Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Specmon

Vista be ******

Recommended Posts

LilBambi
A fascinating discussion with Peter Gutmann, Steve Gibson, and Leo LaPorte on DRM and Vista here. Also a fascinating prior conversation between Steve and Leo last week here.
Steve and Leo continued this discussion in the most recent #75 episode here.I listened to all three in one sitting to get the continuity between them and it's quite telling. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LilBambi

Interesting article at The Register: Microsoft: yes, we have no incompatibilitiesFrom the article:

The first instance refers to incompatibilities between Microsoft's Windows 386, 3.x and Windows 95 products and DR-DOS. This was an operating system developed by Digital Research, and later acquired by Novell, which was 100 per cent compatible with Microsoft's MS-DOS. Thanks to citizens in Iowa, who are pursuing a consumer class action lawsuit against Microsoft, these ancient malpractices are being aired once again, and Microsoft executives have been on the stand in Des Moines defending the company's conduct.Microsoft wanted users to believe that interoperability between DR-DOS and Windows was problematic.The second instance refers to incompatibilities between Windows Vista and next-generation High Definition DVDs, BluRay and HD-DVD. The incompatibilities are deliberate, and part of the specification Microsoft gave hardware manufacturers so they could design Vista-compatible hardware. Just before Christmas, Peter Gutmann published a technical analysis of the Vista incompatibilities, listed some of the potential security and stability threats they posed, and some of the situations were they might cause real harm.In this instance, while Microsoft has gone to great lengths to booby trap its software to disable functionality when certain media discs are being played and to degrade performance when it finds what it thinks is counterfeit media, or "unauthorized" copying - it wants us to believe this will not have serious consequences for users.(Until Vista is tested in real world conditions, we won't know for sure if Gutmann's claims are alarmist and Microsoft is telling the truth, or not - or somewhere in between.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RandomBox

Thank you LilBambi, again!Issue #75 makes for a very educational read.I actually caught myself taking some notes while reading thru the transcript.I might as well post what I thought was note-worthy, as an extract

from #3 http://www.grc.com/sn/SN-075.htmThere’s an acronym soup, of course, once again. *They have something called PVP-OPM. PVP stands for the Protected Video Path. OPM stands for Output Protection Management. HDCP...†which we know is *HiDef Content Protection. Or no – yeah. These acronyms are amazing.*...for DVI and HDMI outputs and Macrovision and CGMS-A protection on analog TV outputs*The ability to pass video through a constrictor, that is, a downscaler followed by an upscaler, so that the information content of premium video can be reduced when an unprotected output such as analog VGA is present.â€*“Tilt bits are provided in the DDI...†– that’s the Device Driver Interface – “...as the driver’s mechanism for reporting that a hacker is suspected.*The tilt bits are also used by the driver in the PVP-UAB.†That’s another one of these acronyms. UAB is the User Accessible Bus.-------------------------------------------...Leo: Oh, the card would still work on the computer, I just couldn’t play a DVD back.Steve: Correct.Leo: Oh, okay. I was a little scared. I thought the card driver would stop working in its entirety....Leo: Are we sure that’s true?Steve: Yes, we’re absolutely sure. And in fact...Leo: I’m a little less perturbed, then. Because I’m never going to put an HD-DVD in my computer. I’m going to watch it on my TV.Steve: And it’s why I wanted to make this point, why it was so important to make this point, is that even today, as far as we know, current versions of HD-DVDs are allowing full resolution output from component video.-------------------------------------------...Steve: ...The two types of video interfaces are DVI and HDMI. Both of those are able to carry HDCP, the HiDef Content Protection, which basically allows the authentication of your display device itself back to the computer. So what I would urge people to do in the future is, if you are buying screens and displays that you want to be future proof, make sure they do provide HDCP, either with a DVI connector, a Digital Video Interface connector, or the HDMI.Leo: But even farther than that, because we’ve seen some displays that have HDMI, but don’t have HDCP.Steve: That’s true. And in fact...Leo: And those you will not be able to play back HiDef content. In fact, that was part of the problem is that all of these “HDCP-capable†cards sold up to now are not.Steve: Right. Well, because – and there are about nine things I wanted to say right there. Again, I don’t think it’s that it won’t play it. But it won’t play it crisp. It will deliberately run it through...Leo: In some cases it will not play it, but it’s supposed to downscale it.Steve: It’ll run through the constrictor. And again, the content provider in the policy that comes with the individual content is able on a...Leo: So some disks are not enabled.Steve: Correct....Leo: Not all disks require this.Steve: Well, Leo, many people who have DVI – I’m completely DVI based. And not a single one of my computer monitors, which is DVI, has HDCP because they were never intended to be secure content delivery screens. They’re computer screens.Leo: So can you play HiDef DVDs on those screens?Steve: No.Leo: So you’re saying that, even though the disk doesn’t require it, the hardware is.Steve: Correct.
Both Leo and Steve are brilliant individuals and I am glad they have chosen computers as a profession to educate me all these years!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
epp_b

Now that is what I call circular reasoning! Ouch! DRM has made an absolute mess of things :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cluttermagnet

I've listened to all of Steve and Leo's latest broadcasts. Well, read mostly. I've absorbed about as much as I can. Acronym soup indeed. This all makes my head hurt. I'm sure glad I have zero emotional, financial, and hardware investment in 'hi def'. Ach! Ptui! But their crappy DRM stuff is going to kill my beloved personal computing platform anyway, slowly and by degrees, it seems. It's more of a problem for the next generation, I guess. They actually care about that sort of stuff. Man, I love vinyl! See? Cave men were good for something, after all. Who knew? :) :( I have already 'unsold' one future copy of 'asta la Vista'. My buddy with the fancy new 64 bit platform has looked deeper into this DRM nightmare and reversed himself, saying "no way!". He's now going to try to ride out the storm with XP for the duration. Seems it will be good enough for the less demanding home video stuff he works with personally. He's not so much lapping out of Hollywood's (Hooligan B*st*rds') trough with the DVD's, it seems. So no cold turkey necessary in his case. But I suppose his relationship with the generic personal computing platform per se would be a bit more along the lines of "...you'll have to pry it from my cold, dead hands..." :rolleyes: Ruin that and you're going to have an angry mob with torches and pitchforks a gatherin'...

Edited by Cluttermagnet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RandomBox

One really can't blame them for attempting to protect the vested interests that they have.But the burden should not be on the consumer.My big gripe is that we end up paying the price to protect us from us....and if that is not bad enough, why is it that I always have to be threatened by an FBI warning on the screen, EACH TIME I attempt to watch a movie on my lowly DVD player {UserNoOp be ******}? :pirate:107 years ago, Dorothy broke the news to her dog, Toto, that they were now in a foreign land. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LilBambi

Yes, it's very interesting. I especially thought it was interesting that even if you are just opting for a business computer that would never see HiDef DVDs you still can't get a version of the OS that would be free of all that. Likely because they feel that folks would just buy that version ... and who could blame the consumer for doing that?They make criminals of those who try to make fair use of what they buy .. treating them in the same category of those who put pirated copies of movies on stands to sell for a few dollars a piece in a foreign country...now those are REAL pirates.We just want to make personal fair use of what we buy for backup/archival purposes and to listen/watch them on other devices we own.There is nothing sinister in that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lewmur
This is a long read, very well thought out by someone that had no previous axe to grind. A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection The Vista security spec is described as "the longest suicide note in history"Merry Christmas. See you all in Hades :D ;) Specmon
Finally took the time to read the entire link. Truly amazing. This should be a "must read" for all business and govt IS pros. I thought Vista was supposed to be all about providing secure computing for corporate interest but it seems the only things corporations will get from Vista are mind boggling headaches.It makes it obvious that M$ has totally sacrificed Vista to the great god "media content provider." They've sold out completely to the RIAA and MPAA. I know a lot of Linux users are afraid Vista will become "the law-of-the-land" and finally give M$ the iron tight monopoly they've been striving for for decades. But I think just the opposite will occur. IMO, Vista will prove to be M$'s downfall. After all, other than the MPAA and RIAA, who benefits from switching to Vista?Why should a big corp want to use Vista when it causes their hardware to shutdown and the only advantage is "pretty graphics?" Why should gamers want to use it when it means they can no longer "tinker" with their machines? Why would the "Joe Average" want to use it when it just triples his cost of a computer he only uses for email and Internet anyway? There is also the theory floating around that component manufacturers will have to abandon writing Linux drivers for their equipment because of strictures placed on them in fulling the Vista license demands. I think this premise is also flawed. I think it will inevitably create a two pronged market. Stuff made strictly for Vista and stuff made for the mass market of people so ticked off they will never touch another M$ product in their life!!!!! B) Edited by lewmur

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Corrine
Anyone find it strange that certain of our more strident Microsoft supporters have not chimed in? B) They seem a bit conspicuous by their absence, do they not? ;) But then again, how does one support an "unsupportable" premise? :D
Actually, as a Microsoft supporter with a Windows OS (currently XP but plan on getting Vista), I really hadn't seen a need to reply in a thread that has pretty much been a discussion by non-Microsoft/Windows supporters, particularly as titled and with comments like the quoted sample that I read more as baiting than open to discussion. Since your minds are made up, I see no point in disagreeing. For the sake of presenting a balanced discussion, however, since non-Microsoft/Windows supporters may not be inclined to locate a response by Microsoft to the posted article, I decided that it wouldn't hurt for those condeming Vista before it is even "out the door" to read Windows Vista Content Protection - Twenty Questions (and Answers).Not on DRM, but Jim Allchin wrote an excellent article on Security Features vs. Convenience that may address lewmur's questions. As to the cost of Vista, take a look at Ed Bott's post, Vista OEM prices finally appear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lewmur
As to the cost of Vista, take a look at Ed Bott's post, Vista OEM prices finally appear.
Two points. One, the "cost" of Vista isn't just in the price of the OS itself but in the cost of the hardware necessary to make it do anything. If I were to spend the $100 with my present computer, all I would accomplish would be to slow down my computer and give M$ to ability to shut it down anytime they so desired.Two, that OEM price is for a ONE TIME install. The very first time you change ANYTHING of significance in the hardware, you void the license and have to pay again. And again. And again. No thanks. Edited by lewmur

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Specmon

A story in today's Inquirer notes that Peter Gutmann has found and already responded to the "20 questions and answers". He's not impressed:

It seems Mr Gutmann is at it again, and has updated his masterwork. This time he points out the inherent contradictions in the Microsoft piece, and there seem to be a lot of them. We all know Vista is a DRM laden kick in the civil liberties, but does Microsoft have to be so daft in its defence? Read the updates starting here
Here's part of his response, there is a bunch more:
Do things such as HFS (Hardware Functionality Scan) affect the ability of the open-source community to write a driver? No. HFS uses additional chip characteristics other than those needed to write a driver. HFS requirements should not prevent the disclosure of all the information needed to write drivers. This claim is directly contradicted by a document by the same author which states: Such tests could involve loading a surface with an image, and then getting the chip to apply various visual effects to the image and reporting back the resulting pixels. and then later on: The internal workings of the graphics chip must be kept secret, such that a hacker building an emulator could not find out the required information. So this document, the primary reference for Vista's content protection, states exactly the opposite of what's said in Microsoft's response, namely that standard chip functionality (in this case graphics rendering in a GPU) is exercised for HFS, and that the device details have to be kept secret to prevent someone emulating the functionality.
Then there is this:
Will Windows Vista audio content protection mean that HDMI outputs can't be shown as S/PDIF outputs? It is better if they show as different codec types, as it allows the difference to be reflected in the UI, thus providing the user help with their configuration and creating a better user experience. The user wants to know the difference between HDMI and S/PDIF, as they are different physical connectors. From reading the slashdot comments on this, it's nice to see that I wasn't the only one who immediately thought of Orwell when they read this reply: War is peace! Slavery is freedom! We have always been at war with consume^H^H^H^H^H^Hpirates!This is another one of these twilight-zone comments that seem to crop up again and again when discussing Vista's content protection. The HDMI designers had very good reasons for making HDMI's audio S/PDIF-compatible, as discussed in the writeup. Arguing that creating an artificial difference between the two because it gives users more control is like arguing that manual gearboxes are better because they provide more control — this may (technically) be the case, but unless you're an F1 driver you're probably not going to appreciate this very much. Less is more. War is peace.
Go read the rest, is not nearly as large as the original post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Corrine
Two points. One, the "cost" of Vista isn't just in the price of the OS itself but in the cost of the hardware necessary to make it do anything. If I were to spend the $100 with my present computer, all I would accomplish would be to slow down my computer and give M$ to ability to shut it down anytime they so desired.Two, that OEM price is for a ONE TIME install. The very first time you change ANYTHING of significance in the hardware, you void the license and have to pay again. And again. And again. No thanks.
As to hardware, I guess that depends on your current PC and the version of Vista selected. With life support extended for XP Home& Media Center five years, I would expect within that time most folks hardware will need to be replaced anyway.Where is it written that OEM installs are one-time only? Did you lose the key between installs? The key does not "expire" merely because you, for example, replace a printer. If WGA doesn't recognize it for some reason, its a free call to MS to get it squared away.I'm not interested in debating any of you any further. You are entitled to your opinion as I am to mine. I promise I will not start a thread in the ATL forum entitled "Linux be Dam*ed".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RandomBox

My head is spinning from TMI. :'(Here are a few salient points from the provided links that I like:1) I liked this blog entry

Q: Why doesn't Microsoft "stand up" to the RIAA/MPAA and just say "****, no, we won't go!"...?A: Two reasons occur to me:*) In that event the RIAA/MPAA would just go around Microsoft completely and implement their standards anyway. It is of critical importance to understand the RIAA/MPAA knows full well that its demands for DRM inside 3rd-party distribution networks are a roadblock to wider consumer participation in the products the RIAA/MPAA are selling. These entities simply do not care at all whether any of their content is workable under digital formats of any kind. The RIAA/MPAA has been brought literally kicking and screaming into the digital age and they *obviously* do not like it one little bit, since it erodes the traditional distribution channels the RIAA/MPAA have controlled utterly for decades. It would suit them just fine if nobody wanted any of their products in a digital format. These entities represent companies who would be more than happy--and are eager, even--to go back to the analog-only distribution formats and channels of the past. Ironically, Microsoft's willingness to jump through the DRM hoops these entities mandate actually contravenes the basic thrust of what these entities are after--which is the dissolution of the digital format for the distribution of their products. In a very real sense, Microsoft has called their bluff and placed these entities in a situation they had hoped to avoid--the mainstreaming of their content via digital distribution. But I fear that irony is lost on many of the respondents here.*) The other "option" that I see obliquely referred to here is the idea that Microsoft should be actively working to subvert the goals of the RIAA/MPAA by openly trying to use Windows as a vehicle to render the DRM mandates of the RIAA/MPAA ineffectual and inconsequential. IE, that Microsoft should use Windows to hack the DRM policies of the RIAA/MPAA and render them ineffectual.Well, does the word "lawsuit" spring into anyone's mind here? How about "Congressional investigation"...? I think most of us might agree that it is more than likely that Microsoft has had quite enough of courts and government meddling over the last few years. Such conditions never become palatable.
2) I liked the DRM acronym: Content, Restriction, Annulment, and Protection. :hmm:3) But mostly I really liked the Schneier's Law: "any person can invent a security system so clever that she or he can't think of how to break it." ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Specmon

Dear Corrine,It is not fair of you to characterize all of we Highlanders taking part in this discussion as Linux Fanatics or even "non-windows supporters".While many of us are using Linux and and expecting our usage of Linux to increase over time, most of us are "still" using Windows on a daily basis, if only because we are supporting other Windows users.I expect to use WinXP until the day it dies, preparing for that day by moving myself and my "users" to Linux.I suspect that I'll even have to bite the bullet and deal with Vista on a machine somewhere, again if only to support people depending on me for expertise.But this doesn't mean that we have to smiling accept the travesty that Vista will perpetrate on us regarding how we can use our machines, and, as you say, as our hardware wears out, gladly spend extra money for hardware that is "built crippled"I was able to thrive as a thinking productive member of our society before Microsoft dominated the field of computing, and as "factors" and other companies (think google) change Microsoft's dominance in the future, I expect to remain standing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Temmu

similarly, i use xp and server 2003 because it is at work.i am truly a linux novice, and cannot imaging convincing corporate to switch out hundreds of users across the country to a new, unfamiliar os and its unfamiliar productivity tools (i did not say dissimilar.)and while i suspect the inevitable immersion in vista is to come in the next few years, it makes me far more nervous than the change from win 3.1 to 95.i am not concerned with what will happen in the corporate environment, server 2007 is about out to match the way vista works (i guess.) but rather fear the end result for the consumer who does not have the deep pockets of industry to fund his computing hobby, a hobby crippled at random by some cracker discovering how to write a codec, a driver, to overcome drm (or whatever) and brother microsoft disabling that hardware for everyone. that being the case, who can endure?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lewmur
As to hardware, I guess that depends on your current PC and the version of Vista selected. With life support extended for XP Home& Media Center five years, I would expect within that time most folks hardware will need to be replaced anyway.Where is it written that OEM installs are one-time only? Did you lose the key between installs? The key does not "expire" merely because you, for example, replace a printer. If WGA doesn't recognize it for some reason, its a free call to MS to get it squared away.I'm not interested in debating any of you any further. You are entitled to your opinion as I am to mine. I promise I will not start a thread in the ATL forum entitled "Linux be Dam*ed".
My current PC has an ASUS 939 board with an AMD 64 3700+ CPU. Not highend but not obsolete by any means. But without a highend video card it won't handle the super duper GUI which is the only thing I've heard about Vista that would be worth having.Where it is written that OEM installs are one time only is in the EULA. I read about the OEM limitation in the Extreme Tech article that announced the release. What you say about it being a free call to M$ applies to XP but NOT to Vista. Not only is Vista different in this regard, each version of Vista differs other version. The whole point of an OEM license is that it is licensed solely for the box on which it is first installed. M$ tightened the EULA to match this concept with Vista. And M$ considers it a change of box if the owner makes significant changes. Such as adding an HD or a new video card or new MB.As to your answering this post, that is entirely up to you. But my post is meant to explain to *others* the reason why I feel your answers are wrong. BTW, I've never seen anyone in ATL object to "Windows people" posting their feelings about Linux. Personally, I'm not a "fanboy" of any OS. I'll complain just as loudly in ATL as I will this forum. Ask anybody there. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gary
Actually, as a Microsoft supporter with a Windows OS (currently XP but plan on getting Vista), I really hadn't seen a need to reply in a thread that has pretty much been a discussion by non-Microsoft/Windows supporters, particularly as titled and with comments like the quoted sample that I read more as baiting than open to discussion. Since your minds are made up, I see no point in disagreeing. For the sake of presenting a balanced discussion, however, since non-Microsoft/Windows supporters may not be inclined to locate a response by Microsoft to the posted article, I decided that it wouldn't hurt for those condeming Vista before it is even "out the door" to read Windows Vista Content Protection - Twenty Questions (and Answers).Not on DRM, but Jim Allchin wrote an excellent article on Security Features vs. Convenience that may address lewmur's questions. As to the cost of Vista, take a look at Ed Bott's post, Vista OEM prices finally appear.
Ed Bott can say what he will about OEM pricing of Vista. The facts are that the General Public will have to pay what is shown below for the opportunity to use Vista.VP.pngedit for spelling Edited by Gary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ross549

Gary, I am going to bet that the majority of Vista adoptees will be from new computer sales. I doubt more than 40% of the copies out there will be upgrades from XP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gary
Gary, I am going to bet that the majority of Vista adoptees will be from new computer sales. I doubt more than 40% of the copies out there will be upgrades from XP.
From the start absolutely. MS will force upgrades down the road.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cluttermagnet
Finally took the time to read the entire link. Truly amazing. This should be a "must read" for all business and govt IS pros. I thought Vista was supposed to be all about providing secure computing for corporate interest but it seems the only things corporations will get from Vista are mind boggling headaches.It makes it obvious that M$ has totally sacrificed Vista to the great god "media content provider." They've sold out completely to the RIAA and MPAA.
Right on, lewmur! Great post. :">

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cluttermagnet
It is not fair... to characterize all of we Highlanders taking part in this discussion as Linux Fanatics or even "non-windows supporters".While many of us are using Linux and and expecting our usage of Linux to increase over time, most of us are "still" using Windows on a daily basis, if only because we are supporting other Windows users.I expect to use WinXP until the day it dies, preparing for that day by moving myself and my "users" to Linux.
Pretty close to what I would have written. I'm not a Linux 'fanatic'. Not yet, at least. But I'm headed in that general direction. I stopped one OS back from most of you, 98SE rather than XP. But I'm conversant with XP and help friends who have that OS. I worked on a new install of XP just yesterday, in fact. I've set up a new 'full install' for a friend. Very neatly done and all drive imaged, all along the way. Very easy to recover from any bad software installs, as we did that night, after we discovered a CD that installs drivers for a small interface device also installs an unbelievable load of well known crapware to the hard drive. You know, the types that incessantly spy on you and try to sell to you, and some of which, if allowed to connect to the net, also immediately proceed to download dialers, trojans, keyloggers, root kits, etc. A quick restore to a recent image fixed everything. But I diverge...Linux doesn't attract this sort of garbage, BTW, but then only about a half a percent of the world's desktop market belongs to Linux right now. Its a Windows world...I don't even know how to get around in Linux yet. I'm at the bad end of the learning curve and I feel pretty useless when looking at a freshly- loaded Linux desktop. So you can definitely characterize me as a 'regular Windows user'. It's pretty much all I know so far. That will change. So I'm totally immersed in the Windows environment yet I am quite vocally critical of the OS, which has gotten both better and worse as it has gone along. For me, the bad began to outweight the good when XP was released. I passed on XP. As critical as I have been of some aspects of XP over the years, I figure I'm at least ten times, maybe a hundred times more critical of Vista (or "hasta la Vista", as I prefer to call it) right out of the box. I mean, it strikes me there's something somewhat evil going on with that. What a waste! What a tragic waste! And how contemptuous of the consumer, both private individuals and business. Vista could have been so very much more, had everyone taken the high road. Yeah, like that's going to happen! :"> I am a Windows supporter. And I'm very sad at what they have done to Windows. My patience, long wearing thin, has now run out.Let's not start a war over it, however. We had one in here a while back. Election 2004, remember? I sure do. People got ugly. I darned near left here for good over that. And believe me, folks, I have since then had to use every bit of my self control to avoid lobbing commentary grenades, as the train wreck unfolds and the world situation worsens, month to month. Dang, it has been just sooooo tempting to throw in a few "told ya so". There were sure a few such posts of that tone by the 'winners' right after that election, of the "nyah, nyah" sort. Ugh! I could have chewed rusty nails. The pendulum has again swung...Let's keep it civil. It's a good community in here.
I expect to use WinXP until the day it dies
I'm going to run 98SE til the wheels fall off. While I transition to Linux. I hope 'they' don't succeed in killing that OS family off, especially as a result of this Vista/DRM mess and its wider hardware implications. I rather like the idea of 'freedom'. I'm funny that way...Let me just add my own 'Dear Corrine':It's been fun, your contribution has been great- and much appreciated. If we should agree to disagree on certain issues, so be it, but let's continue to like each other and hang in there. It's been a great ride. Edited by Cluttermagnet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cluttermagnet
A story in today's Inquirer notes that Peter Gutmann has found and already responded to the "20 questions and answers". He's not impressed:
Here are several interesting quotes, found way down at the bottom of this short paper, just before the Footnotes:
“As a not-so-long-ago electronics design engineer, I can imagine the rage & pain felt by engineers & their employers [...] This is total insanity from anyone's perspective except the content providers, and they don't care because it's everyone else who's picking up the tab for it!†— Anthony May.“Microsoft wasted no time; it issued a patch three days after learning about the hack. There's no month-long wait for copyright holders who rely on Microsoft's DRM. This clearly demonstrates that economics is a much more powerful motivator than security†— Bruce Schneier on Microsoft's DRM re-enabling patch for FairUse4WM. “I propose that each copy of the OS should ship with an orange jumpsuit and sensory deprivation goggles, since all Vista users have been unilaterally declared 'enemy combatants' by the content apparatchiki †— Daniel Nevin. “Windows Vista? And what a vista! All you see as you look around your garden is a 60foot high brick wall†— Crosbie Fitch.
Emphasis mine. It goes on. I laughed a lot. It's better than crying. :">"Hasta la Vista"... Edited by Cluttermagnet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cluttermagnet

Ooh! Ooh! What they say...Microsoft spins DRM tale in 'blog' I laughed, I cried- well, mostly, I cried...

...one of the most amazing piece(s) of PR weaselwork I have seen for years...
Edited by Cluttermagnet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RandomBox

After a month of collaborative work the folks from the doom9 forum have extracted volume unique keys from HD-DVD disks, which can be used with Backup HD DVD to copy AACS protected content.1. Decryption Keys For HD-DVD Found2. HD-DVD Volume Unique Keys Discovered3. HD players hand over DVD keysA simple Google search for the words "hd dvd keys" will provided you all the links you wish on this subject matter! :devil:

Edited by RandomBox

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zlim

Cluttermagnet - don't feel as if you need to learn the ins and outs of linux. Use your beloved 98SE for everything EXCEPT going on the internet. Keep using 98SE for all the other things that you are used to doing.My husband's 2K computer has no connection to the internet. I've never updated it, added any patches nor did I need to put on a firewall, AV, trojan detector, etc. He gets his work done and his computer doesn't act weird. If he wants to see something on the world wide web, we have other computers for him to use.If you use FF as a browser, it won't be too hard to figure out how to browse in any linux distro that includes FF.Since 2K has now been extended to July 13, 2009, I have two years that I can still use it to browse. Meanwhile on my old 98SE that refuses to install 2K (I may not have enough resources), I'm trying puppy linux so I can browse safely on that.As I said many times, I don't run XP (I had it on a computer briefly, hated it and removed it) and I have less inclination to try Vista. My next computer won't have windows on it.

Edited by zlim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cluttermagnet

Thanks, zlim-Well, whenever I get good enough at Linux, I'll indeed use that for internet. But as a practical matter, I continue to access the net with 98SE, 'fully patched', of course, and I strongly believe it is a reasonably safe platform even today if it is run sensibly. It's no longer for the average user, however, who should be into XP about now, and just taking whatever autopatching MS cares to push at them. Ugh! FWIW there is a small core of expert users who are 're-engineering' patches for 98/SE, derived from later MS OS's, with some good success, I understand. Accepting 98's shortcomings, of course, as it can't compete with XP in various ways- file size and drive size and CPU speed limitations and such. Videophiles shouldn't waste any time with the OS. XP is better. But I'm conservative. I don't visit a lot of questionable sites, run IM clients, and such. Just some emailing and a little light surfing at times. I'm careful.Oh, and regarding 'fully patched', that gets a bit interesting. Notice that most recent patches for other OS's were for IE and Outlook vulnerabilities. A bit of other stuff, buffer overruns and such, but a lot of that. And as I've indicated, there are ways to adapt 98SE installations despite the disappearance of 'formal' MS support- various tricks, workarounds, retooled patches from currently supported OS's, etc. I've been following this issue lately with great interest, and now believe even more strongly than before that 98SE can survive, connected to the net, so far. Bottom line for me- if you stay away from (or stop using) IE and Outlook/OE, you get probably several orders of magnitude better safety just that easy. Upgrading 98 to IE6 no longer makes any sense, as I see it, assuming you've already saved all MS patches for 98SE. In any case, they are also available from safe, non-MS sources right now, and still will be after MS pulls the plug on patch downloading later this year (no new patches coming out, but MS still downloads the old ones to IE6 browsers only). This means don't even bother with many recent patches, which were aimed at IE6. DO install all the other generalized patches, however. This means taking the time to learn what each patch actually fixes, and whether or not it is relevant in your case. Further, there are many good 'tweak' patches out there which are worthwhile. All this becomes quite a deep subject in and of itself. Run Thunderbird, lock down your obsolete copy of IE5 hard, put NoScript on Firefox and use it, turn off java in Firefox, and run a full complement of (98SE- compatible) current security s/w such as a/v, firewall, anti- malware, hosts list, etc.- and relax and enjoy learning Linux, I guess. Heh! Oh, and backup and drive image frequently, of course.Sorry, not trying to hijack the thread, but I suppose this is all germane to 'there are alternatives to (hasta la) Vista'. Not trying to start a Win98 support thread or anything. B) You can find them elsewhere on the net.

Edited by Cluttermagnet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zlim

axel, releases patches for 98 and ME, which I've been downloading and applying to fix vulnerabilities that MS issues patches for, for 2K and XP.http://www.mdgx.com/This is the cumulative patch, including a fix for the daylight savings problem that will hit US people in March when DST starts two weeks earlier than usual.http://rapidshare.com/files/11335243/Win98...s_V4.9.zip.htmlit is 15 megs so not for you on dialup but maybe you have a friend who can download it for you.

Edited by zlim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gary
Source
Microsoft's quest to closely control the way Windows Vista can be used on PCs has taken a turn for the worse as new information indicates that the company is breaking tradition when it comes to Windows Vista upgrades. With Windows Vista, users will not be able to use upgrade keys to initiate completely new installations. It is a change that will affect few users, but enthusiasts will certainly be amongst those pinched.Upgrade versions of Windows Vista Home Basic, Premium, and Starter Edition will not install on any PC unless Windows XP or Windows 2000 is already on the machine in question. In years previous, upgrade versions of Windows could be installed on any PC. If a PC did not have an older version of Windows installed, users could provide an older installation CD of Windows for verification. After dropping a qualifying CD in the CD-ROM drive, the installation routine would verify the disc and you'd be on your way. With this approach, one could use an "upgrade" copy of Windows to lay a new Windows install on a computer.One again, Microsoft appears to have made licensing decisions without considering how people actually use their products. Last fall the company trotted out changes to its retail licensing that would have punished users who frequently upgrade their PC hardware had the company not relented. Now Microsoft seeks to complicate our ability to start a crisp, new install with an upgrade version. Why?
No Clean Installs using an upgrade DVD. One must have an operating Windows OS or fork over $399.00 for the Ultimate Version of Vista. M$ puts it to the consumer once again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cluttermagnet
axel, releases patches for 98 and ME, which I've been downloading and applying to fix vulnerabilities that MS issues patches for, for 2K and XP.http://www.mdgx.com/This is the cumulative patch, including a fix for the daylight savings problem that will hit US people in March when DST starts two weeks earlier than usual.http://rapidshare.com/files/11335243/Win98...s_V4.9.zip.htmlit is 15 megs so not for you on dialup but maybe you have a friend who can download it for you.
Thanks zlim. I'm aware of mdgx, it's a great resource for Win98. BTW 15 megs is within my capabilities on dialup, at around 28.8 to 34K. Takes well over an hour, of course. I use a friend's broadband to fetch big files such as Linux distros.To do the DST fix, one needs only to get hold of a copy of the MS native software TZEdit.exe and follow some simple directions readily available on the net. I will provide a link later. Or do a Google search. There were a couple of great threads on this in Lockergnome. This small utility, only about 42K in size, is also to be found in the Res (resources) folder on my 98SE install disks. It is widely available from multiple sources including MS itself (hard to find, apparently). There are also some small installer packages available on the net which do only this DST patch. This would be good for the less 'geeky' among us, who don't like to install stuff manually. One does not need to take a 'kitchen sink' approach and pile on 'the works' to fix one small problem, however. Those big packages are good for Joe Average. In fairness, some of the folks who are very experienced with the OS do try and then later praise these packages, or at least report "...worked fine..." etc. But others are too nervous and have understandable difficulty in trusting. The folks who are doing all the great work to support the venerable old 98 OS do us a great service and deserve much praise. Sadly, because there are always just a few 'rotten' people pushing out evil hacked software, every time you install something you are taking a risk. There are better ways IMO to do the daylight savings time update to Win98. I'm not comfortable with the second resource you list because it wants to disgorge an entire bundle of patches as one upgrade. 15m is a pretty big file. It must contain a lot more than just the DST fix, or else that is some pretty inefficient code! I don't know these folks, nor the source of their patch. There is a lot of debate in the small Win98 community as to whether this sort of approach is a wise method or not. Also, that site seems to require that downloads be done with proprietary software (a downloader) and is a money maker, thus it is sharply limiting the number and size of free downloads. Please understand, I know there are indeed multiple, reputable sources for these various flavors of huge OS patch bundles. This may indeed be such a source. A lot of folks prefer to choose for themselves from among the vast collection of offerings. Some do report successfully applying these huge bundle patches. Occasionally we hear about the patches breaking some functionality on particular machines. Apparently this does not happen very often, but it does happen. I prefer a minimalist approach to patching. I like to learn exactly what patches/tweaks are available, a little about how they interact with the OS and each other and my hardware, what is affected, and whether I really need each one of them. Some I try, others I skip. I spend a lot of hours researching for every few minutes I'm actually downloading or installing patches.Edit: Win98 Daylight Savings Time Manual Update Required-- Lockergnome threadalso mgdx Microsoft + Unofficial: Time Zone UpdatesThere is also an official MS ftp source url listed in the Lockergnome thread if you are more comfortable getting it from the source directly. Edited by Cluttermagnet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...