Re: Windows Vista content protection: a big long suicide note (forwarded)

On Dec 26, 1:48 pm, "Joel Kolstad" <JKolstad71HatesS...@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
"JeffM" <jef...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in messagenews:1167154009.714993.315660@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Let's see if folks react to the
massively DRM-encumbered HD-DVD / Blu-Ray paradigm
the way they did to (Circuit City's) DivX (completely ignored it)
and in so doing find that they don't need M$ Vista.The big difference is that DIVX was clearly marketed as a "use it for 48
hours... pay more if you then want to keep if from self-destructing" whereas
with Vista there's no self-destruction: There's just degradation of the output
down to a "standard definition" display/audio output.

It's still pretty rotten, though. Although you'd expect there will be various
hacks/patches to work around the DRM nonsense, they aren't going to be
commonly applied given that here in the U.S. the technology required to do so
would undoubtedly be considered illegal per the DMCA.


I think you're confusing the old Divx discs with the newer Divx video
codec standard. I don't think they are in any way related to each
other.

Yousuf Khan

.