Do unto others as Frey has done unto you.
Seti Team    Free Software
I believe truth and principle do matter. If you have to sacrifice them to get the results you want, then the results aren't worth it.
 FoaS_XC : "Take great pains to distinguish a criticism vs. an attack. A person reading a post should never be able to confuse the two."

intermech

  • Guest
Re: Vista copy protection is defended
« Reply #50 on: February 15, 2007, 01:29:54 pm »
I think that hardlocks are the answer. Make a hardlock fit into a USB drive, make the modular so that they can connect to each other. Have the software saved and able to run off of the hardlock and have a hardware component in the hardlock that has to match the software. The software might be able to be copied, but the hardlock would be much more difficult. Switch out all CD, DVD, HD-DVD drives for usb banks and convert all movies, music, and software to hardlock cartridges . . . JUST STAY OUT OF MY COMPUTER!

Offline Dash Jones

  • Sub-Commander of the Dark Side
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6477
  • Gender: Male
Re: Vista copy protection is defended
« Reply #51 on: February 16, 2007, 11:33:20 am »
If it's a hardlock how would that impact the ability to upgrade a computer instead of having to buy a whole new one?
"All hominins are hominids, but not all hominids are hominins."


"Is this a Christian perspective?

Now where in the Bible does it say if someone does something stupid you should shoot them in the face?"

-------

We have whale farms in Jersey.   They're called McDonald's.

There is no "I" in team. There are two "I"s in Vin Diesel. screw you, team.

Offline Nemesis

  • Captain Kayn
  • Global Moderator
  • Commodore
  • *
  • Posts: 12485
Re: Vista copy protection is defended
« Reply #52 on: February 16, 2007, 07:15:57 pm »
I think that hardlocks are the answer. Make a hardlock fit into a USB drive, make the modular so that they can connect to each other. Have the software saved and able to run off of the hardlock and have a hardware component in the hardlock that has to match the software. The software might be able to be copied, but the hardlock would be much more difficult. Switch out all CD, DVD, HD-DVD drives for usb banks and convert all movies, music, and software to hardlock cartridges . . . JUST STAY OUT OF MY COMPUTER!

Cartridges can be copied too. 

The MAME emulator is an example of that.  It allows playing old video games by running software copies of the old cartridges and machine ROM chips in an emulator that responds as if the programs were in the actual hardware it was designed for.
Do unto others as Frey has done unto you.
Seti Team    Free Software
I believe truth and principle do matter. If you have to sacrifice them to get the results you want, then the results aren't worth it.
 FoaS_XC : "Take great pains to distinguish a criticism vs. an attack. A person reading a post should never be able to confuse the two."

Offline Sarek

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2553
Re: Vista copy protection is defended
« Reply #53 on: February 19, 2007, 03:03:46 am »
As for the mp3 thing...any lossy compression of music is evil...any promotion of any codec that is inherantly lossy is a clear sign of mental abberition of a most severe sort and if you really feel that way, I would suggest you urgently seek proffessional help.

To the true connoisseur, any digitalized music is lossy.  Only analog recordings are acceptable.  Also, solid state amps are no good, true high fidelity requires vacuum tubes.   ;)
Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.  – John Adams (1814)


www.lp.org




Offline Nemesis

  • Captain Kayn
  • Global Moderator
  • Commodore
  • *
  • Posts: 12485
Re: Vista copy protection is defended
« Reply #54 on: March 02, 2007, 02:26:20 pm »
The U.S. Department of Transportation view on Vista

Quote
In a memo to his staff, the DOT's CIO Daniel Mintz says he has placed "an indefinite moratorium" on the upgrades as "there appears to be no compelling technical or business case for upgrading to these new Microsoft software products. Furthermore, there appears to be specific reasons not to upgrade."

Among the concerns cited by Mintz are compatibility with software applications currently in use at the department, the cost of an upgrade, and DOT's move to a new headquarters in Washington later this year. "Microsoft Vista, Office 2007, and Internet Explorer [7] may be acquired for testing purposes only, though only on approval by the DOT chief information officer," Mintz writes.


Quote
The DOT's ban on Vista, Internet Explorer 7, and Office 2007 applies to 15,000 computer users at DOT proper who are currently running the Windows XP Professional operating system. The memo indicates that a similar ban is in effect at the Federal Aviation Administration, which has 45,000 desktop users.


I didn't know the FAA had made that decision as well.
Do unto others as Frey has done unto you.
Seti Team    Free Software
I believe truth and principle do matter. If you have to sacrifice them to get the results you want, then the results aren't worth it.
 FoaS_XC : "Take great pains to distinguish a criticism vs. an attack. A person reading a post should never be able to confuse the two."

Offline GE-Raven

  • Lord God Emperor for Life of the Taldren SETI Group
  • D.Net VIP
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2621
  • Gender: Male
  • The cause of AND solution to life's problems
    • Raven's Nest
Re: Vista copy protection is defended
« Reply #55 on: March 08, 2007, 11:06:24 am »
The U.S. Department of Transportation view on Vista

Quote
In a memo to his staff, the DOT's CIO Daniel Mintz says he has placed "an indefinite moratorium" on the upgrades as "there appears to be no compelling technical or business case for upgrading to these new Microsoft software products. Furthermore, there appears to be specific reasons not to upgrade."

Among the concerns cited by Mintz are compatibility with software applications currently in use at the department, the cost of an upgrade, and DOT's move to a new headquarters in Washington later this year. "Microsoft Vista, Office 2007, and Internet Explorer [7] may be acquired for testing purposes only, though only on approval by the DOT chief information officer," Mintz writes.


Quote
The DOT's ban on Vista, Internet Explorer 7, and Office 2007 applies to 15,000 computer users at DOT proper who are currently running the Windows XP Professional operating system. The memo indicates that a similar ban is in effect at the Federal Aviation Administration, which has 45,000 desktop users.


I didn't know the FAA had made that decision as well.


Standard Operating procedure for any large Business/Org.  We won't be installing it here at our university (which means there is a defacto BAN on it other than student owned machines) until we have evaluated the software ourselves.

I would assume that would be the same for the DOT.  I would be willing to lay a side bet with any takers that by 2008 things will be different.

GE-Raven