| |||||||||||||
A cost analysis of Vista content protectionA cost analysis of Vista content protectionPosted Dec 23, 2006 18:11 UTC (Sat) by azhrei_fje (guest, #26148)Parent article: A cost analysis of Vista content protection
I read the article. It starts by saying that it won't discuss "political issues" (ie. DRM) but strictly hardware-related issues. Unfortunately, the author has an axe to grind, as becomes obvious early in the paper. While there are definitely some very insightful tidbits hidden in the article, the amount of rhetoric oftentimes overwhelms the senses. I give it one "thumbs up" because there is useful information enclosed, but one "thumbs down" due to the biased approach. Of course, you'll need to read it in order to draw your own conclusions.
(Log in to post comments)
A cost analysis of Vista content protection Posted Dec 24, 2006 6:47 UTC (Sun) by jamienk (guest, #1144) [Link] I think that the issue dissected is so messed up that any sane analyst would reach similarly exasperated conclusions. Rather than being biased, I think the author does a good job pointing out the utter absurdity of the issue.
Well, you try it Posted Dec 24, 2006 11:03 UTC (Sun) by dion (subscriber, #2764) [Link] I think the problem is that writing neutrally about DRM is about as easy and makes as much sense as writing neutrally about drunk driving.
Sure, if you are a completely dispasinate automaton or alien then you might be able to write a very objective article about the economical impact of drunk driving, but just about anyone else is going to be biased because everybody is going to be hurt.
The DRM in Vista is going to be crap for everyone even people who don't use Vista, there is no reason to act as though it's just going to be a trip to happy fun land.
A cost analysis of Vista content protection Posted Dec 25, 2006 18:17 UTC (Mon) by vmole (guest, #111) [Link] And what ax is he grinding? You accuse him of being biased, but don't specify how. The only "bias" I see in the article is the desire to be able to use video and sound hardware to its full capabilities without having it randomly disabled by Vista, buggy drivers, and sunspots. Or perhaps you see his opinion that maybe, just maybe, our hardware and software ought to serve us, rather than be slaved to the desires of "content providers" (of course, if you make your own content, that's not protected...) Peter Gutmann is a pretty smart guy, with a *lot* of experience with cryptology and various DRM systems (check some of the other papers on his site). I think he might be "biased" in favor of systems that stand a chance of working without being an unreasonable burden on implementors and users.
A cost analysis of Vista content protection Posted Dec 27, 2006 1:36 UTC (Wed) by corey_s (guest, #12510) [Link] It is clear that the original poster's review of the article was biasedtowards his own interpretations of the author's alleged bias.
|
|||||||||||||