Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

No Full HD Playback for 32-bit Vista 554

snafu109 writes "Pity the Vista user with a 32-bit CPU. Senior Program Manager Steve Riley announced today at Tech.Ed Australia that full HD content shall only be played at the full resolution where only signed drivers are used — only in the 64-bit version of Vista. From the article: '"Any next-generation high definition content will not play in x32 at all," said Riley. "This is a decision that the Media Player folks made because there are just too many ways right now for unsigned kernel mode code [to compromise content protection]. The media companies asked us to do this and said they don't want any of their high definition content to play in x32 at all, because of all of the unsigned malware that runs in kernel mode can get around content protection, so we had to do this."'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

No Full HD Playback for 32-bit Vista

Comments Filter:
  • by IntelliAdmin ( 941633 ) * on Thursday August 24, 2006 @11:28AM (#15970030) Homepage
    This is another example of the media companies dictating what the consumer can purchase in the marketplace. They have been hampering innovation since the beginning of time. If it were up to media companies we wouldn't even been able to purchase a tape recorder back in the seventies, a VCR in the eighties, and an MP3 player in the 90s, and now they are doing the same with HD in the 00s. I bet Linux will step up to the plate and be able to play HD.

    Free Windows Admin Tools [intelliadmin.com]
    • by TheDreadSlashdotterD ( 966361 ) on Thursday August 24, 2006 @11:29AM (#15970046) Homepage
      How much would you like to bet that only 10% of the U.S. population will really care?
      • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 24, 2006 @11:50AM (#15970247)
        I'd be honestly amazed if more than 1% of the population cares.

        I expect that most people who wind up getting Vista will get it on new computers. These new computers will most likley be 64-bit computers anyway.

        In the end, the only people who will care are geeks. Everyone else will assume that it's a problem with their old computer. I can already here the meme coming up, "oh, 32-bit isn't enough for HD, you need 64-bit to do HD!".

        The vast majoriy of people will assume that 64-bit computers are required for HD content due to some techy reason they don't understand. They won't believe that someone would intentially criple their computer.
        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          > I can already here the meme coming up, "oh, 32-bit isn't enough for HD, you need 64-bit to do HD!".

          Please quit misusing the term meme. I'm really tired of every concept, joke, or fad being called a meme. From dictionary.com:

          meme
          n : a cultural unit (an idea or value or pattern of behavior) that is passed from one generation to another by nongenetic means (as by imitation); "memes are the cultrual counterpart of genes"

          jfs
      • by Catbeller ( 118204 ) on Thursday August 24, 2006 @03:50PM (#15972804) Homepage
        The majority of the population doesn't care about school funding, tortured confessions, faked up wars, New Orleans, evolution, Afghanistan, electric cars, space, books, or ... you get the idea.

        3-10 per cent of the population has always carried the civilization for the mute and disinterested majority, same as it always has. I really don't care about what the majority cares about. (Star Search, or some other "reality" show, isn't that the focus of the age?)
    • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 24, 2006 @11:43AM (#15970186)
      "This is another example of the media companies dictating what the consumer can purchase in the marketplace."

      Much like the FSF "dictates" what some of it's users can do with its code.*

      *Or to quote Linus, "he who writes the code, dictates the license". And to borrow another slashdotism. "If you don't like the license, don't use the code".
      • by grasshoppa ( 657393 ) <skennedy@@@tpno-co...org> on Thursday August 24, 2006 @11:52AM (#15970264) Homepage
        *Or to quote Linus, "he who writes the code, dictates the license". And to borrow another slashdotism. "If you don't like the license, don't use the code".

        You got modded troll, but you are actually really insightful.

        It's somewhat sad that you are as insightful as you are, I would expect this to be common sense.

        If you don't agree with the movie industry, don't support them. If you don't agree with the music industry, don't support them. By extension, that means all the electronic companies out there trying to screw you for them by proxy.

        it's quite simple really.
        • Except.. (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Marc2k ( 221814 )
          hardware makers and Congress aren't in bed with the FSF. That statement is analogous to, "If you don't like the PATRIOT act so much, move!" Granted, not supporting MPAA companies is a great start, but enough people still do support them that they're going to have clout with both lawmakers and hardware manufacturers for quite some time; both of those have affect the world around us, even if we are boycotting the MPAA.
        • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

          by cmacb ( 547347 )
          I agree totaly. I no longer buy CDs or DVDs, don't go to movies and refuse to use any electronic device.

          (posting this from my abacus)
      • by Jeremi ( 14640 ) on Thursday August 24, 2006 @12:25PM (#15970631) Homepage
        Much like the FSF "dictates" what some of it's users can do with its code.*


        Except that FSF produces and thus owns the code it writes. The media companies do not produce computers or operating systems, and yet they try to dictate rules to the companies that do. See the difference? When Richard Stallman is able to strongarm Microsoft into removing all DRM from Vista, then your comparison will make sense.

      • According to Jack Valenti, former spokesman for the MPA, in a talk he gave on the campus of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign a few years ago at Roger Ebert's Overlooked Movie Festival, one should not be able to make their own backups. Consumers should buy another copy of the media because Hollywood studios (his former clients) invested so much money in making those movies. Nothing was said about the investment consumers spend in buying copies of the movies and the consumer's desire to not se
    • by vrtladept ( 674792 ) on Thursday August 24, 2006 @11:56AM (#15970313) Journal
      Linux already plays HD content. I have proof in my living room today.

      See http://mythtv.org/ [mythtv.org] and http://www.pchdtv.com/ [pchdtv.com]

      Enjoy! I can do soooo much more with my myth box than a cable or sattelite provided pvr. I can store to DVD, I can watch from multiple networked locations, etc.
      • by Toby_Tyke ( 797359 ) on Thursday August 24, 2006 @12:28PM (#15970687) Journal
        Now, to be fair to MS (shocking idea on slashdot I know, but bear with me) you can play just as much HD content on XP, and presumably Vista, as you can on Linux, regardless of what kind of CPU you have.

        You see, the article is talking about HDCP DRM protected content, specifically blue ray and HD-DVD. To the best of my knowledge, there are no Blue Ray or HD-DVD players for linux, or OS-X for that matter, so even if windows only supports them on 64-bit CPUs, that will still be better support than any other OS has at present.

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by nchip ( 28683 )
          Well, your knowledge sucks then. The first HD-DVD player on the market runs redhat Linux [geekswithblogs.net], so there ALREADY IS a hd-dvd player for Linux.. just comes bundled with hardware.
      • Yep (Score:4, Interesting)

        by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Thursday August 24, 2006 @12:46PM (#15970885)
        and in 5 years, it'll be illegal to sell and impossible to find the hardware needed to build an hdtv mythtv box. Maybe 10 tops. Ah well, when it happens, I'm just going to stop consuming.
    • by suv4x4 ( 956391 ) on Thursday August 24, 2006 @12:03PM (#15970382)
      "Media companies are ruining innovation"... by making people embrace 64-bit technology?
      • by Gary W. Longsine ( 124661 ) on Thursday August 24, 2006 @12:56PM (#15970996) Homepage Journal
        I find this fascinating. The personal and identity information of every PC user on the planet has been under serious and sustained attack for nearly a decade now from "unsigned" malware, but that really didn't elicit meaningful changes in the design of the operating system that most PC users employ. However, when the entertainment industry realizes that these techniques for privilege escalation can be used to hijack their content, serious design changes are created to support the policy these customers seek to enforce.

        100 million individuals can be easily ignored because they produce white noise when speaking, but a dozen individuals with hundreds of millions of dollars can speak with a very clear voice and wind up with veto power over Microsoft. They have decided that everyone must upgrade their computers to watch HD content. (It's time to purchase shares in Intel, the top PC component suppliers, and the top 10 PC makers -- they'll all be selling more stuff as a result of this.)

        The security needs of the individual consumer will continue to be largely ignored, except where they happen to overlap with the needs of really big clients like the entertainment industry. It's not clear how to aggregate those little voices to speak with one, loud and clear, voice, particularly as they don't know, on an individual basis, what to say or even that they need to say anything at all. I suppose if enough people start switching to Mac OS X or Linux, and cite security concerns as a primary reason, that might get attention in Redmond.
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by Ophion ( 58479 )

      This is another example of the media companies dictating what the consumer can purchase in the marketplace. They have been hampering innovation since the beginning of time.

      I know--it's what killed the dinosaurs.

  • by mdobossy ( 674488 ) on Thursday August 24, 2006 @11:28AM (#15970034)
    ... by the time Vista finally hits store shelves, 32-bit CPUs will be a long forgotten antique.
  • by 8127972 ( 73495 ) on Thursday August 24, 2006 @11:29AM (#15970048)
    ..... Microsoft can hedge their bets in terms of which standard wins. After all, nothing sucks more than being on the losing side.
  • niiiiice (Score:5, Funny)

    by minus_273 ( 174041 ) <aaaaa@SPAM.ya[ ].com ['hoo' in gap]> on Thursday August 24, 2006 @11:30AM (#15970049) Journal
    i guess this the major upgrade MS is talking about!
  • Bullshit (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Spad ( 470073 ) <slashdot&spad,co,uk> on Thursday August 24, 2006 @11:30AM (#15970053) Homepage
    The media companies asked us to do this and said they don't want any of their high definition content to play in x32 at all, because of all of the unsigned malware that runs in kernel mode can get around content protection, so we had to do this.

    Because if Microsoft had said no, then the Media Companies would all have just jumped ship to Linux, thus destroying Microsoft's monopoly once and for all.

    Seriously, in Microsoft's position they don't have to do *anything* they don't want to - I suspect large amount of money or other "incentives" changed hands here.
    • Re:Bullshit (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Reapman ( 740286 ) on Thursday August 24, 2006 @11:33AM (#15970079)
      Saw this coming right when they started talking about "Trusting Computing" and it's ilk. I'll wait for a 3rd party program that runs BD or HD even if it has to run it at a lower res, these guys have to realize that if nobody can use their stuff, that NO FORMAT is going to win. DVD is probably going to trump both HD and BD anyways, and this is just another nail.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by lowrydr310 ( 830514 )
        Mod parent up!!!

        Seriously, who friggin' cares about HD. I'm certainly not excited. I see it as something that people use to show off to their friends - "look at me, I have a 42 inch HD display!!!" I know HD content looks a little more stunning, crisp, and vivid, but standard definition is just fine for most people. It's not like there's distortion or noise like in the analog days. The little compressions artifacts you can see in DVDs are tolerable, even when displayed on a large screen.

    • Re:Bullshit (Score:4, Insightful)

      by wonkavader ( 605434 ) on Thursday August 24, 2006 @11:35AM (#15970104)
      Not so sure. Microsoft has (at least in past) had it's eyes on media distribution ala Apple, and buying up content themselves. They make play nice with the media folk because they want to partner with them in future.

      (And screw them, break the partnership, be found with suspiciously similar IP, get sued, and then just grind everyone down with lawyers and stalling -- they do that by reflex, I gather.)

    • Re:Bullshit (Score:5, Funny)

      by Whiney Mac Fanboy ( 963289 ) * <whineymacfanboy@gmail.com> on Thursday August 24, 2006 @11:41AM (#15970166) Homepage Journal
      "The media companies asked us to do this ..... so we had to do this."

      Interesting - after all, thats precisely the line Apple uses about the DRM in ITMS songs.

      Just another way MS is copying Apple ;-)
      • Re: Bullshit (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Black Parrot ( 19622 ) on Thursday August 24, 2006 @11:59AM (#15970337)
        > "The media companies asked us to do this ..... so we had to do this."

        > Interesting - after all, thats precisely the line Apple uses about the DRM in ITMS songs.

        At least we know who their real customers are.
        • >>> "The media companies asked us to do this ..... so we had to do this."
          >>> Interesting - after all, thats precisely the line Apple uses about
          >>> the DRM in ITMS songs.

          > At least we know who their real customers are.

          Apples and oranges again. We're not talking about a new distribution model, i.e. iTunes. We're talking about being able to play your already purchased BlueRay/HDDVD on your PC instead of your DVD player.

          jfs
    • Ironically, DRM on such a large scale was often joked at but never taken seriously...

      To completely -prevent- something on x386 Windows PC solely due to DRM??? Wow.

      Wait a few years, and you won't be able to run unsigned operating system (nor non-validated software: whatever that may mean) on your hardware.
    • What do you mean, "the Media companies would have all just jumped ship to Linux"? What does that even mean? That they would release discs that only played on Linux? Please...

      Anyway, Linux lacks the secure media data paths technology that's required to implement AACS, the DRM used by HD-DVD and BR discs.
  • For real? (Score:4, Funny)

    by andrewman327 ( 635952 ) on Thursday August 24, 2006 @11:31AM (#15970059) Homepage Journal
    Wait, so Microsoft is cutting back on feature bloat in the name of security? (Clicks heels chanting "there's no place like home.")
    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by eddy ( 18759 )
      No, in the name of "Rights Management". Security is something completely different, and much less important (apparently)
    • They're actually increasing feature bloat in the name of insecurity. They're basically adding an extra point of failure in the driver loading process to ensure that you can't run kernel drivers whose source you've vetted yourself.
  • by MrLogic17 ( 233498 ) on Thursday August 24, 2006 @11:31AM (#15970060) Journal

    Sounds like an opening for competition against Media Player. If WMP is shipped brain damaged, what's to stop 3rd party apps from doing full HD payback instead?

    VideoLan anyone? http://www.videolan.org/ [videolan.org]

    • by Spad ( 470073 ) <slashdot&spad,co,uk> on Thursday August 24, 2006 @11:34AM (#15970088) Homepage
      I suspect the MPAA will refuse to licence the HDCP decoding tech to anyone that doesn't go to extreme lengths to "protect" their content.

      This, combined with needing a new 3D card and new monitor - or a new TV - and having to splash out £500 for a player seems like just another nail in HD/Blu Ray's coffin before it's even started.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by peragrin ( 659227 )
        The problem is people are used to being able to record a tv program with their vcr. HDCP will fail in the market as people won't be allowed to do just that, as outlined by copyright law for fair use.

        The only way around it will be if the media companies go to on demand tv for all their content after it's aired in it's normal time slot. But cable companies and the media giants aren't that smart.
      • Yep (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Sycraft-fu ( 314770 ) on Thursday August 24, 2006 @12:12PM (#15970462)
        That's what MS means by saying they "have" to do this. They don't mean that literally Sony has a gun to their head or anything. They could, if they wished, ship Windows without any DRM at all. However what would happen is the media companies would simply refuse them the licenses necessary to be able to play any of their HD content at all. While I'd like to see MS say "Fine fuck you and the horse your rode in on," I understand they realistically can't. They are doing a heavy push for this media PC concept and supporting HD is part of the hook.

        So, I say what I say in relation to everything HD-DVD or Blu-ray: Boycott it. Don't buy it, just stick with DVDs. Doesn't mean you are shut out of HD content entirely, there are people doing some un-DRM'd HD stuff online (remember this new stuff doesn't mandate signed drivers for anything HD, just for anything with AACS, meaning HD-DVD and Blu-Ray). If HD-DVD and Blu-Ray fall flat, but regular DVD keeps going strong and new un-DRM'd content starts picking up, the media companies will have little choice but to drop it.
    • I'm already enjoying HD content on all of my systems (two windows, one ubuntu) using VLC, so I suspect as soon as HD-DVD and Bluray are reverse-engineered, I'll be using it for those too.

      Assuming I ever actually buy a BD or HD-DVD drive, of course.

  • Umm. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Churla ( 936633 ) on Thursday August 24, 2006 @11:32AM (#15970066)
    But what about non MS media players which run on Vista?

    What hurdles will they have to get HD content on non DRM'd to death systems? Or am I off on a technological tangent which is impossible?
    • If you want to play something DRM'ed, you'll have to crack the protection, which in the US is probably a DMCA violation. I am not a lawyer, but thanks to the bloodsuckers who are lawyers being actually prepared this time around, you'll get a chance at the legal penalties DVD Jon [wikipedia.org] narrowly escaped.
  • Scariest part ... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by throbbingbrain.com ( 443482 ) on Thursday August 24, 2006 @11:32AM (#15970069)
    "The media companies asked us to do this ..... so we had to do this."

    Wow.


    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by zyl0x ( 987342 )
      That sounds less like volunteering and more like voluntolding.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      This is actually a good sign - microsoft aren't stupid. If they thought they were a total monopoly they'd have just said "fuck off" - so they're actually trying to avoid an all-out war which could damage them.
    • Microsoft: "The media companies asked us to do this (protectedt path video only)..... so we had to do this."

      Apple: "The media companies said we had to charge more than $1.... so we told them to fuck off"

      One company uses a monopoly to apply pressure the other direction...
  • x32? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by linuxci ( 3530 ) on Thursday August 24, 2006 @11:32AM (#15970072)
    Well x64 sounds bad enough but now they're referring to the 32bit x86 architecture as x32. Just doesn't sound right.
  • Shocked! (Score:3, Funny)

    by ErikTheRed ( 162431 ) on Thursday August 24, 2006 @11:33AM (#15970081) Homepage
    I am shocked that Microsoft wouldn't put their end-user's interests first I'll tell you.

    Oh... wait... Never mind.
  • Malware? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by DingerX ( 847589 ) on Thursday August 24, 2006 @11:34AM (#15970087) Journal
    Uh--so let me get this right, "Malware" now includes anything that does not "register" with Microsoft and adhere to unconscionable DRM schemes?
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by luvirini ( 753157 )
      Yes, and that means that all kinds of malware like openoffice.org, third party antivirus scanners, games and such will be automatically removed by Windows Vista Security tools.
    • No, "Malware" includes any software the person using the term doesn't like. To be honest, anything less secure than a direct video pipe into your brain's optical cortex is malware from the MPAA's viewpoint.
  • "Malware" is ware that's mal (bad) for us, not what's bad for the MPAA.

  • No HD? News to me... (Score:5, Informative)

    by Inverted Intellect ( 950622 ) on Thursday August 24, 2006 @11:35AM (#15970103)
    HD definition content is and will still be playable on any Windows computer with the proper hardware and software. However, HDCP protected content will not be playable in full definition unless the proper DRM requirements are met.
  • by Oz0ne ( 13272 ) on Thursday August 24, 2006 @11:37AM (#15970121) Homepage
    This is getting kind of ridiculous. I understand setbacks, feature freezes, etc. And delays! Boy do I understand delays. I'm a software developer.

    What I don't understand at this point, is why *anyone* would be interested in upgrading to Vista. Is it me or does it just seem like XP with bigger hardware requirements and more annoying "are you sure?" dialogues?
    • by w33t ( 978574 ) on Thursday August 24, 2006 @11:55AM (#15970298) Homepage
      I'm right there with you.

      I honestly have not heard anything that makes Vista seem appealing, at least from a feature standpoint.

      The only motivators for 'upgrading' to Vista seem to be the lock-ins. Take for example directX 10 being only for Vista. This means that I will have to buy Vista to play newer video games. And of course this is not because there is something inherently better about Vista - it is simply an artificial constraint.

      The one technology that had me interested was the databasing file system, but it was announced that this was pulled from Vista long ago.

      It's as if Microsoft is an automobile manufacturer from whom you must by the newer model car to be able to use the newly built highway. Not because the new car is better, any safer, or indeed really any different from your current car. But simply because it is a Microsoft brand.

      I wish I could believe that the consumer will not stand for such blatant charades - but technology is merely magic to the lay, so they have no choice but to accept what they are told, and they will buy Vista because they 'need' it to watch new movies, and I will buy it because I 'need' it to play new games.
  • Well I guess I am just going to have to scrap my plans to buy lots of HD-DVDs and Blu-Ray DVDs for $35 each (after I already spent lots of money on DVDs which work fine thank you), buy a player that can play them (do they exist yet?), and play them in Windows while I sit at my desk!!
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by LWATCDR ( 28044 )
      Just download them using Bit Torrent.
      Since you already have the DVD why should you pay just for a new format. You have a license to watch the movie or show so why should the resolution matter?
  • by maynard ( 3337 ) <j.maynard.gelinas@nOspaM.gmail.com> on Thursday August 24, 2006 @11:39AM (#15970147) Journal
    I haven't run windows in fifteen years or so. But recently there's some software and features on win that I happen to need. But MS is making it *very* difficult, both by segmenting the market to inflate prices and feature limitations that I just can't justify the purchase. This is annoying. Over time computers are becoming less useful, not more! Who in their right mind would pay more for modern hardware and software to do less? These people are nuts.
    • Wait. Are you saying that you haven't used a windows based PC in 15 years? Or just not happen to have a PC running windows at home. If the former, I'd like to let you know that there are a number of enhancements to windows since Windows 3.0 was available in '91 (3.1 came out in '92, I believe).

      P.S. If you are saying you haven't used a windows-based PC in 15 years, yet are a /. reader, I call BS. :-)
  • by RyanFenton ( 230700 ) on Thursday August 24, 2006 @11:40AM (#15970158)
    Windows is nice because it is convenient. I can plug components in, copy my content around, play games, program, move songs and video to my portable player, etc., with no problems that aren't quickly fixed.

    When the computer I'm using ceases to be my tool for handling data of my choice, it instead becomes a box where I have to ask permission, and it even goes so far as to prevent grey are usage (new console emulators with disc readers, remixing content, memory editors, No-CD checks for games I own, etc.), then I'd rather not use that kind of system. It is no longer convenient for me.

    Now, the question is, how do you convince 'average' people that the new limitations will no longer be convenient for them? Or will it be too late for some forms of content when Vista and other DRM systems are completely mainstream?

    Ryan Fenton
  • Once again.... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by e4g4 ( 533831 )
    ...the media companies are steering technological "innovation." How is this even remotely reasonable? The media distributors have resisted new technology since the advent of the recordable videotape, for precisely the same reason. My real question is - will Vista be able to play full HD content from media distributed by independent media companies (who choose not to use the HDCP garbage)? Furthermore, where the hell do the media companies get the idea that by limiting full HD content playback to signed d
  • Since Blue-Ray and HD-DVD are going to require HDCP, and not a single Video Card on the market currently supports HDCP (a lot of the chips do, but the cards don't enable it), you'd need to buy a new video card to play the content, anyway.

    Not that I support this move. Microsoft is in a strong enough position that they don't have to cave to the MPAA.

  • The media companies asked us to do this and said they don't want any of their high definition content to play in x32 at all, because of all of the unsigned malware that runs in kernel mode can get around content protection, so we had to do this.

    No. You aren't at the beck and call of the media companies. Supposedly you are there to answer to your shareholders and ultimately the end consumer.
  • by gaines ( 987885 ) on Thursday August 24, 2006 @11:47AM (#15970213) Homepage
    Does anyone have video footage of Microsoft bending over for the media companies? I was hoping it was caught on film.

    "Thank you sir may I have another?"
    - Bill Gates
  • by Prototerm ( 762512 ) on Thursday August 24, 2006 @11:47AM (#15970216)
    I, for one, use my computer to watch all my existing DVD's. I've got a large screen, a good sound system, and a comfy chair. I can't remember the last time I used my TV to watch them.

    And, while I have an AMD64 machine, for the most part, I don't see that a 64-bit OS buys me anything except problems with older drivers, and possibly software, too, I don't know.

    So, why do I want to upgrade to a Blue Ray or HD-DVD again? I have a nice collection of DVD's, the resolution looks just fine on my LCD monitor, and they play in Linux as well as Windows XP. Vista (a.k.a. "Windows DRM Edition") issues aside, it seems to be that the movie studios are killing both HD formats with their greed and paranoia.

    You know what they say: "Pride cometh before you're eaten by the lions". Or something like that.
  • by BouffeMoiLaChatte ( 188459 ) on Thursday August 24, 2006 @11:48AM (#15970220)
    "The media companies asked us to do this and said they don't want any of their high definition content to play in x32 at all,..."

    haha this is the worst lie i've heard these days...

    any body should understand "AS our X64 platform doesn't sell very well , we hope by discarding 32 bit market to boost 64bit server and os shares..."

    just my 2 cents... :-)
  • So basically, it seems to me that MS is admitting that their new operating system has just as many security holes as their current versions do:

    This is a decision that the Media Player folks made because there are just too many ways right now for unsigned kernel mode code [to compromise content protection].

    So your OS has more security holes than a block of swiss cheese, and you're going to "protect" media companies by not allowing full HD playback at all in 32-bit versions? I guess I just have one more reas

  • by ballpoint ( 192660 ) on Thursday August 24, 2006 @11:52AM (#15970265)
    #define unsigned
  • Doesn't just seem a little weird that Microsoft is even engaged in an issue concerning playing media? I just seems to me that an operating system should handle memory and program control.

    This means that even if you have an HD-DVD disc, an HD-DVD player, a video card that has the right code to process HD-DVD content, and a CPU/GPU powerful enough to handle the type of processing involved, enough memory in the computer, and a monitor capable of displaying HD, you still won't be able to watch an HD-DVD. Wh

  • ...and of course its only a coincidence that anybody wanting to play HD will have to pay $$$ and upgrade to another version of windows
  • It's just like Eben Moglen said in his Wizards of OS3 keynote speech in 2004. What these companies are competing with is FREEDOM - their most dire competitor - and they are going to lose.
  • End of Windows MCE (Score:3, Insightful)

    by SuperKendall ( 25149 ) on Thursday August 24, 2006 @11:58AM (#15970333)
    So what good is a Windows media center edition box if you can't put an HD-DVD or Blu-Ray drive in it? Or are all MCE boxes going to have to be 64-bit Vista Server class boxes?

    This choice to bow to the media company pressure hands the home living room media center box to Sony on a silver platter with cherries on top and the head of Bill Gates wrapped up in a tasteful box on the side.
  • by Sloppy ( 14984 ) on Thursday August 24, 2006 @12:03PM (#15970386) Homepage Journal
    The media companies asked us to do this...

    And your customers (neither the users nor the EOMs) did not. Forces other than market forces are at work here.

    And it occurs to be that Microsoft shareholders probably didn't ask for this either. Now would be a good time for Microsoft shareholders to ask Microsoft management for an explanation as to how telling customers "fuck you, we don't care what you want" is a reasonable strategy for maximizing the value of Microsoft's stock.

  • Only for WMP? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by RyoShin ( 610051 ) <tukaro@gmaiDEBIANl.com minus distro> on Thursday August 24, 2006 @12:08PM (#15970420) Homepage Journal
    This is a decision that the Media Player folks made because there are just too many ways right now for unsigned kernel mode code [to compromise content protection].
    So, if it's a Media Player decision, does that mean that this only matters if you use WMP? If that's the case, I'll continue using my vastly superior ZoomPlayer, thankyouverymuch. (Though I don't plan on ever buying HD-DVD or Blu Ray movies.)

    The media companies asked us to do this and said they don't want any of their high definition content to play in x32 at all, because of all of the unsigned malware that runs in kernel mode can get around content protection, so we had to do this.
    I'm sure the CEOs thought for a good three seconds on whether or not to try and fight this. One CEO probably opened his mouth to yawn, and before it was even half open the media industry had whipped out a big fat check.

    Vista keeps looking more and more worthless. I think once (if ever) XP becomes useless to me, I'll just upgrade to Linux.
  • Sad. (Score:4, Funny)

    by keyne9 ( 567528 ) on Thursday August 24, 2006 @12:14PM (#15970488)
    "Won't someone think of the multi-millionaires?"
  • by rice_burners_suck ( 243660 ) on Thursday August 24, 2006 @12:17PM (#15970531)
    MS and their nonsense. The following introduction may appear to stray from the topic, but I assure you that I am building up to something meaningful and on-topic.

    It's like the secret agreements they have with computer manufacturers like Dell, HP, Lenovo, etc. If you look at any IT or technology magazine, you'll notice that every advertisement for every computer states something to the effect that "HP/Dell/Lenovo/[Insert company name here] Recommends Microsoft Windows XP Professional." I would be willing to bet that these companies don't actually recommend anything, but are required by their secret agreements with MS to make this statement, in order to qualify for their "discount" -- or else they'd be paying $299.99 for every copy of Windows they install on every computer, which would price them right out of the market.

    Now I don't know if this is still the case, but it was a few years ago: MS also had, in those secret agreements, a clause that these computer manufacturers could not also install MS's competitor's OSes on the machines (Linux, for example). This was "proven" by then Be, Inc.'s then CEO "JLG", who offered BeOS for free to any computer manufacturer, to include free on any computer they build. Nobody took his offer. Now, you say that Be was not a competitor to MS, with only .0000000001% of the market at its peak? Then why did MS cite Be as a competitor in court, to prove that MS doesn't have a monopoly?

    It is this monopoly power that allows MS to do what it does best: Crush its competitors and blackmail its customers (in this case, the computer manufacturers) with agreements that could not possibly exist if MS did not have a monopoly.

    And here is where the above comes into the range of the topic: Since MS has a monopoly, they can now also blackmail those who write drivers. "Oh, you write drivers for Linux/Mac OS X, too? Well, then, we won't sign your Windows drivers." Which means that 90% of the market won't buy this piece of hardware, or they will return it to the store when they realize that it doesn't play full HD, even on 64 bit Vista, since the driver is not signed. Which means that you can expect the major graphics card vendors to stop producing drivers for other systems.

    Blackmail. Where do you want to pay us against your will for software you don't want today?

  • by I'm Don Giovanni ( 598558 ) on Thursday August 24, 2006 @12:20PM (#15970577)
    The most common complaint voiced around here against Vista is that Vista filled with DRM, that is, Vista supports "more DRM" than XP. That "more DRM" is/was the ability to play protected BR and HD-DVD discs. Vista32 now won't have that ability. So your "Vista is evil because it shoves DRM down our throats!!" complaints are now moot. :p

"Mr. Spock succumbs to a powerful mating urge and nearly kills Captain Kirk." -- TV Guide, describing the Star Trek episode _Amok_Time_

Working...