Schadensfreude ist die schoenste Freude



  • Gut das es Windows gibt, ich wuerde sonst den Spektakel von diesem Zirkusverein missen.

    http://apcmag.com/has_vista_lost_all_credibility.htm

    Microsoft's own most senior executives were completely bamboozled by the "Vista capable" labelling scheme. "I personally got burned by the Intel 915 chipset on a laptop that I PERSONALLY (e.g. with my own $$$) [bought]", said Mike Nash, Corporate Vice President, Windows Product Management, who bought a "Vista capable" laptop, only to find it couldn't run the Aero interface. "I now have a $2100 email machine," he concluded.

    http://www.tomsguide.com/us/intel-915gm,review-453-7.html
    Also ca. 3000 Punkte in PCMark04, ist doch nicht schlecht? Aber natuerlich nicht fuer ein paar Fenster, die Transparenzen haben (Vista Aero).

    Auf meinem ca. 2 Jahren alten PC konnte ich damals Compiz ohne Probleme laufen lassen, mit Transparenzen, Expose, 3D-Cube, uvm. (also nicht vor 2 Jahren, sondern als Compiz grade wieder fussioniert hat in Compiz-Fussion).

    http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/chipsets/i915g/gr9.gif
    Also mit dem Intel915 kann man UT2004 in 800x640 mit 40fps laufen lassen. Gut Aero laeuft in 1280x768 und mehr, aber Aero hat ja auch keine Bumbmapping, Licht und Schatten, usw.

    Es war ja damals vor Jahren noch normal das Windows kein Dualboot kannte, das man Windows auf keiner erweiterten Partition installiern kann, das Windows automatisch ohne Nachfrage den MBR ueberschreibt.

    Aber denke das Vista sich weiterentwickelt hat? Live-CD von Vista? USB-Boot-Stick von Vista? ext2/3/reiserfs support von Vista? Ganz und gar Dual-Boot in Vista? 21 Jahrhundert in Vista?

    If you’re dualbooting Windows Vista Enterprise or Ultimate alongside a Linux distro, and have installed the Linux bootloader into the MBR, then you’re guaranteed to run into problems when installing Vista Service Pack 1, Microsoft has admitted.

    Microsoft Technology Advisor Michael Kleef explained to APC that “…BitLocker isn’t just about encryption and system validation, but rather data integrity. When you enter your PIN, BitLocker checks it every step of the way from the TPM chip through the bootloader, and if it finds something that doesn’t match what it’s expecting, access is denied. Installing LILO or GRUB effectively breaks the chain of trust as these bootloaders take over the MBR, so on an encrypted boot partition, this means that the system won’t boot.

    The failure of KB935509 does not depend on whether BitLocker is active, but rather the host operating system’s capacity for using it. Therefore, although the bootloader is unified across all versions of Vista, only Vista Enterprise and Ultimate are affected – other versions do not feature BitLocker and so do not require KB935509 as an SP1 prerequisite. APC tested this with different versions of Vista and have verified that they are unaffected.

    Also egal ob du BitLocker hast, brauchst oder benutzt, spielt keine Rolle.
    Ich weis, ich weis, es gibt nur Windows als System und jeder der nicht auf Vista updatet, der ist Technologiefeindlich.

    Aber Vista fuehrt doch jeden in ein neues HD-Zeitalter? Ja, jeden, ob er will oder nicht.
    http://www.theinquirer.net/en/inquirer/news/2006/12/24/vista-security-spec-longest-suicide-note-in-history

    "Windows Vista includes an extensive reworking of core OS elements in order to provide content protection for so-called "premium content", typically HD data from Blu-Ray and HD-DVD sources. Providing this protection incurs considerable costs in terms of system performance, system stability, technical support overhead, and hardware and software cost," says Gutmann on his homepage.

    Klingt doch nicht so uebel. Also einfach kein Vista benutzen? Tja an HD und DRM kommt keiner vorbei.

    "These issues affect not only users of Vista but the entire PC industry, since the effects of the protection measures extend to cover all hardware and software that will ever come into contact with Vista, even if it's not used directly with Vista (for example hardware in a Macintosh computer or on a Linux server). This document analyses the cost involved in Vista's content protection, and the collateral damage that this incurs throughout the computer industry."

    Hier ist ein schoenes Q/A von MS:
    http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/archive/2007/01/20/windows-vista-content-protection-twenty-questions-and-answers.aspx
    Vor allem die Kommentare sind sehr aufschlussreich:

    Right now, I can voice my feelings about DRM by simply avoiding all DRM laiden content. Personally, I have done just this. I also avoid media players that enforce the crippling of my Fair Use rights. In Windows Vista, it is no longer possible to avoid these players as the functionality is built into the operating system. And even if I never purchased any DRM content, by simply paying for Microsoft Vista I end up supporting the very companies and technologies I am trying to avoid. No thanks. And the same concept applies to the costs of hardware.

    clshrock schrieb:

    MrTuffy,

    I have indeed read ALL of the original post. It is not that Microsoft made it possible to allow a customer to consume HD/Blu-Ray content, just that MICROSOFT IS FORCING IT ON EVERYONE WITHOUT LETTING THE CUSTOMER DECIDE IF THEY *WANT* HD/Blue-Ray content to display on their PC.

    You are extremely naive if you assume that the only costs involved with DRM are tied to the media that employ DRM. The largest and most expensive part of DRM is what is required to enforce the DRM on the player side.

    If a consumer wants to avoid DRM content, it is not right to still make them pay the hardware and software costs involved in enforcing DRM. When will companies stop assuming their customers are criminals?

    Don't assume that everyone wants HD/Blu-Ray support. It should be optional--and don't give me that whole Business/Premier/Ultimate non-sense about the activation of these features. Personally, I wonder what the hardware requirements of Vista would be for a version that does not contain all the draconian "features" mandated by the content barrons--would it be that the hardware requirements would decrease?

    Seriously, why do I need or want a process running on my computer that polls every hardware device every 30 seconds just to see if Windows should re-initialize my equipment? And don't give me that nonsense about a dual core processor and that the process will be neglible; ANY time spent performing any such activity is UNWANTED and UNDESIRABLE.

    -Court

    Was solls, mir kann Windows, DRM und HD gestohlen bleiben. Ich lehn mich zurueck, verfolge die Blogs und die Nachrichten und lache ueber die Leute die das ganze mitmachen. Sollte in ein paar Jahren Blu-Rays 5Euro kosten, ohne DRM ausgeliefert werden und ich jeden Player damit benutzen kann, dann denke ich darueber nach mir sowas zu kaufen.

    Eigentlich schade. Wuerde die ganze Conten-Mafia einfach "Protection" jeglicher Art fallenlassen, wuerde man stattdessen fuer eine Flatrate oder Zahlung sich Filme runterladen koennen, dann waere die Einfuehrung von HD-Content innerhalb von einem jahr vonstatten gegangen und jeder haette sich einen HD-TV gekauft. Es waehre halt eine klassische Win/Win-Situation gewesen.



  • Hallo

    Du nervst. Wenn du so zufrieden bist, dann lass doch die Menschheit in Ruhe.

    chrische



  • DEvent schrieb:

    Was solls, mir kann Windows, DRM und HD gestohlen bleiben.

    Aha.



  • dummes, inhaltsleeres gebashe. es interessiert echt keine sau, welches os dir gefällt oder auch nicht.
    geh mal kacken, dann gehts dir vielleicht wieder besser.

    chrische5 schrieb:

    Du nervst. Wenn du so zufrieden bist, dann lass doch die Menschheit in Ruhe.

    ACK. absolut richtig.



  • Ich hoffe DEvent wird endlich gebannt. Der trollt ja eigentlich nur rum.



  • get a rl



  • DEvent: Nerv nicht. 👎


Log in to reply