So basically MS's Linux subsystem can't even do the job Cygwin does quite nicely?
Cygwin can't run native Ubuntu elf executables which is wehat the Linux subsystem does.
I probably missed the gazillion times this point was raised, but why is this a thing? I get it that you can just run "the same file" but why bother. The linux subsystem is not even close to be a real production environment so you can't validate anything on it anyway. There are so many ways to get a good linux environment that are both way closer to the real thing and can run native binaries (obviously).
As a developer, I honestly don't see the use case here when I can either run a VM, dualboot, or for most simple project simply build them as windows executable anyway. In which case do you need to run a linux ELF in a butchered down environment that (hopefully) isn't what you'll run the production code in the end?
and can be implemented on any platform
And how would one does this? By design, DRM schemes requires a level of obscurity. It doesn't matter the mean you're using, if you have encrypted content that you want in clear, at one point you'll have to have both the content and the key available client side. If anyone can implement such DRM, then nothing prevents the copy of the deciphered content as it is played.
That's why we got HDCP as an attempt to plug the "if you can play it, you can save it" hole. And we know how it went.
I'd be really impressed if someone came up with a DRM solution that satisfy all these:
The closest you'll get is with keys stored in hardware, but we've seen how that one played out already.
So, stop saying that "it is up to other browsers to add support". The instant anyone can play encrypted content, it's gone. And people pushing DRM really don't want that.
for an even higher level of security
Security for who? Not for the people actually making content, not for the customers, not for netflix... Ah, I have it on the tip of my tongue... who's increasing security by screwing over everyone involved again?
Joking aside, most people will not care about "why" only Edge will support 1080p, because most people are not into technical stuff. However, a fair amount of people turns to their somewhat geeky relative/friend when some question arise; and those will know that the only reason for Edge to support this when other won't is content provider willingly screwing other by using DRM. I'm curious to see how this will play out in the long term.
You don't want to upgrade? Fucking don't, that;s your choice.
That one's the killer here. We're not the one trying our hardest to update these old Win7/Win8 installs here. Too bad the post is hard to read, I'm sure it's all at least that funny.
I have a very small mind and must live with it. -- E. Dijkstra