Vista Madness (PMP, DRM, WHQL & More) - Page 3

Last message on previous page:
dsharp9000,

I think you are confusing a few things. When devices support HDCP and comply with the PMP are used on an OS that does not require these specs and does not support protected playback, that does not mean that these devices will not work on such OS (as suggested by some people here), nor will it complicate driver design for such OS, because these requirements can simply be ignored on that OS.
As for added cost, well, several devices already comply, and they are no more expensive than their comparable previous versions. New standards are introduced in software and hardware constantly, DirectX goes througyh constant revision, so does OpenGL. Programs and hardware that ran fine on MacOS 9, no longer works on OSX, not without some cost involved. The discrete PC graphics market (intergrated graphics solutions are not affected by the PMP requirement) is a market with HUGE profit margins, especially in the Highend segment. Chips are being sold at several times the amount they cost to make and develop. ATI stated that they are going to pass on their cost to consumers, whereas they are not in a position to claim that is necessery. ATI has the choice of offering solutions without support for protected content playback. ATI chooses not to do that. ATI could reduce their profit margin on each chip sold in order to accomodate costs involved with ensuring compatibility with the emerging HD market. ATI chooses not to do that and instead pass that cost on to its clients. ATI chooses to blame MS/Vista for the rising price of their products, forgetting that the windows platform is ATI's main reason of existance.
Innovation in PC component design, Videocards in specific has never been higher that it is currently. nVidia and ATI are on product cycle times almost half the time as any other component. You cannot honnestly be serious that a company that can come up with a completely new chip architecture every 9 months to satisfy a market willing to pay huge amounts of money for their gaming fix, hasn't got the resources and knowhow to implement a 10$ security feature in its 600$ retail design? And that a specification that is all laid out clear, and only needs to be implemented (not reinvented) hurts innovation...?

The PC in its current state is all based on content. The current PC has evolved from a typewriter replacement to a machine that can handle complex 3D tasks, HD video playback, enormous storage needs, world wide connectivity etc. It has done so because of consumer demand. Content isn't only protected HD content, but is everything you read, watch play, use and listen to. Without content, there would be no PC. Content has dictated the development of PC/PC components for many years, for Windows, Apple and Linux alike. Content dictates the specs for your Video out, the requirements of your 3D card, the size of your harddrive, the size of your screen, the cabbles to your amplifier, the functionality of your playback software and ultimately the functionality of your OS. It has done so for many, many years. For many, many years people have used and abused their PCs to enjoy but also copy, share and distribute content. Many people have never bothered to find out who made it possible for them to enjoy that content, and have never had second thoughts about sharing, copying and distributing that content, just because technology made it possible for them to do so, and to do so in relative anonimity. These people are now often mistaken that possibillity they always had for a right they always had. They reason thas as soon as they buy a DVD, they own the movie on that DVD and they should be allowed to do with that whatever they want. But surely if you buy a concert ticket you don't drive home with the band in your trunk, do you? Or if you buy a ticket to the zoo, you don't drive home with an elephant strapped to your roof, do you? You bought the ticket, but you don't expect to have the right to make a photocopy of the ticket 'for safekeeping' and still be allowed into the concert with that photocopy, do you?

What I am trying to say is that some people want it all. They want HD, but they don't want to pay for it. They don't want to accept the consequenses of a decade and a half of free-spirited copying and downloading. They are now offered a simple choice, if you still want to enjoy content, you will have accept the rules. The choice is simple, yet the only thing they can come up with is; I want the content, but I don't want to accept the rules. If DRM is making PC more expensive, then it can also be said that the evolution of the PC has made Content creation more expensive.

On your last comment about two versions of Vista. Can you explain to me exactly what the difference is with the current situation? If your hardware doesn't support protected HD media playback, then there is nothing for the DRM to protect in the first place so it will be a complete non-issue. Why would that require a different version of Vista? I can tell you from my own experience (Vista 32bit Ultimate) that DRM on my PC is a complete non-issue. Since I don't play DRM protected files, I have never seen any proof that it was affecting my PC in any negative way, be it perfomance related or functionality related.

Thanks, for the reply. It is good to hear from someone that wants to discuss this subject from a more logical standpoint.

I am not going to repeat what I already said relating to increase hardware costs but will repeat that ATI has said that it does increase costs. As you said, "ATI stated that they are going to pass on their cost to consumers, whereas they are not in a position to claim that is necessery". I am unsure what you mean by "they are not in a position to claim that is necessary" as you seem to saying that any company cant recoup costs. You also state "ATI has the choice of offering solutions without support for protected content playback. ATI chooses not to do that" ---- thus leaving future support for any non protected version os (ie:linux) suspect or at the very least more expensive.

You also state 'ATI could reduce their profit margin on each chip sold in order to accomodate costs involved with ensuring compatibility with the emerging HD market. ATI chooses not to do that and instead pass that cost on to its clients". This also means more cost to the pc. You also state "ATI chooses to blame MS/Vista for the rising price of their products, forgetting that the windows platform is ATI's main reason of existance". I agree that ms/vista is reason for rising price of their products. Additionally, I also agree that windows platform is main reason for ATI existance; however, the new requirements for drm at both the software and hardware level introduces a layer of complexity that means longer and more costly development time for pc hardware and software. The new complexity that drm and vista at both the hardware and software level negates the policy of the past leaving the potential of the pc market suspect --- if I were ATI --- I would be concerned about future.

You also state "the PC in its current state is all based on content. The current PC has evolved from a typewriter replacement to a machine that can handle complex 3D tasks, HD video playback, enormous storage needs, world wide connectivity etc. It has done so because of consumer demand". I agree with you and want to continue to see the pc to evolve rather than become stuck as a overpriced dvd player. When the pc first came out --- no one saw what it be able to do at present. The same holds true now --- no one knows where the pc might evolve to in future --- but the spec is now controlled by the content providers --- this may hinder its evolution in ways we cannot fully comprehend as one must get the approval of content owners for any change in the spec. This type of limitation did not exist in the past leaving future innovation in question.

You state "Can you explain to me exactly what the difference is with the current situation? If your hardware doesn't support protected HD media playback, then there is nothing for the DRM to protect in the first place so it will be a complete non-issue. Why would that require a different version of Vista?" . A none drm version of vista would remove all the drm stuff from the vista kernal --- drm adds unnecessary complexity to both the hardware and software and wastes computer resources and to me represents an engineering defect. A non drm version would also allow the adding of open source (none drm) hardware that is outside of requirements of content owners.

There are also other concerns that I have with the content providors controling the pc market as it is negatively (in some cases eliminating) effecting segments of pc software in addition to hardware even though it does not relate to drm (if you ask I can get into --- but trying to keep my response to you from being to long). For example, alternative virtualization technologies such as vmware face elimination from the market place because of the "potential" threat virtualization poses to drm protection. This is problem with content providors having to much control in the pc industry --- technologies are either eliminated or become so laced with limitations so as to hinder its usefulness because of "mere threat" to protected content even when protected content is not relavent to drm.

You also state "What I am trying to say is that some people want it all. They want HD, but they don't want to pay for it". Personnally, I dont know anyone that has not been paying for dvd's. All the people I know have loads of dvd's ---- my own dvd collection takes up a whole closet. The content providers could of released hd dvd's long ago if they were not so paranoid about all the drm protection. In my opinion, the protected content owners have already missed out on numerous marketing opportunities and potential increased revenues because of shear paranoia.

Please note I do not disagree with you at all relating to content owners having right to protect content; only believe there is an underlying issue here that is of far greater concern whether you believe in drm or not and wonder if there is any alternative which might be option--- maybe there is not --- but thought it be worth asking.