Vista is still the most secure OS to date.

[Zeeshan Quireshi]

We all know who all guys illegally installed MAC OS X on some pc

If arya can run windows on his mac , then i can run Mac on my PC , SImple

 

[praka123]

wow!piracy jindabaad?eh
DRM is not supported by Micro$oft:Wrong-they are interested in it!

................................
So, if the hardware people hate this inflicted pain, why do we have it? Two reasons, MS and the hardware vendors themselves abdicating their responsibilities to you the consumer. MS is evil, the rest of them sold you out for their profits. Ironically, they all lost, as did we the users.
The root of this crappy DRM infection is Microsoft. It is the driving force here. This has nothing to do with protecting content, as we keep pointing out, there has never been a single thing that has had a DRM infection applied that didn't end up cracked on the net in hours. DRM is about walled gardens and control.
He who controls the DRM infection controls the market. DRM is about preventing you from doing anything with the devices without paying the gatekeeper a fee. This is what MS wants, nothing less than a slice of everything watched, listened to or discussed from now on. DRM prevents others from playing there, thanks to the DMCA and other anti-consumer laws.
Make no mistake, MS is pushing the DRM malware as hard as it can so it can rake in money hand over fist with no competition. It is really good at lock-in, in fact, the firm based its entire business model on harming the user so they have to comply and spend more.
Want more proof? If you look at the Windows MeII (aka Vista) logo requirements, specifically the graphics portion or the list (Spreadsheet section I, lines 452 and on), you will see that they list something very curious. The first thing they list is that the graphics is DRM infected, this is mandatory. The next requirement is that it meets the functionality standards, like 453. So, MS is saying in no uncertain terms that DRM infections are more important than the device actually working.
What a wonderful world we live in, in the real rational world, roadkill does not have to pay for the privilege or agree to a crushing Windows EULA before they get their brains splattered on the grill of a coked out record company exec's Porsche logo.
So, if Microsoft is the root of all this evil, why blame the hardware folks? Because they are all spineless cowards. Intel sold you out. ATI sold you out. Nvidia sold you out. AMD sold you out. Every other hardware vendor that has a Windows Vista malware sticker on their machines sold you out. This is a badge of compliance, just that you are being forced to, not that the stuff will work with Vista.
These corporate worms all stood in line and assured their own pain, and then heaped that pain and cost on you. None of them had the balls to stand up and do anything about it, they are dumb sheep, and MS knows this. They use logo compliance as a weapon, and everyone falls into line.
What is the result? Media centers suck, all of them. They are unwieldy, unworkable, unfriendly, anti-consumer piles of garbage that sit on store shelves rotting. People don't buy media center PCs because they want a DRM infection that turns their $5K flat panel into a black screen, or if they are really lucky, a downrezzed blur, they buy them in spite of it. This is usually done out of ignorance, something that seems to be prevalent in abundance among the masses. All the companies prey on this.
So, you have an evil mastermind herding spineless sheep. You suffer and pay more. Media center PCs are a dead category because of DRM infections, a promising new tech squashed in the name of greed and control. Lets chrome one and put it beside a mini-disc player with a DAT as a backdrop. Garnish with Audio DVDs, Blu-Rays and HD-DVDs as needed.
What good did DRM do here? All the things that DRM infections have tried to protect are still cracked, AACS patches are cracked before the new discs have started to be pressed, and the game goes on. The content mafiaa and MS have lost every single skirmish in the war.
.........................

read full article:
*www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=38926

 

[Zeeshan Quireshi]

wow!piracy jindabaad?eh

Not exactly , my dad has an iMac(at Office) so in short i'm only using my licensed copy of Mac

Also , it was just for testing and i don't have it installed currenty .

 

[gxsaurav]

abbey.....DRM yahaan nahi hei?to yashrajfilms kya kar raha hei? they got DRMed songs launched in India along with dear old M$.bheje mein aaya ke?
*www.techshout.com/software/20...-technologies/

Now you tell me, how many people know about it? how many people buy it in India? what is the market effect of this method of Yash Raj films? And does it matter in india?

There was some Slashdot buzz earlier this week about Microsoft Windows Media Center users suddenly facing restrictions forbidding playback of recorded analog cable TV content. Was DRM smuggled along with an "update" into unsuspecting users' machines?

Slashdot is what? a Linux fanboy site, so what do u expect from them.

In fact, Windows Media Center has always obeyed CGMS-A, a DRM system that TV stations can use.

So, is it wrong to support DRM in MCE of Vista, if the TV Companies want it? Its not Microsoft who is making this DRM. It is RIAA & MPAA who are government bodies, whose order Microsoft must follow if they want to do business in USA. The broadcast companies in USA uses such DRM & if MS wants the consumer to use there computer as a TV, then they must follow what the MPAA & RIAA wants them to follow.

Tech creators are free to build DVRs and other devices that ignore CGMS-A signals and create restriction-free recordings, but Microsoft opted to kowtow to content providers and infect Media Centers with the DRM anyway.

Microsoft is a company which answers to the government. Tech creators are single users. MPAA & RIAA can sue MS billions for not supporting DRM in Windows, but how many single users they are going to sue for making such hacks.?

o, if the hardware people hate this inflicted pain, why do we have it? Two reasons, MS and the hardware vendors themselves abdicating their responsibilities to you the consumer. MS is evil, the rest of them sold you out for their profits. Ironically, they all lost, as did we the users.
The root of this crappy DRM infection is Microsoft.

This was written by a Linux fanboy, right? . ya, it is very credible & unbiased article (Yaakk...thu)
*www.techshout.com/software/2007/16...-using-microsofts-net-and-other-technologies/

 

[eddie]

It is RIAA & MPAA who are government bodies, whose order Microsoft must follow if they want to do business in USA.

...and according to which orders of RIAA & MPAA was Microsoft being forbidden to sell their OS until they included DRM in it?

MPAA & RIAA can sue MS billions for not supporting DRM in Windows,

...and what law would that come under?

You've been proven to be a disgusting liar time and again but you just won't improve. I wonder how you sleep at night after telling so many lies through out the day...but then I guess you have gone so low that it just doesn't bother you any more. Isn't it?

 

[gxsaurav]

...and according to which orders of RIAA & MPAA was Microsoft being forbidden to sell their OS until they included DRM in it?

According to the Digital Millenium Copyright act, if Microsoft wants to support TV recording in there OS, then they must follow the rules imposed by RIAA & MPAA which forbids any such recording unless the user pays a license fees or unless he plays only on his single PC.

Same goes with Blue Ray & HD DVD. If MS wants to support these in there OS then they must follow the rules imposed by MPAA & RIAA by supporting AAAC in Vista with HDMI connection etc else these media won't play.

Go do some research first.

 

[eddie]

According to the Digital Millenium Copyright act, if Microsoft wants to support TV recording in there OS, then they must follow the rules imposed by RIAA & MPAA which forbids any such recording unless the user pays a license fees or unless he plays only on his single PC.

People are already doing their TV recordings without any DRM or Vista-MCE. DMCA didn't force Microsoft to include DRM...it was their "choice" not a necessity! Microsoft could have easily released Vista without DRM and none of the clauses in DMCA could have stopped them. Stop lying!

Same goes with Blue Ray & HD DVD. If MS wants to support these in there OS then they must follow the rules imposed by MPAA & RIAA by supporting AAAC in Vista with HDMI connection etc else these media won't play.

Microsoft had the power (nearly 90% desktop market) and they could have refused to include DRM in their OS. This would have caused severe pressure on Hollywood companies to rethink their strategy but Microsoft didn't want to do that. Rather they wanted to create a platform for these companies to exclusively support them and this was pure business...no compulsions!

Go do some research first.

Talks gx_saurav

 

[gxsaurav]

People are already doing their TV recordings without any DRM or Vista-MCE. DMCA didn't force Microsoft to include DRM...it was their "choice" not a necessity! Microsoft could have easily released Vista without DRM and none of the clauses in DMCA could have stopped them. Stop lying!

Microsoft also released Vista with integrated search & they got sued. Stop lying

Any OS which is made in USA needs to comply with DMCA, else it won't be allowed to sale by the government. i hope you know how much arrogant EU is acting over Vista for silly things such as integrated PDF Search. Microsoft is a company who has to answer to the court & Government to which they pay tax. It is not a community OS with no governing body. Sorry, you don't know how business is done & according to u, Linux is the only possible way to do business.

Hey, lets think of it this way. Leopard has no DRM, right. (thats as far as we know right now). Lets see if Apple will be able to support HD DVD in Leopard without DRM or not.

Microsoft had the power (nearly 90% desktop market) and they could have refused to include DRM in their OS. This would have caused severe pressure on Hollywood companies to rethink their strategy but Microsoft didn't want to do that.

Microsoft has the power, nearly 90% desktop market but still they are not allowed to integrate a media player in Windows Vista for Europe, still they are not allowed to integrate search feature in there OS, still they are not allowed to make the OS secure by locking the kernel from exterior intrusion.

Microsoft is big. But Hollywood & RIAA is bigger. Wait, r u thinking that the total money that MS has is more then the money combined by adding the major recording labels . Eddie, I seriously doubt your real life analytical skills now. You just see Linux cos it works for u. Not for others. U have a particular mindset made which cannot be changed. I know I know, MS only gives jobs to those who are deserving

 

[sakumar79]

@praka123, reading your quoted text from the Inquirer website, I am not sure I get it... DRM is a mechanism proposed by MPAA/RIAA to protect their interests... Being in a nascent stage of implemention, it may be messy in Vista. But why are you blaming MS for it? And for that matter, why are you against it? DRM is adopted to reduce piracy of digital content... Its current implementation is messy and makes it difficult for the end user, but it is still in a nascent phase.

When you purchase a software (license), you are legally allowed (typically) to install and run it on one computer only at a time. Thats the law... If you install it on multiple computers, you are breaking the law... When you buy a casette or CD, you are allowed to use that CD or casette anywhere, but you are allowed to take a copy only for backup purposes and not for distribution. Similarly, DRM tries to make sure that when you purchase digital media, you have a restricted usage field. Due to the rampant piracy going on, the music/movie industry is forced to take severe steps that affect the end user... The user, having lived a life of luxury (in the context of being used to copy the digital media freely), is now forced to look for pirated means of luxury or live within restraint. While the main aim of DRM is to reduce the piracy and still allow users a certain degree of freedom, it is clear from current situation that DRM is not able to reduce piracy that much, while it is cramping the end user's freedom a lot... You need to give it time to figure out a balance.

I am not sure where the author got the point that MS is pushing for DRM. May be it is right, maybe it is not. But there is no concrete evidence that he gives that makes me believe it. Here is a different view on it: *www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=printArticleBasic&articleId=9005047 - a couple of extracts:
1. In a nutshell, this is the dilemma Microsoft faces as it prepares to launch Windows Vista. By any standard, Vista's new DRM capabilities -- aimed at protecting the rights of content owners by placing limits on how consumers can use digital media -- hardly qualify as a selling point; after all, it's hard to sing the praises of technology designed to make life harder for its users.
2. many of Vista's DRM technologies exist not because Microsoft wanted them there; rather, they were developed at the behest of movie studios, record labels and other high-powered intellectual property owners. "Microsoft was dealing here with a group of companies that simply don't trust the hardware [industry]," Rosoff said. "They wanted more control and more security than they had in the past" -- and if Microsoft failed to accommodate them, "they were prepared to walk away from Vista" by withholding support for next-generation DVD formats and other high-value content

Not that I agree with it completely, and it may be that MS will try to utilise this DRM to try to monopolise digital media content, but I am posting it to show that there is always a different explanation possible. If you keep a closed mind set that "anything that MS does is evil", I cant help you.

Also, implying that since DRM doesnt work with crack being available, it need not be provided at all is like saying that for software where crack is available, the software company should make it available legally for free... It makes no sense... DRM is a mechanism under progress... Its nowhere near perfect, and never will be perfect (just like everything in the universe)... But its there for the purpose of protecting the rights to the Intellectual Property that is the digital media. And it probably will be here for a long time in the years to come, learning and adapting all the while.

Arun

 

[iMav]

^^ thats because he has nothing else to bash ms with so its drm drm dmr ... hes been saying it since the day he first read that drm is in vista ... he hasnt found anything else wrong with vista

 

[eddie]

Microsoft also released Vista with integrated search & they got sued. Stop lying

...and how is that comparable to this situation?

Any OS which is made in USA needs to comply with DMCA, else it won't be allowed to sale by the government.

Yes and Microsoft even without DRM would not have broken ANY clause of DMCA while releasing Vista. They just needed to exclude recording capabilities and leave that to the user to use and decide. Just like how Windows XP was working. XP does not break any clause of DMCA and was selling fine but Microsoft is just trying to hide behind a pseudo support. It was their choice and not a compulsion...and we know why they took this choice.

Sorry, you don't know how business is done & according to u, Linux is the only possible way to do business.

Yes...as I said earlier...you are just better than Donald Trump in carrying out business. Don't act like a kid...oh wait...you are not better than one in any case

Microsoft has the power, nearly 90% desktop market but still they are not allowed to integrate a media player in Windows Vista for Europe, still they are not allowed to integrate search feature in there OS, still they are not allowed to make the OS secure by locking the kernel from exterior intrusion.

Clearly you do not understand anything about Monopolistic Trade Practices. Time for you to read about them?

Microsoft is big. But Hollywood & RIAA is bigger. Wait, r u thinking that the total money that MS has is more then the money combined by adding the major recording labels .

The point is not who is bigger but the point is that what market would the Hollywood have been left without Microsoft? Imagine a company with 90% control of market telling the Hollywood that they don't want to include a Viral technology. Either Hollywood can ease up their stance or they can forget Microsoft Windows as a platform on which they can run their DVDs. Do you think Hollywood is stupid enough to go against such a consumer power? You really need some economics lessons!

Eddie, I seriously doubt your real life analytical skills now.

An overgrown kid who lies throughout his day is commenting on my "real life analytical skills". How soothing

-- and if Microsoft failed to accommodate them, "they were prepared to walk away from Vista" by withholding support for next-generation DVD formats and other high-value content

The point is that IF (and that is a big IF) those companies would have walked away then where could have they sold their content? Imagine 90% of digital market going straight out of their hands! Just imagine the severity of this situation. Can any business afford to lose 90% of their market? Microsoft had a chance to take the high road but what they did was to just follow their old pathway...lock down the users as much as possible! There is no different aspect to it.

 

[iMav]

eddie as far as ur last comments and about wanting MS to play heavy handed against hollywood ur talking stupid and u know that .... hd dvd has already lost to a great extent against blu ray

 

[gxsaurav]

...and how is that comparable to this situation? Yes and Microsoft even without DRM would not have broken ANY clause of DMCA while releasing Vista. They just needed to exclude recording capabilities and leave that to the user to use and decide. Just like how Windows XP was working. XP does not break any clause of DMCA and was selling fine but Microsoft is just trying to hide behind a pseudo support. It was their choice and not a compulsion...and we know why they took this choice.

I will say this in simple terms.

Windows XP has no TV recording capability by default. Windows XP MCE had this because the content provider in USA & Europe unlike India use set top boxes & they can encrypt there channel feeds to prevent any recording ability.

If MS wants to support TV Viewing in Windows via MCE, they must support this DRM.

If they are supporting this DRM of TV Channels then they must comply by the rules to let the user record the show, to see on his computer only ( .dvr-ms files)

The point is not who is bigger but the point is that what market would the Hollywood have been left without Microsoft? Imagine a company with 90% control of market telling the Hollywood that they don't want to include a Viral technology. Either Hollywood can ease up their stance or they can forget Microsoft Windows as a platform on which they can run their DVDs.

This is the pinnacle of stupidity, you are saying that a company should go against the Governmant body? Dude, MS will be closed the next day. US Government will take there license back. OMG....you really don't know how business is done/

Do you think Hollywood is stupid enough to go against such a consumer power? You really need some economics lessons!

USA & Europe has more TV, DVD Players & HD DVD players then computers. I hope u know this fact. According to Hollywood & RIAA the ideal way to see your movies & Audio CDs is to use TV & DVD Player & not the computer.

If you want to use computer then you cannot make & distribute copies. This is the law.

Microsoft cannot go against the law.

How soothing The point is that IF (and that is a big IF) those companies would have walked away then where could have they sold their content? Imagine 90% of digital market going straight out of their hands! Just imagine the severity of this situation. Can any business afford to lose 90% of their market?

Have you ever been to Microsoft Tech Support? You will be amazed by the amount of stupidity the customers show. If it doesn't work on there computer they will simply use the TV & DVD player in which case Microsoft & Windows will loose a compelling feature for there product to sale. Hollywood & RIAA don't want you ideally to play content on computer. They want u to play it on TV with DVD player.

 

[eddie]

If they are supporting this DRM of TV Channels then they must comply by the rules to let the user record the show, to see on his computer only ( .dvr-ms files)

...and they could have easily by-passed this choice. XP is still being used by people around the world for TV viewing and recording WITHOUT DRM! This was not a compulsion but a choice from Microsoft.

This is the pinnacle of stupidity,

Oh a person who spells government as governmant has a word like "pinnacle" in his vocabulary? Interesting

you are saying that a company should go against the Governmant body? Dude, MS will be closed the next day. US Government will take there license back.

A HA HA HA HA!!! RIAA is a government body???? OMFG!!! Dude...you are so stupid that laughing at you hurts my ribs. You idiot...RIAA is "NO GOVERNMENT BODY". It is just an association of recording companies. They have NO RIGHTS whatsoever to revoke anyone's license or grant one to someone. Get some sense and facts before arguing you stupid man!!!

OMG....you really don't know how business is done

Yes and you are just better than Donald Trump

If you want to use computer then you cannot make & distribute copies. This is the law.

Microsoft cannot go against the law.

So? How does that bring DRM into picture?

If it doesn't work on there computer they will simply use the TV & DVD player in which case Microsoft & Windows will loose a compelling feature for there product to sale.

YES!!! Now you came to the exact point!!! Absolutely where I wanted you to come from the very beginning! This is what was there in the mind of Microsoft all along. It was money that was talking for them...no RIAA threats...no closing threats...no nothing. It was entirely a CHOICE and not a compulsion...like what Microsoft and Microidiots want us to believe.

Hollywood & RIAA don't want you ideally to play content on computer. They want u to play it on TV with DVD player.

Oh wow!!! This is so great...if the companies didn't want their content to be played on Microsoft's platform then they should have been happy that Windows didn't play the DVDs. Why would they sue then? Why would they think about becoming hostile against Microsoft?

On one hand you say that Hollywood doesn't want their content to be played on PCs but on other one you say that they will sue Microsoft if it doesn't play? Are you making any sense to even yourself or are you just posting randomly without even thinking?

 

[gxsaurav]

...and they could have easily by-passed this choice. XP is still being used by people around the world for TV viewing and recording WITHOUT DRM! This was not a compulsion but a choice from Microsoft.

Do you have some problem in understanding that Windows XP comes without any inbuilt TV Viewer or recording application. Those who are using XP are using some other recording application like Media Portal or Pinnacle TV Center or SageTV. Now whether these 3rd pary application support DRM or not is not the problem of MS.

XP MCE supports inbuilt TV recording, because of which MS is forced to support the DRM standards used by TV Channels.

Get some sense and facts before arguing you stupid man!!!

Hey, who went to DoJ recently to sue MS. Google right? Whats stopping RIAA & MPAA to sue MS.

It was money that was talking for them...no RIAA threats...no closing threats...no nothing. It was entirely a CHOICE and not a compulsion...like what Microsoft and Microidiots want us to believe.

Microsoft had 2 choices, now act sane & tell me which they should have chosen

1) No DRM support resulting in the inability to play any TV content on MCE & loose market share of there business.

2) Support it, & let the user watch TV on the computer. Let the user use the computer the way they want.

On one hand you say that Hollywood doesn't want their content to be played on PCs but on other one you say that they will sue Microsoft if it doesn't play?

I think you have some problem in reading text eddie. I never said Hollywood will sue MS if HD DVD doesn't play. If Vista has no support for AAAC then these disks won't play at all. Now, is it wrong to support a feature in an OS MS makes so that the consumer can play such content?


Every bussiness wants money. According to your logic Mandrive should be sued too cos they charge money for there Linux distribution which is available from other vendors for free.

 

[eddie]

Hey, who went to DoJ recently to sue MS. Google right? Whats stopping RIAA & MPAA to sue MS.

The law! The law stops RIAA & MPAA from suing MS because there is no clause in DMCA that can "force" Microsoft to include DRM. Why Google went to DoJ? Go and read about the settlement and clauses that were signed by Microsoft in their antitrust case.

Microsoft had 2 choices...

1) No DRM support resulting in the inability to play any TV content on MCE & loose market share of there business.

Exactly what I have been trying to hammer in your thick head all along!!! Microsoft had choices and no compulsions! They were not FORCED into their decision of including DRM but they chose to do it. Now do you get the point? Now would you get down your horse that Microsoft was "forced" to include DRM in Vista?

I think you have some problem in reading text eddie. I never said Hollywood will sue MS if HD DVD doesn't play. If Vista has no support for AAAC then these disks won't play at all. Now, is it wrong to support a feature in an OS MS makes so that the consumer can play such content?

...and did I say that Hollywood will sue if HD DVD doesn't play? Are you blind? I just wrote what you said..."that hollywood doesn't WANT PCs to play DVDs". Now if Microsoft had not included DRM then Hollywood would have got what they desired...i.e. "No playback of HD DVDs on PCs". Now what inclination would Hollywood or RIAA have for suing Microsoft?

Every bussiness wants money. According to your logic Mandrive should be sued too cos they charge money for there Linux distribution which is available from other vendors for free.

...and did I say that earning money is bad? Did I say that Microsoft should distribute their OS for free? I just said that Microsoft chose to include DRM...and was not forced to include it. Now you get it in your stupidity filled head?

 

[iMav]

microsoft did not choose to include drm it chose to include mce in vista rater than having it as a separate os ... eddie ur talking non-sense dude ...

 

[gxsaurav]

Lolz...no point in telling Eddie anything. According to him, it is wrong for MS to support a technology which no matter how pathetic, still prevails in the market.

 

[praka123]

@praka123, reading your quoted text from the Inquirer website, I am not sure I get it... DRM is a mechanism proposed by MPAA/RIAA to protect their interests... Being in a nascent stage of implemention, it may be messy in Vista. But why are you blaming MS for it? And for that matter, why are you against it? DRM is adopted to reduce piracy of digital content... Its current implementation is messy and makes it difficult for the end user, but it is still in a nascent phase.

DRM is crippling user privilages.in the name of fair use,these big monopoly is screwing its users follow DRM.it is like a root-kit in itself installed on ur vista.M$ wants to control u and they installed DRM on their own will not enforced by RIAA or whoever.as the article explains it pretty well.How can u trust M$?-there are enough anti-trust cases against them already.they can do whatever the way they want and US laws are accordingly changed!
piracy is a crime.but DRM is fscking sick thing.if ur a coder,u might be knowing how nice to incorporate a piece of code that will trace all the user's private datas and send it to u via internet?
DRM kills privacy too
there are anti-drm campaign running allover US and other countries.
*defectivebydesign.org

When you purchase a software (license), you are legally allowed (typically) to install and run it on one computer only at a time. Thats the law... If you install it on multiple computers, you are breaking the law... When you buy a casette or CD, you are allowed to use that CD or casette anywhere, but you are allowed to take a copy only for backup purposes and not for distribution. Similarly, DRM tries to make sure that when you purchase digital media, you have a restricted usage field. Due to the rampant piracy going on, the music/movie industry is forced to take severe steps that affect the end user... The user, having lived a life of luxury (in the context of being used to copy the digital media freely), is now forced to look for pirated means of luxury or live within restraint. While the main aim of DRM is to reduce the piracy and still allow users a certain degree of freedom, it is clear from current situation that DRM is not able to reduce piracy that much, while it is cramping the end user's freedom a lot... You need to give it time to figure out a balance.

Arun

DRM is not the way to control piracy.who are they(M$,RIAA) to control us?it is upon us to not to promote piracy.but no way DRM can be justified.
i am skeptical about the future for windows users and others with this type of laws enforced (DMCA)
there is one more thing more than recording industry or hollywood movies.that is ur own user privilages.that is questioned by DRM.this sort of laws like DMCA needs to be removed.these are direct attack on users.
the main problem is there is a BIG EULA that many of windows users never readsif u have completely read EULA,u will rethink about VIsta or any windows.
the thing here is DRM is not a nice thing.It is a root-kit installed by OS company on ur system to watch what ur doing in ur system.
remember Sony DRM?
*en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_Sony_BMG_CD_copy_protection_scandal
the same can happen with vista too ?
No answer than this VIsta sucks with DRM.i am no other way criticizing Vista oS.
Just cant bear DRM enforced by Microsoft.<-------the founders are evil that is

 

[sakumar79]

The article explains a lot of things, but without giving much proof... Dont make statements like "they can do whatever they want, and US laws are accordingly changed!" - Tell me what US law was changed because MS did whatever they wanted, even if it was originally against the law. And remember that MS makes the OS for the whole world. Are you saying that they are making every country to change the laws too? Thats ridiculous.

The DRM implementation may not be good and it can be hard for the user. It may be even a bit of infringement on your privacy. But imagine that it is implemented for years. In the years to come, it could have the ability to evolve into a more user-friendly implementation, and might end up reducing piracy. Without giving an alternative implementation solution that can be more or at least equally effective, please dont go condemning the implementation.

There is a difference between Sonys rootkit and Vista's DRM. Sony did not inform beforehand of the rootkit whearas MS has informed that DRM is present in Vista before its release... Now, to what extent it invades one's privacy I dont know. If you are going to accuse the OS of tracking what you are doing and sending your private info back to MS, please elaborate (I havent used Vista and am still on XP only, so I dont have personal experience with it). Do you mean through DRM, it is collecting your personal info and sending it? You mean it was not possible earlier for them to track your personal info and send it if they wanted to?

Arun