Should I boycott Longhorn?

[Geo-King]

We keep moving on to newer operating systems for various reasons but do we really have to move on anymore. Dos Sucked, Windows 3.X Sucked, Windows 9X & ME Sucked, Windows 2000 was ok but now Windows XP is stable and there are so many user friendly Linux distros, why move on to Longhorn. The reason I kept moving on to the next version of Windows was because it got better and better.

However now it’s not going to get that much better then XP and from what I am heard with the next version of Windows (Longhorn) there is going to be a lot of Digital Rights Management (DRM) witch will stop you from not only copying something but not let you download any file that Microsoft deems “illegal”. Hardware manufacturers will start putting embedded DRM software (firmware) on motherboards to work with Longhorn to try and stop you from doing anything they don’t like. As usual this will hurt everyone but pirates because people that do illegal stuff know how to work around protections but the average user will get a shit load of blue screens and errors.

What sucks is, even if you want to boycott Longhorn Microsoft has ways of forcing you to buy newer versions of stuff. For example they will stop supporting XP and they will come out with new software that will only work on Longhorn. I even think using Linux with new hardware will still have some DRM limitations?


Solution…
Use old hardware and do not upgrade OS’s unless using Linux? Keep your old PC just incase. Buy new PC just for new games.




Here is a discussion on DRM. Look for the title Digital Rights Management Michael Sims

http://www.the-fifth-hope.org/hoop/5hope_speakers.khtml



Digital Rights Management
Michael Sims
L L

Digital Rights Management is quickly becoming pervasive in electronic devices of all sorts. This minimally-technical overview of DRM systems in use now and planned for the future will show you how and why your ability to make use of electronics is being reduced by corporate desires to increase profits and exercise control over their products. The emphasis here will be on DRM systems that have gotten little publicity. The DVD CSS system will be touched upon but most of the time will be spent describing systems for controlling television broadcasts, DRM built into CPUs and BIOS's, and other areas that haven't gotten nearly as much attention as CSS.

Saturday 1900
Area "B"

[Wamplet]

Sounds like the computer is turning into a console. http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/redface.gif

[Mariamus]

Don't worry, it'll only be a matter of weeks after Longhorn has been released that all the hackers and crackers out there will have found a way to bypass the DRM.
The problem with the DRM is that it won't just hit the illegal content, it'll hit the legal content just as well, just like the anti-piracy group here in Denmark had a program to wipe all illegal mp3 and video files from a users computer, the problem was that it didn't distinguish between legal and illegal files, so a lot of people lost a lot of legal files, and the program was a complete disaster. http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif I don't know if they're even distributing the program any more.
But then again, the anti piracy group here in Denmark are a bunch of complete assmunchers... They've been at it for a few years, and they've scraped in a lot of money, but the artists who were supposed to get the money haven't seen a penny yet.

[IHerman]

I'm not into games anymore, so dropping Microsoft products seems like a good idea.

My computer can play any video/dvd I like so upgrading won't be necessary. However one day something will get fried and then I'll probably need to replace more than half of it because old parts don't work on new parts.

The first thing I'll do with whatever hardware copyright blah I'll find on that thing is try to kill it. No doubt there will be cracks and workaraounds available within days.

We've all witnessed the Sony copy-prevention disaster. Modern discmans couldn't even play a damn CD. I'm sure something like this is going to happen again.

It'll probably end up people not being able to copy their own home-videos.


That and the "user-friendlyness" of Microsoft products is getting so annoying it hurts. The My Documents I could handle, just ignore it. But all the autoplay and whatever help, auto-something and wizardshit that pop up every minute is just too much. Configuring windows not to be annoying takes ages. And whoever invented that hold shift button 8 seconds to blahblah and that shit should be executed.

I'd wish there was a simple version of windows. No autoplay, no browser, burnsoftware, no anything. Just a plain OS with a filesystem and some very basic programs like paint, a calculater and notepad. Download whatever you want but start with a plain and simple OS. Currently Microsoft has to sell windows versions without mediaplayer in Europe, which is a step in the right direction.

I've tried Ubuntu, it works great, but I'm kind of stuck with windows for a few things I'm too lazy to try in Ubuntu.

[IwantMORE]

Look Longhorn is the DNF of OS's we have no idea when MS is likely to release it, probably next year some time but they know if they rush it and release a pile of cack then it will do them a lot of harm.

As you said there look like very little reason to move up to Longhorn from XP or W2K but that doesn't matter the MS roadmap is get it pre-installed on all new computers asap so that every new computer ships with the new OS. This way people buying a new computer will get it and it will slowly take over market share like XP did. I stuck with W2K which imo is still better than XP and I don't see anything in XP that makes it wroth upgrading for but most people still went for XP and MS is still selling W2K at a higher price than XP because they know it's better.

The problem could be that there will be a lot of new OS's hitting the market before longhorn including Tiger, then new open source Solaris and many upgrades to all the Linux clones. MS is still running to keep up with everyone else but unless someone can get computers on the shelves in PC World and other high street shops selling PC's to people who know nothing about computers then there will still be a MS domination in the OS market and Longhorn will do well.

The new policy by MS to turn off updates and ask people to prove they have a valid copy of Windows to update will do them harm. Many people if they had to find serial numbers, original install discs and the such to prove they had a valid copy of windows would not, because they do not know where the discs are, can't be bothered or don't understand. If MS don't work this 'upgrade' to windows validation right then they are going to piss off a lot of people and the more people looking for alternatives the better the alternatives will sell.

Longhorn is a long way off and it will be more prudent to make up your mind much closer to the release date when more is known, which will be in the classic 3DR stand WID http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[IHerman]

The problem with people is that they don't know shit about computers.

They want microsoft because everybody uses it.

And they'll mess up the upgrades because they lost they key, original CD, got it illegaly anyway and such.

As a result 90% of all PC's with Longhorn will be filled with security holes, virusses and spy-ware.

I totally lost my point but my guess is it's got to do something with microsoft being total *******s.

[Rider]

you mean like:

http://www.againsttcpa.com

[Geo-King]

Just curious why do you like Win2K better? Other then speed and hard drive space, or is that it?

[NutWrench]

People will simply not buy hardware that limits their choices.

Vote with your wallet.

[Kevin Wolff]

Geo-King said:
Just curious why do you like Win2K better? Other then speed and hard drive space, or is that it?


I agree with him so I'll answer for him: Win2k was made for computers intended to be run in environments where people shouldn't be annoyed with...um..."stuff." XP is much more annoying than 2000 is. Most of the stuff can be disabled, but it isn't always worth the effort - hence, fans of alternative OSs that only use Windows when needed usually like 2000 more than XP.

[Dreams]

If Hardware DRM comes up with all it's limitations, i hope people will switch to linux, macs, or an new opensource operating system that will be as easy to use as Windows.

[Duoae]

I'm going to start stockpiling my cmoputer parts so i can run my games many years into the future.

[Yatta]

And whoever invented that hold shift button 8 seconds to blahblah and that shit should be executed.


LOL! Amen, brother. http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[jimbob]

im switching back to DOS, it has never crashed on me.

no blue screens either http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

still microsoft though http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif

meh, monopoly`s suck

[Inanimate Carbon Rod]

Longhorn felt just like WinXp with a cool theme when I had a chance to use it.

[IwantMORE]

Like Kev said W2K does the job without all the frilly bit I don't use and would disable. It still seems more stable than XP and is easier to stip down to a bare OS with very little overheads for a MS product that is.

[NutWrench]

Dreams said:
If Hardware DRM comes up with all it's limitations, i hope people will switch to linux, macs, or an new opensource operating system that will be as easy to use as Windows.



I think some kind of compromise will be reached myself, like what happened during the Pentium III serial code idea. (Which ended up being an option that you could switch off in BIOS.)

If Microsoft forces the issue, saying that Longhorn will ONLY run on "DRM-Ready hardware" then I will definitely make Linux my main operating system.

Anyone who thinks that DRM will stop at MP3s and Movies is going to be in for a nasty surprise.

[Paroxysm]

I have no problem with microsoft on the whole Thanks http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[DudeMiester]

DRM won't be a problem for illegal content, because it will have all that stripped out to begin with, so it doesn't matter what DRM stuff you've got, it'll still work. However, legal content is where is will be a pain in the ass, because anything imported will not work period. Costs for smaller companies will be mad high, because they can't afford to have 50 different versions of every CD/DVD/Program/Video for all the different DRM regions.

Thus DRM will royally fuxor legal content and anyone who makes it, because anyone in their right mind won't go through the hassle of using it.

However, the problem with Linux is that, I find anyways, it needs to be more streamlined. Right now there are so many programs with all these strange names, very complex consoles, GUIs that serve no purpose other then to look nice. It needs to be make simple enough that any retarded idiot can use it, and right now imho it's far from it. Hopefully that will change.

[NutWrench]

I agree. I don't think Linux is quite ready for the average user yet, but it could be by the time that people are forced to make a choice between Longhorn and Linux.

[Geo-King]

Microsoft's Longhorn OS Faces Antitrust Scrutiny
Antitrust regulators from the U.S. Department of Justice (news - web sites) (DOJ) will be reviewing Microsoft's (Nasdaq: MSFT - news) upcoming Longhorn operating system to be sure it is in compliance with the company's antitrust settlement.


http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nf/20050127/tc_nf/30039


Well I have to say Linux is getting easier to use so it’s just a matter of time, I guess your right…

[John]

Well, ever since they implented the K GUI, it's been running well with some builds of linux.

[Frenkel]

jimbob said:
im switching back to DOS, it has never crashed on me.

no blue screens either http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

still microsoft though http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif

meh, monopoly`s suck



Then use FreeDOS (http://www.freedos.org).

[Geo-King]

Heres an interesting page.


Talks about,
Bloat
Backward Incompatibility
Perpetual Upgrading
Vaporware
Hostile treatment of customers
Predatory Practices
Bundling of inferior products
Bugs, bugs, and more bugs
Insecurity
Closed "standards"
Mutilation of existing standards
Lack of innovation
Attempts at taking over appliance markets
Attempts at buying the public's trust
Outright Deception
Common Defenses of Microsoft Debunked

http://www.kmfms.com/whatsbad.html
WoW, I have a feeling the people that made that page hate MS...



To be fair here is an article from Microsoft that says Linux security is a myth. I am sure it's not bias in any way LoL.

A senior Microsoft executive, speaking exclusively to vnunet.com, has dismissed Linux's reputation as a secure platform as a "myth", claiming that the open source development process creates fundamental security problems.

http://www.vnunet.com/news/1160853



I pretty much made my mind up that I am going to do all I can [u]not</u> to upgrade to Longhorn [u]if I don’t have to</u>. So if anyone has used the beta and can give me a good reason why I should use Longhorn when it comes out please inform me. I always fix other peoples computers so I do realize that I will have to know it well enough to be able to fix peoples problems but I am talking about my own personal use.

One day when games are easy to run on Linux I am going to run far away from windows but for now I am stuck. When game companies make Linux ports of games the hardest thing you have to do is go into bash (or whatever shell you use) mount the cd-rom, type the command to run the installer (assuming you have CD there) and make sure you have rights to the directory you want the game in with the chmod command. I know x-windows and kde (aside from being logged in as admin) does some of this for you plus if you really wanted to you can make the cd-rom auto mount but not everyone knows how to use unix in anyway and sometime you have to do this… So that’s what I think is bringing it down. That’s not even the worst of it; the worst of it is trying to get games that weren’t made for Linux in the first run. If you can’t find a source port on the net and you don’t know how to program FOREGT ABOUT IT! Maybe all of these open source programmers should stop working on security just for a little bit so they can work on making software that’s out right now compatible (apps, games also making it over all easier) so people will have a reason to switch over. Making a win32 partition and running WINE is a start but it’s not good enough. Linux on the desktop is not going to make it on its own, programmers and users have to make it happen.





p.s.
Grr to necessary evils… I really hate steam! http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[Piano Man]

Well, just as long as you don't fall for the Dark side... (Macintosh)... http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Mountain Man]

Longhorn will never touch my computer. I will give up PC gaming if I must, though I hope Linux comes into its own as a gaming OS by the time Longhorn is released in 2006. If not, I'll suck it up and buy a console.

[Mountain Man]

IHerman said:
I'd wish there was a simple version of windows. No autoplay, no browser, burnsoftware, no anything. Just a plain OS with a filesystem and some very basic programs like paint, a calculater and notepad. Download whatever you want but start with a plain and simple OS.


I'd be all for a Windows gaming OS: nothing but a barebones operating system stripped of everything but the bare essentials to allow you to play games.

[Kevin Wolff]

It needs to be make simple enough that any retarded idiot can use it, and right now imho it's far from it.


I would rather retarded idiots not use computers. http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[Crispy Critters]

Kevin Wolff said:

It needs to be make simple enough that any retarded idiot can use it, and right now imho it's far from it.


I would rather retarded idiots not use computers. http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif



I agree.

[Geo-King]

piano_man15 said:
Well, just as long as you don't fall for the Dark side... (Macintosh)... http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif



I like to go out and buy signal parts to build my own computer. Can you even buy new Mac motherboards separately? I know generic hard drives and most types of ram work… However Mac's are too costly anyway. The only thing I like about Mac’s is that OS X runs over unix but that’s not convincing enough to make me get one.

[Kevin Wolff]

Can you even buy new Mac motherboards separately?


You can... http://www.macopz.com/buildamac/

Oh, and the higher price comes mostly from lower production levels, and doing *combination* hardware-software testing with them. http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/redface.gif Not like you don't get anything for the money, either. http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

[Geo-King]

Microsoft: Longhorn beta will arrive by June

Published: February 7, 2005, 1:00 PM PST
By Ina Fried
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
TrackBack Print E-mail TalkBack

SAN FRANCISCO--Microsoft is on track to release the first full test version of the next major Windows release by the end of June, a Microsoft executive told CNET News.com on Monday.



http://news.com.com/Microsoft+Longhorn+b...bj=news.1012.20 (http://news.com.com/Microsoft+Longhorn+beta+will+arrive+by+June/2100-1012_3-5566423.html?part=rss&tag=5566423&subj=news.1012.20)

HMMM... So I guess June is when the propaganda will start.

[ZuljinRaynor]

It seems we like doing illegal things and companies can't protect themselves, that seems what your boycott is about.

How about Windows comes through STEAM! w00t 5 days of Download. And for people with clean boots, you need Steam for DOS, aka lots of trouble. http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/doh.gif http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/doh.gif http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/doh.gif

[Geo-King]

ZuljinRaynor said:
It seems we like doing illegal things and companies can't protect themselves, that seems what your boycott is about.




Actually I am not talking about anything illegal you just assumed that. It sickens me that the more accepted the Digital Millennium Copyright Act becomes; more people forget their rights. I am glad I live in Canada.

[ZuljinRaynor]

Could you explain more about this? Sorry if I understood wrong. What does that Act actually do?

[Phait]

I wonder what it'd take to get advertisers and supporters to run an ad in the biggest newspapers detailing why DRM is bad and why it should not be implemented...

[Geo-King]

ZuljinRaynor said:
Could you explain more about this? Sorry if I understood wrong. What does that Act actually do?



DRM – Digital Rights Management
This is so post to stop you from pirating software however this also affects software that you bought with your own money and a lot of industry insiders say in the future this will bring more problems then it will fix. If I buy a Music CD from a store and I want to put it on MY mp3 player or on MY computer, there is nothing wrong with that but a lot of DRM software will try to stop you from doing it. If it were up to companies that support DRM, VCRs and DVD recorders would be outlawed Grrr!

DMCA – Digital Millennium Copyright Act
This makes it illegal to pirate intellectual property however this is being misused by a lot of companies to sue people. DMCA makes it illegal to rip music, game or movie CD’s or DVD’s with DRM to your hard drive EVEN IF IT’S YOURS! I don’t know about you but if I buy something I consider it mine and I should be able to make back up copies or rip it to my computer! I am NOT going to share it with anyone so way am I being treated like im guilty until proven innocent shouldn’t it be the other way around?




phiat
I wonder what it'd take to get advertisers and supporters to run an ad in the biggest newspapers detailing why DRM is bad and why it should not be implemented...




More and more people’s rights are being taken away for various reasons and I don’t want to see this trend continue. I recently was in a music store and I was looking around and I saw a CD by Velvet Revolver that I was about to buy but then I saw a sticker on the front of it that said it had DRM. I tossed that CD back on the self and I ended up not buying anything. I advise people who do not like DRM to do the same and maybe we wont see so much of this in the future.

[DudeMiester]

^^In addition you might want to mention to the manager (not the clerks they don't give a damn) that you would have bought their CD, but it had DRM so you didn't. It shows them directly that they are loosing business because of this kind of crap, and not because of the internet.

[ZuljinRaynor]

Here is a question... what if we got Microsoft to bring a DOS emulator into Longhorn since they really want to make it compatible with previous versions. Then I see no reason to boycott it at all... sorta. :P

[Jeff]

Kevin Wolff said:
I agree with him so I'll answer for him: Win2k was made for computers intended to be run in environments where people shouldn't be annoyed with...um..."stuff." XP is much more annoying than 2000 is. Most of the stuff can be disabled, but it isn't always worth the effort - hence, fans of alternative OSs that only use Windows when needed usually like 2000 more than XP.



I was advised to get Windows 2000 Pro with my current computer by a friend, because he said that it doesn't come with as much ahem, shit, as XP Home does. I got XP Home on advice from Wamplet, because some of the features in XP Pro weren't required for what I'm doing. Does XP Pro come with this "bloatware" as it's sometimes called? Or just less of it, because when the time comes I'm getting XP Pro 64-bit.

[Geo-King]

Linux: "Enemies of Linux" Trying to Undermine OS?
Linux Business
Posted by CmdrTaco on Tuesday March 08, @02:01PM
from the seems-a-little-conspiratorial dept.
Pinawella writes "It's reported on VNUnet that 'Enemies of Linux' http://www.vnunet.com/news/1161778 are trying to undermine the OS with a campaign of disinformation. It's based on an interview with an exec from the Open Source Development Labs, but who are these enemies?"



That’s odd? I guess we should always watch out for misinformation.

[Phayzon]

IHerman said:
I'd wish there was a simple version of windows. No autoplay, no browser, burnsoftware, no anything. Just a plain OS with a filesystem and some very basic programs like paint, a calculater and notepad. Download whatever you want but start with a plain and simple OS. Currently Microsoft has to sell windows versions without mediaplayer in Europe, which is a step in the right direction.




Im to laazy to read all the later stuff, so this may have been said.

Try Windows Server 2003. It only has notepad, calculator, paint, and im not sure about media player if it does, you can get rid of it.

[Geo-King]

Some news for everyone.


Linux: Red Hat/Apache Slower Than Windows Server 2003?
Microsoft
Posted by Zonk on Saturday May 07, @02:20AM
from the who-doesn't-love-some-delicious-fud dept.
phantomfive writes "In a recent test by a company called Veritest http://www.veritest.com/ , Windows 2003 web server performs up to 300% higher throughput than Red Hat Linux running with Apache. Veritest used webbench http://www.veritest.com/benchmarks/webbench/home.asp to do there testing. Since the test was commisioned by Microsoft, is this just more FUD from a company with a long history? http://features.slashdot.org/features/99/04/23/1316228.shtml?tid=109 Or are the results valid this time? The study can be found here."

( Read More... | 136 of 197 comments | linux.slashdot.org )



LoL.



Linux: Myth of Linux Hobby Coders Exposed
Linux
Posted by Zonk on Friday May 06, @06:54PM
from the not-just-basement-rangers dept.
Eh-Wire writes "Stuart Cohen, CEO of the Open Source Development Labs, does a short piece on the myth of renegade hackers coding in their parent's basements to create the Linux OS. http://www.newsfactor.com/story.xhtml?story_id=34392 He suggests this hasn't been the case for many years and goes on to claim that of the top 25 core developers, more than 90% of them are fully employed with some of the largest technology companies in the world. Stuart goes on to explode the myth of renegade programmers by saying, 'Sure, it represents a new way to create software, but the actual process looks a lot like how enterprise software has been made for decades.' A short but interesting read."

( Read More... | 141 of 191 comments | linux.slashdot.org )



Interesting.



Politics: Microsoft Reverses Stand on Discrimination Bill
Microsoft
Posted by Zonk on Friday May 06, @02:14PM
from the listening-to-their-constituents dept.
sriram_2001 writes "Bowing to intense pressure both from outside as well as its employees, Microsoft has reversed its stand on the anti-discrimination bill. In a company wide email, http://scobleizer.com/linkblog/archives/3929 Steve Ballmer says that though the Washington legislative session is over for the year, they'll support any such legislation in the future. However, he adds that they'll be supporting it in the US only as they don't want to involve the company in debates in countries with different cultures and value systems. He also says that he doesn't think Microsoft should be involved in most public policy issues." Announcement about the email's release on the Scobleizer main site http://radio.weblogs.com/0001011/2005/05/06.html#a10008 .

( Read More... | 223 of 341 comments | politics.slashdot.org )



weird?


Anyone hear any interesting news about DRM, longhorn or linux?

[rg3]

I didn't expect an unbiased study from MS, and the Apache vs. IIS one is not one of them. Read the /. comments to find out about it.

[Kevin Wolff]

I wouldn't be surprised if Windows won that, actually. Red Hat is notoriously slow. http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

But in all seriousness, they put Windows 2003 against Red Hat 8. There's been speed improvements made in the Linux kernel and Apache since then (2003). And they used a server with documented performance problems with that setup. Pretty slick of them, eh?

EDIT: The report itself appears to be about that old. Argh. http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/doh.gif

EDIT 2: The Slashdot article links to the wrong study. The real one is: http://www.veritest.com/clients/reports/microsoft/microsoft_IT_Pro.pdf

[Sigma]

p.s.
Grr to necessary evils… I really hate steam! http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif



Ditto. Incidentally, the public is tragically misinformed about Firmware criminality, the vile DRM trojans, and imbedded network computing. I had no idea that the DRM sticker on my CDs referred to anything other than abstract federal regulations. http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif

While I enjoy reading the work of William S. Gibson, I have no desire to live it.

On a related topic: Could someone please mention embedded consumer RFID and its inherent perils?

Edit: I retract that ditto. Steam and the aforementioned technological misuses, while quite evil, are unnecessary.

[Drazula]

Longhorn using DRM is much worse than Steam. I seriously doubt Microsoft will get away with it, since they do not want to lose more market-share to Linux. The whole point of Linux is open sharing.

Longhorn will collapse using DRM. I doubt it will be any more restrictive than XP when it is commercially released.

[IceColdDuke]

If Microsoft adds DRM, Longhorn as said before will flop. Even though the public builds that Microsoft has release of Longhorn, only have 33% of the overall features it is clear that Longhorn's main advantage is a 3D user interface, and thats more or less it. And extra internal features including easier driver design, non of which the end user gives a damn about.

I actually thought of buying Longhorn if it had WinFS, but sense they dropped the only thing that made there OS worth the money($300), I don't really see a point of buying it, espeically with DRM.

[Sigma]

Does anyone know of forums/websites dedicated to these and similar topics? If so, please post them here; more exposure is always a good thing http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif.

[Geo-King]

Big News on Microsoft
Por Yakov Lansky - Monday, May. 30, 2005 at 5:14 PM
yakov1929@hotmail.com

How true. It is also true in the Estados Unidos dos Americanos that most games, which I and my grandchildren play, run all on windows. All of the machines in my home network boot linux as the master operating system and master boot manager. Windows appears as a secondary boot selection. Installed windows does not acknowledge the presence of Linux. Only the windows install program, the only superuser program that you own when you 'buy' windows, knows about Linux. Windows' admits this when it asks permission to destroy Linux as one of the questions asked of the user by windows system installation program while it is installing windows and corrupting the master boot record of the primary hard drive (drive 0)so that only windows will be able to boot....this requires one to run LILO or GRUB again after a floppy boot after windows' installation is done.
New advice...do not buy any mother board newer than 2004! All the BIOS manufacturers in del Estados Unidos have conspired to 'Digital Rights Manage' the BIOS so that DRM will not be avoidable....and Linux might not run on these hardware spyware devices anyway. The only reason to buy any of these new boards are to run the newer games, which may be sufficient for some. The same is true for video cards manufactured after 2003 as the video firmware contains hooks for DRM. Audio cards got the treatment in 2004. Hard drives will be DRM'd by late 2005 with the addition of secret partitions available only to microsoft software secret routines. Television and radio cards will come equipped with 'broadcast flag' DRM by July 2005 unless stopped by current court cases in the Estados Unidos.
Windows would no be so bad if it was'nt so full of all kinds of malware, but after extraction of window's malware little would remain of it. Linux does an excessive amount of logging as well. Would that a system came along that did no logging, kept no history, totally destroyed files when asked....any and all files. At least Linux contains no file like window's 'registry' files. A boatload of secrets, undocumented 'features', spyware, and other malware in windows' registry.




http://argentina.indymedia.org/news/2005/05/295338.php

DRM in video cards and harddrives too??? Is this for real?

[Sigma]

<font color="yellow">http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/eek.gif Holy s**t!</font>

Please, somebody, get more info on this!

<font color="orange">EDIT: FYI, Estados Unidos del Americanos = USA.</font>

2ND EDIT: Where many of us <font color="orange">*live*</font>.

[Geo-King]

Intel Adds DRM to New Chips
Intel
Patents
Hardware
Posted by Zonk on Saturday May 28, @01:37PM
from the get-you-where-you-live dept.
Badluck writes "Microsoft and the entertainment industry's holy grail of controlling copyright through the motherboard has moved a step closer with Intel Corp. now embedding digital rights management within in its latest dual-core processor Pentium D and accompanying 945 chipset. Officially launched worldwide on the May 26, the new offerings come DRM -enabled and will, at least in theory, allow copyright holders to prevent unauthorized copying and distribution of copyrighted materials from the motherboard rather than through the operating system as is currently the case..." The Inquirer has the story as well.




http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/05/28/1718200&from=rss



Your Rights Online: MPAA Giving Up on Broadcast Flag... For Now?
Television
Posted by CmdrTaco on Wednesday June 01, @03:57PM
from the fight-for-your-right-to-time-shift dept.
YetAnotherName writes "The MPAA, which has worked hard to get a broadcast flag into US digital television, is unlikely to push for it, according to the EFF. Previously, the US Court of Appeals ruled that the FCC didn't have the authority to mandate the flag, and the MPAA began to strike back. Naturally, the fight isn't over yet."




http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/05/06/01/198201.shtml?tid=129&tid=17



Your Rights Online: Sony's New DRM Technique
Patents
Posted by Zonk on Tuesday May 31, @02:19PM
from the no-reburning dept.
skochak writes "Sony has introduced a new DRM scheme. You can burn a CD-R from the original once, but you can't re-burn from that first copy." From the article: "The concept is known as 'sterile burning.' And in the eyes of Sony BMG executives, the initiative is central to the industry's efforts to curb casual CD burning. 'The casual piracy, the school yard piracy, is a huge issue for us...Two-thirds of all piracy comes from ripping and burning CDs, which is why making the CD a secure format is of the utmost importance.'"




http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/05/31/1659254&tid=155&tid=188

Do you think Linux will support all this DRM crap??? Will some people start to vilify Linux if it doesn’t?

[Tedades]

How could you not copy a cd...

I guess I'll get even more pissed at my computer if longhorn is installed.
Windows XP sucked big time, and they'll gonna make it even worse if they want.

[ikkejw]

Geo-King said:
Do you think Linux will support all this DRM crap?


Never, unless Microsoft develops their own Linux distro.

[IwantMORE]

My guess is that someone will work out a way round it, they always say it will be impossible to break then some 7 year old kid works out a way.

You will still be able to copy a CD by playing it into a computer from a walkman/ext cd player via the line in and recording it, it's a bit more work but once that has been done you can copy it as many times as you like.

[Mountain Man]

ikkejw said:

Geo-King said:
Do you think Linux will support all this DRM crap?


Never, unless Microsoft develops their own Linux distro.


Actually, Linus Torvalds plans on including DRM support in a future kernel:

Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 20:59:45 -0700 (PDT)
From: Linus Torvalds
To: Kernel Mailing List
Subject: Flame Linus to a crisp!

Ok,

there's no way to do this gracefully, so I won't even try. I'm going to just hunker down for some really impressive extended flaming, and my asbestos underwear is firmly in place, and extremely uncomfortable.

I want to make it clear that DRM is perfectly ok with Linux!

There, I've said it. I'm out of the closet. So bring it on...

I've had some private discussions with various people about this already, and I do realize that a lot of people want to use the kernel in some way to just make DRM go away, at least as far as Linux is concerned. Either by some policy decision or by extending the GPL to just not allow it.

In some ways the discussion was very similar to some of the software patent related GPL-NG discussions from a year or so ago: "we don't like it, and we should change the license to make it not work somehow".

And like the software patent issue, I also don't necessarily like DRM myself, but I still ended up feeling the same: I'm an "Oppenheimer", and I refuse to play politics with Linux, and I think you can use Linux for whatever you want to - which very much includes things I don't necessarily personally approve of.

The GPL requires you to give out sources to the kernel, but it doesn't limit what you can _do_ with the kernel. On the whole, this is just another example of why rms calls me "just an engineer" and thinks I have no ideals.

[ Personally, I see it as a virtue - trying to make the world a slightly better place _without_ trying to impose your moral values on other people. You do whatever the h*ll rings your bell, I'm just an engineer who wants to make the best OS possible. ]

In short, it's perfectly ok to sign a kernel image - I do it myself indirectly every day through the kernel.org, as kernel.org will sign the tar-balls I upload to make sure people can at least verify that they came that way. Doing the same thing on the binary is no different: signing a binary is a perfectly fine way to show the world that you're the one behind it, and that _you_ trust it.

And since I can imaging signing binaries myself, I don't feel that I can disallow anybody else doing so.

Another part of the DRM discussion is the fact that signing is only the first step: _acting_ on the fact whether a binary is signed or not (by refusing to load it, for example, or by refusing to give it a secret key) is required too.

But since the signature is pointless unless you _use_ it for something, and since the decision how to use the signature is clearly outside of the scope of the kernel itself (and thus not a "derived work" or anything like that), I have to convince myself that not only is it clearly ok to act on the knowledge of whather the kernel is signed or not, it's also outside of the scope of what the GPL talks about, and thus irrelevant to the license.

That's the short and sweet of it. I wanted to bring this out in the open, because I know there are people who think that signed binaries are an act of "subversion" (or "perversion") of the GPL, and I wanted to make sure that people don't live under mis-apprehension that it can't be done.

I think there are many quite valid reasons to sign (and verify) your kernel images, and while some of the uses of signing are odious, I don't see any sane way to distinguish between "good" signers and "bad" signers.

Comments? I'd love to get some real discussion about this, but in the end I'm personally convinced that we have to allow it.

Btw, one thing that is clearly _not_ allowed by the GPL is hiding private keys in the binary. You can sign the binary that is a result of the build process, but you can _not_ make a binary that is aware of certain keys without making those keys public - because those keys will obviously have been part of the kernel build itself.

So don't get these two things confused - one is an external key that is applied _to_ the kernel (ok, and outside the license), and the other one is embedding a key _into_ the kernel (still ok, but the GPL requires that such a key has to be made available as "source" to the kernel).

Linus

(Do a Google search for "linus torvalds drm" for more articles and information.)

[avatar_58]

Mountain Man said:
Actually, Linus Torvalds plans on including DRM support in a future kernel




In other words, your damned if you do and your damned if you don't. http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif DRM is going to be here and its going to shoved down our throats.

However like all developments before it, its not fool proof. Anyone who thinks it is has had their eyes shut and their ears plugged for the last century....it will be bypassed. Mark my words...

[NutWrench]

Imagine the fun that hackers will have when they can write trojans that can use DRM to declare themselves a protected part of the operating system. (And make themselves impossible to remove, even through low-level access with live CDs, etc).

[DudeMiester]

Well I for one hope that such a virus is made, hell I'd make it myself if I could. It would permantly scare people off from using DRM products, and would force software vendors to break DRM in order to keep computers safe.

As for what Linus was saying, that's not really DRM. That's as he said, a signing mechanism, to verify the source of the file. He specifically states that what is done with that signature (e.g. denying access based on it) it outside the scope of the kernal. It makes no preference, the signature is just added information.

[Mountain Man]

DRM is fine as long as it's use exclusively for protecting a user's system from external attack. It's not so good when third party vendors plan to use it to protect the system from the user!

[Kevin Wolff]

Not to mention that you (or someone) could just remove the DRM section from the kernel source and distribute that elsewhere.

[thefly]

Can I play Tetris on this OS? Yes/No.

That is all i care about really.

[Tedades]

thefly said:
Can I play Tetris on this OS? Yes/No.

That is all i care about really.



DRM will prevent playing games on the system, only programs like Microsoft Office and Internet Explorer can be used.

Games can only be played on the x-box 360.
DRM will even prevent you from using the PS3.

[JackpotDen]

One second.

You do not have to take sides on the "MS VS LINUX" war. it's not even a war. It's like saying "I like a hammer bestest!" and another guy coming up and saying "HAH, you fool, screwdrivers are SOOOOO much better, and smartier!".

When i get the money, where's what I'm going to do :

Dual boot.

I keep my windows in case i ***** up the Linux based OS, or I feel like playing the latest hit zofmgnf not linux compatible lol @ joo game/need specific, non-open source software.

[NutWrench]

Depending on how obnoxious Longhorn is, I may go with a dual boot system in the future, as well. I'll mostly use Linux so I can get things done and only use Windows as a gaming system.

[Jeff]

Should I boycott Longhorn?




Sure. I don't plan to get it either. http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

[Mountain Man]

NutWrench said:
Depending on how obnoxious Longhorn is, I may go with a dual boot system in the future, as well. I'll mostly use Linux so I can get things done and only use Windows as a gaming system.


That's what I do now.

[Sephiroth]

What Linus means is that DRM section of the kernel will be an option much like the Driect Rendering Manager is now, you dont need it (well I dont because I own an nVidia card) so just recompile the kernel and disable DRM support, no biggie

[DudeMiester]

Sephiroth said:
What Linus means is that DRM section of the kernel will be an option much like the Driect Rendering Manager is now, you dont need it (well I dont because I own an nVidia card) so just recompile the kernel and disable DRM support, no biggie



Actually what I think he meant was signing the kernal, so you know it's offical Linux kernal. Not for any other reason.

[Sephiroth]

DudeMiester said:

Sephiroth said:
What Linus means is that DRM section of the kernel will be an option much like the Driect Rendering Manager is now, you dont need it (well I dont because I own an nVidia card) so just recompile the kernel and disable DRM support, no biggie



Actually what I think he meant was signing the kernal, so you know it's offical Linux kernal. Not for any other reason.



Actually that would be useless, since Linus already signs the kernels on kernel.org and due to the fact that if there was a signing of the binarys it would be useless, because Linux is copyrighted under the GPL, so that means that whatever you use to sign those binarys also has to come with the source, DRM doesn't work well on open source software when it comes to being restructive, for windows it wil be hell yes, but as many kernel devs said sure DRM will be in the kernel, but the only thing it will do it allow the use of restructed hardware, when it comes to running unrestricted binarys and software the kernel will allow it.

all the kernel needs to do is allow filters to be put in place by the parent process, which could radicly alter the responces given by the DRM core, totally flexible and when that adobe e-book asks if this key allows printing, youre filter just makes it say 'yup sure it does'
making DRM utterly useless.

[IwantMORE]

Lunix onboard.
MS onboard.
Apple onboard.

DRM seems to be the future. Long live open source....

[Phait]

Guys, what would it take to run a full page ad in a major newspaper explaining why DRM is bad? I would seriously like to do something like that, but I can't do it alone.

[DudeMiester]

phait said:
Guys, what would it take to run a full page ad in a major newspaper explaining why DRM is bad? I would seriously like to do something like that, but I can't do it alone.



A website and a paypal button. Oh and maybe about a week to popularise it, and another week to get the funds. Should spread like wildfire. This is a war, and the soldiers of justice. It's revolution time.

[Phait]

DudeMiester said:

phait said:
Guys, what would it take to run a full page ad in a major newspaper explaining why DRM is bad? I would seriously like to do something like that, but I can't do it alone.



A website and a paypal button. Oh and maybe about a week to popularise it, and another week to get the funds. Should spread like wildfire. This is a war, and the soldiers of justice. It's revolution time.



So who is with me?

[Phait]

Um, oh my god. Look at the rates for advertising full page in USA Today:

http://www.usatoday.com/media_kit/usatoday/ai_rates_full_circulation.htm

http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/redface.gif http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif

[Mountain Man]

And sadly, for any such campaign to be effective, you'd have to run the ad multiple times, so you're looking at mucho money.

A better idea would be some sort of grassroots effort, like the guy who took on Apple and the iPod's "18-month" battery flaw (link (http://www.ipodsdirtysecret.com/)). He walked around New York City and added his own editorial commentary to iPod posters, video taped the whole thing, then released a cleverly edited movie onto the internet. Next thing you know, he was on national TV preaching his cause, and now we see that Apple has recently settled a case that will compensate iPod owners who have encountered decreased battery life, the end result of something that cost next to nothing to get the ball rolling. Use your imagination. It doesn't have to be expensive or flashly just so long as it gets people's attention.

The biggest obstacle you're going to face, however, is that there are a lot of very wealthy people with vested interest in DRM, from Microsoft to software industry to the music industry to Hollywood, so it's going to be a fight--make that a big fight![/i]--for the public's mindshare.

[Phait]

I think if such an anti-DRM campaign ended up with say a 30% to 50% loss in computer sales that might be enough of a hit, you think?

[Sephiroth]

Do you really want to fight this? then take every closed source peaice of software you own and burn it, then "zero" write your harddisks then install an OS under the GPL licesnse why?

1) GPL doesn't allow restrants on anything and all the source must be aviliable.

2) If no one buys closed source products DRM has failed

3) No one can control the GPL, people like M$ try to keep as many users away from Linux, FreeBSD and the other clones because they know they can't touch anything that has been licsensed under the GPL and that alone is all the power we need to fight this, if all software is GPL'ed and enouph people use it, DRM'ed closed envroment will be the M$ and Apples downfall

DRM is still new tech, so if enouph people focus on something else it will fail.

[Dukefan]

Mountain Man said:
A better idea would be some sort of grassroots effort, like the guy who took on Apple and the iPod's "18-month" battery flaw (link (http://www.ipodsdirtysecret.com/)). He walked around New York City and added his own editorial commentary to iPod posters, video taped the whole thing, then released a cleverly edited movie onto the internet. Next thing you know, he was on national TV preaching his cause, and now we see that Apple has recently settled a case that will compensate iPod owners who have encountered decreased battery life, the end result of something that cost next to nothing to get the ball rolling. Use your imagination. It doesn't have to be expensive or flashly just so long as it gets people's attention.



What's sad is how misplaced those complaints were. Lithium-ion batteries are finicky things--hell, rechargable battery technology in general is, and there aren't many new developments on the horizon--and depending on usage patterns, 18 months' operation might be completely normal. Additionally, anecdotal evidence suggested that the failing battery was an anamoly, not a common occurence. Taking a single instance of a product failing, when it's likely that a multitude of factors was the cause, and using that as an excuse to vandalize property, plaster the media with complaints, and claim credit for a company's policy you really had nothing to do with, all seem fairly media-whorish to me.

Yeah, that's right, the Neistats had nothing to do with Apple's new plan. Apple announced the plan on 14 November 2003. (http://www.macnn.com/news/22054) ipodsdirtysecret.com was registered on 20 November 2003, and didn't start getting publicity until 21 November. Plus the fact that any sort of customer service policy is always months in research, negotiation, planning, and implementation before being rolled out, and the Neistats campaign was little more than a happy coincidence. Additionally, they tried to leech off their original host (http://das.doit.wisc.edu/neistatoriginal.txt) of the movie, when his only request was that they acknowledge Apple's response on the website.

That, plus they don't know the proper negation of "replacable." To think they plastered up that stupid mistake all over NYC...

[Geo-King]

Dukefan said:
What's sad is how misplaced those complaints were. Lithium-ion batteries are finicky things--hell, rechargable battery technology in general is, and there aren't many new developments on the horizon



There is some promising technology however it’s too costly right now so we will have to wait awhile.

[Mountain Man]

Dukefan said:
What's sad is how misplaced those complaints were.


Oh, I agree completely. There are many anecdotes of people with 5-year old iPods with almost 100% of their battery capacity. My iPod is almost 2-years old and still going strong.


Taking a single instance of a product failing, when it's likely that a multitude of factors was the cause, and using that as an excuse to vandalize property, plaster the media with complaints, and claim credit for a company's policy you really had nothing to do with, all seem fairly media-whorish to me.


I never said, I agreed with the guy. I only used him as an example of something that "worked" in the fact that it gained gobs of free publicity and got at least some result. As for the settlement, I'm not talking about Apple's battery replacement program which did indeed get underway long before this guy's 15 minutes, I'm talking about a recent class-action lawsuit settlement (http://ipodlounge.com/index.php/news/comments/apple-to-offer-50-credit-in-ipod-battery-settlement/) which offers to either replace defective batteries or iPods at Apple's discretion or give owners of defective units a $50 gift voucher.

[DudeMiester]

To get things back on track, who would support (e.g money or time) an anti-DRM movement/war? I know I would donate what I can, and certainly bitch/moan about it to everyone I know. If only I have pamphlets and perhaps GPL software to go with it.

Although I do have an issue with GPL fanatics, personally I feel it's someone's right to choose opensorce or closed-source for their projects. I wouldn't want such a movement to turn into a GPL zealot orgy.

[IwantMORE]

Before you start any campaign like that you need to work out what you are going to say...

DRM is crap is not going to convince people. Nor is DRM is bad because it will stop you copying music/video/software.

Get a well balanced argument that someone who knows nothing about computers will understand.

Even then and with all the money in the world you may not be able to convince more than 20% of all computer users that you are right.

[Sigma]

http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

A well-reasoned argument (or system of arguments) would be at once necessary and appreciated. Possible inspiration for such can be found in this article (http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.06/view.html?pg=1) at www.wired.com (http://www.wired.com) and this site (http://richard.pacdat.net/DRM/index.htm), maintained by a person named Richard Pitt.

On a cautionary note, the DRM/technototalitarian agenda must not be attacked too <font color="orange">*directly*</font> or frantically, lest the strutural integrity of the movement be compromised. In the current zeitgeist, it is all too easy to be branded a "reactionary" or "zealot". http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif

EDIT: Anyone else notice the convergency of DRM with invasive consumer RFID? How soon before our computers automatically order via internet everything that our spyware's reports say that we would want?

2ND EDIT: Someone should build an information clearinghouse site describing known DRM/"untrustworthy computing" http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif hooks in hardware and software (and circumnavigation methods if legal).

[Sephiroth]

DudeMiester said:
Although I do have an issue with GPL fanatics, personally I feel it's someone's right to choose opensorce or closed-source for their projects. I wouldn't want such a movement to turn into a GPL zealot orgy.



Totally agreed, infact I also support closed source as long as it doesnt contain any code that restricts usage of it.

Closed source, GPL, GNU, LGPL and many others
But it's the GPL we need to kind of hide behind, because closed source can be screwed with, the people that invested in DRM I'm pretty sure they intend to see this all the way through, at any cost, or these huge software companys wouldnt have went with the DRM approtch. Think of the GPL sort of like gate away between our base and DRM's base, kinda like the neutreal zone, none of us has control over it, but both are safe while in it.

neutreal is all we need, because the only way for DRM to win is to have it's investers use there "muscle", but there muscle doesn't work on open source because open sorce is not a company or an organization, not even an indvidual, so there is no way to use those famous bissness practaces on.

None the less if there are closed source projects that dont want any part of DRM then we should post a pitition and have these companys sign it stating they will not "sign" there binarys or encode there binarys with any form of DRM signature.

Sometimes money is not needed to fight huge corprations when you know how to go about it.

The idea of the pitition is to get enough support by closed source companys to fight back, while hiding behind the good old neutreal GPL.

Almost like the SCO lawsuit
SCO accuses Linus of code infrengement
M$ buys a million dollar unix licence off of them (no doubt for court funds) because M$ knows if SCO wins, windows doesnt have a competior and thats what they want.

but wait .. whats this? IBM out of no where says I don't think so Tim.

IBM is helping out, because they have products that depend on this Linux (there server based market would take a huge hit) so they stand up and say no this ant gonna happen.

And we as a community which are free have to do the same, we need to hide behind the GPL and hopefully companys with large server share will see that making DRM a reality will disallow the freedom they have now and doing this will cause these bigger companys to react and thats what we want.

[Sigma]

And we as a community which are free have to do the same, we need to hide behind the GPL and hopefully companys with large server share will see that making DRM a reality will disallow the freedom they have now and doing this will cause these bigger companys to react and thats what we want.



I quite agree. Vive le GPL and the benefits it brings to open and closed source factions alike. Would that more major players could be played off against each other, whether by accident or design...

[DudeMiester]

GPL is a great weapon against companies these days, but I would hardly say "Vive le GPL". It's a tool and it has certain uses, but it's hardly universal, despite what some of the crazy zealots have to say. More important then the whole Open Source movement, and in a way central to it, is the idea of choice. The GPL limits your choices in a significant way, and hence it limits its application.

[Sigma]

Ahh... Yes, I acknowledge your point and redact my post. Vive la GPL until something better arrives.

It's also probably not a good idea to deify any specific licensing agreements or arrangements, lest they change and leave us out in the cold.

Again, I applaud your post, DudeMeister. http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[DudeMiester]

Well personally if I was going to make an open source project it would be like the MIT license. Absolutely open source and public domain, meaning you can do whatever you want with the code, including incorperating it into a closed-source project (with credit given of course).

[Sigma]

Wow http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/eek.gif! Until now, I had never heard of the MIT license! Well done indeed, DudeMeister http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif!

I wholeheartedly agree. The important thing is that the reactionary (preemptive usage, zoink!) technology of DRM never manages to escape its vile crypt and see the light of day.

[Kevin Wolff]

DudeMiester said:
Well personally if I was going to make an open source project it would be like the MIT license. Absolutely open source and public domain, meaning you can do whatever you want with the code, including incorperating it into a closed-source project (with credit given of course).


That would be called leeching. I don't understand why people approve of the practice.

[Sephiroth]

^^
Exactly.

[Mountain Man]

On a somewhat related note concerning DRM, apparently Apple is planning to use to DRM to ensure that the x86 version of Mac OS will only run on Apple approved hardware (link (http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/2137787/security-chip-block-non-macs)). There goes those dreams of building a computer using off-the-shelf parts and installing Mac OS on it.

[Combat Chuck]

I wonder if Windows will make use of the same DRM to prevent itself from being installed on x86 Apples. You have to admit, there would be something ironic about buying an Apple and putting Windows one it...

[Mountain Man]

Probably not. Microsoft doesn't really care what hardware you install Windows on, just so long as you're buying their product. Apple makes most of their money from hardware sales, so they're pretty depserate to keep their software tied closely (and in this case actually locked in) to their hardware.

[Kevin Wolff]

I can understand Apple using DRM for that...barely. A better way would be to simply not make drivers for anything but what's included in the computers they sell. And, maybe, modify slightly the hardware they make so the drivers don't work with off-the-shelf components that appear to be the same.

[DudeMiester]

Kevin Wolff said:

DudeMiester said:
Well personally if I was going to make an open source project it would be like the MIT license. Absolutely open source and public domain, meaning you can do whatever you want with the code, including incorperating it into a closed-source project (with credit given of course).


That would be called leeching. I don't understand why people approve of the practice.



So would you call me a leacher when I use calculus in closed source software, because calculus is public domain information? Likewise if I borrow some programming ideas and techniques from an open source project, even large blocks of code and sub-systems, it's the same concept of re-applying information and there's nothing wrong with it imho.

[Kevin Wolff]

So would you call me a leacher when I use calculus in closed source software, because calculus is public domain information?


Calclulus isn't computer code, so it has no bearing here.


Likewise if I borrow some programming ideas and techniques from an open source project, even large blocks of code and sub-systems, it's the same concept of re-applying information


Programming ideas and code aren't the same thing. Code is copyrighted. What's the point of you (or anyone) writing code and making it available to everyone, if somebody is gonna take it and make it unavailable with whatever closed-source they're running? You might as well have done that from the beginning.

The GPL is actually like a proprietary license, but with a different requirement. Instead of signing an NDA and paying for whatever code you want to use, you simply release your changes of what you used. Fair enough, don't you think? With the "totally open" licenses, the author isn't likely to get anything (at all) back for their work. I don't really find that fair.

If you want to write code that's open, yet you'd like it if a closed-source product, there's a better way of doing it: cross-licensing. In a nutshell, "This code is GPL for everyone, except for X, Inc., which paid me $Y so they can use it in closed source." It's the same idea for educational licensing you get with high-end software, kind of. With that, the code author can get something back for their work.

[DudeMiester]

But if I was making something open source, I really don't care about recognition. I'm making this thing publicly avaiable for anyone to use for whatever they want. Sure I'll get some recognition from my immediate group of peers, like how a scientest gets recognition from a good paper, but beyond that I don't care what happends. Hence it's open source. That's the way I see it.

[Kristian Joensen]

Kevin Wolf, software patents enable riduculous thinks such as patenting something like calculus.

[Sephiroth]

What you say is very true, but lets look at things another way.. without patents companys Like M$ would be unstoppible whats to stop them from reverse engineering the software and using that exact code?

Thats why these exist, because really if you want to go to the point of "I want my code to be free" then whatever product that uses your code should also be free, otherwise all you are is a programming fountain that provides companys with code for nothing.

A licence that has some rules is a good thing, because you otherwise you have companys that steal features then 5 years down the road they claim they invented it and want a patent for it.. like the pager for virual desktop.... M$ tryed but fail because HP spoke up in the nick of time HP-UX was the first for have Virtual Desktops with a pager.

Do you want your code to become property of someone else? your knowlege there cash? That's what licences are for, to stop this from happening.

[Phait]

Well if somebody took open-source code, used it for their closed-source program, no one would know - so the license essentially failed, in that context.

[Sephiroth]

It depends.. if you made something that does something in a way you could tell it was your code, some kind of mark or symbol your code produces that has nothign to do with the actual function or what the code is suspost to do normally, then yes I can tell and yes that company would be in deep shit.

Like if you made data recovery tool that recovered data but added a header for that program that said something like "recovered by Blah" now if a compnay steals that even if they change the "recovered by Blah" it might still have the same offset and if it does them most likey it was ripped, because it would be very unliky to have a competitor have a product that does the same thing as yours does and even write the recovery tags in the same place in a file you picked...

Also the way a program behaves is unique the debug code tells all once that closed source program is disassembled or reverse engineered, so there realy is no way to get away from the license, it all depends if the author cares enough about the code to actully look into it.

[DudeMiester]

Well let me bring up the scientific paper example again. When a paper is released, it's fully possible for a company to rip off the ideas contained therin and patent it. However, there are systems in place to prevent this, and they do prevent it without forcing people to open up their closed systems that integrate those ideas. Similarly we have sites like SourceForge, where a simple search can find all kinds of public domain code. Perhaps in the short term we will have some minor issues until an equilavent system to that enjoyed by scientific papers, is put in place. However in the long run, there are no dangers or issues involved with making code pure open source without any strings attached.

From my perspective, anyone who disagrees simply has an over-zealous attachment to the GPL license. Sure it's a useful thing, but it's not universal, so don't lie to yourself or make up excuses to say it is.

[Sephiroth]

Not really, companys don't like to play by rules, they like to twist things and turn them to get any rights they can to whatever it is they want (M$ did some of this not too long ago) Making software totally free without any restructions is insane! it would come down to who has the most money to patent the most ideas and that would lead to companys dying left and right due to monopoly of patents, it doesnt matter what license it is LGPL, GPL or closed source as long as that code has a creator and he is aknoledged as the inventer then yes free software is perfectly fine otherwise no because there would only be I OS or 1 Office Suite, or even one anti virus, that would lead to total chaos! eventually 1 company would control everything, to stop this from happening thats why Patents exist, thats why Licesnes exist.

[DudeMiester]

Hello? Did you even read my example about scientific papers. I don't see any corperations ass-raping the universities with ridiculous patents. Mainly because the papers serve as prior art, and so any patent won't stand up in court. Likewise with pure open source code. Any patent on it can't stand up in court, it doesn't matter what laywers or how much money you have. You have prior art and can prove it, period.

Don't get so wrapped up in hypothetical worst-cast scenarios, that you loose any perspective on reality.

[avatar_58]

DudeMiester said:
Don't get so wrapped up in hypothetical worst-cast scenarios, that you loose any perspective on reality.



That guy wouldn't know reality if you gave him a free all day pass....so don't bother http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif


As for the whole DRM longhorn deal....this is what I find most amusing. I want to know how many of those complaining will eventually just use longhorn anyway in the end? I mean, many complained about XP (as did I) and now the majority of them use it anyway (as they should....it blows 98/ME away for god sakes...)

I plan on getting it and maybe dual-booting with the old XP just in case newer programs don't work etc.

I mean really people...your all worked up for nothing. It's just an O/S for heaven sake, not the end all decision of the world. If you don't want to use it dont.....go get a flavour of linux and be merry. In the end no one really cares....

[Sephiroth]

DudeMiester said:
Don't get so wrapped up in hypothetical worst-cast scenarios, that you loose any perspective on reality.



Oh really? Hypothical is it, then why in the recent years have comanys sued other companys for code infigment?
according to you it's all under control, if you bother to read some articals on ./ you'd find out exactly how "Hypothical" Licences are the only way to protect smaller companys from the bigger ones, and even code that comes out of uni's have licenses.. look at BSD its not part of the GPL it has it's own license its called the BSD license, buy why? according to you we don't need anything we should just by a CD Stamper and a Disc Launcher and just stamp our code and randomy just fire the pressed cds somewhere.

What next? Music artists should'nt copyright there songs?

[DudeMiester]

Sephiroth said:
Oh really? Hypothical is it, then why in the recent years have comanys sued other companys for code infigment?



All those lawsuits you're referring to were with closed source projects, where unlike open source there are no third parties to corroberate your claim to the patent or the prior art. Your example is irrelvent.


according to you it's all under control, if you bother to read some articals on ./ you'd find out exactly how "Hypothical" Licences



I never said the licences are "hypothetical", nor did I say things are absoultely under control. You are not just taking this to the absurd extremes, but you are outright lying.


are the only way to protect smaller companys from the bigger ones, and even code that comes out of uni's have licenses.. look at BSD its not part of the GPL it has it's own license its called the BSD license, buy why? according to you we don't need anything we should just by a CD Stamper and a Disc Launcher and just stamp our code and randomy just fire the pressed cds somewhere.

What next? Music artists should'nt copyright there songs?



Continued ridiculous exagerration. I never said there is no use for GPL and such things, I said they are not universal. They have a sub-set of uses from all possible applications. Likewise with my pure open source ideology.

However, there is no need for me to continue further as these posts will be deleted soon enough, but try not to get this thread locked, please. As for everyone else, please reply to the first post in this thread, so your posts aren't lost when Joe deletes this inane arguement.

PS: A quick discussion tip. Letting your emotions dictate your words is a sure fire way to fail.

[Kevin Wolff]

Ladies and gentlemen, Sepiroth!! *clapclapclap* http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif


DudeMiester said:
But if I was making something open source, I really don't care about recognition. I'm making this thing publicly avaiable for anyone to use for whatever they want. Sure I'll get some recognition from my immediate group of peers, like how a scientest gets recognition from a good paper, but beyond that I don't care what happends. Hence it's open source. That's the way I see it.


Think about this: If you're willing to make code you write open source, why should closed-source software be able to use it? I figure they should at least release their changes, to give something back to you and other users of the open code (since they aren't paying you or anything like that).

[DudeMiester]

So if I use a certain shadowing technique in my game that I read in a paper somewhere, I have some ethical responsibility to announce to the world exactly how I used it and what slight changes I made? I think not. Giving credit is one thing, telling everyone exactly how you implemented it is another. Even so, most of the time no one even gives credit, and I don't see a lot of complaints from scientists studying computer graphics.

This concept is identical to the one with code. Code is just an expression of an idea, like the written word in a scientific paper is.

[Kevin Wolff]

DudeMiester said:
So if I use a certain shadowing technique in my game that I read in a paper somewhere, I have some ethical responsibility to announce to the world exactly how I used it and what slight changes I made?


Depends if they care. You keep changing the topic away from code you write, to what others write.


Code is just an expression of an idea, like the written word in a scientific paper is.


Code is copyrighted to the author, under whatever license they choose.

[DudeMiester]

Exactly my point. There is no univeral license like some believe the GPL to be. There's nothing wrong with making code public domain with unlimited use. The scientific community presents their ideas in the same manner, and does quite well.

[Geo-King]

IT: Longhorn to Require Monitor-Based DRM
Microsoft
Posted by Zonk on Friday July 15, @11:24AM
from the it's-everywhere-it's-everywhere dept.
Mr_Silver writes "Engadget has an interesting article regarding a new feature in Longhorn entitled PVP-OPM (Protected Video Path - Output Protection Management) which detects the capabilities of the display devices you are using and manages how (and if at all) content is sent to it. In short, this means that if Longhorn detects that your monitor is not "secure" enough, then your premium video content won't play on it until you buy one that is. Who gets to decide? The content providers of course." From the article: "So what will happen when you try to play premium content on your incompatible monitor? If you're "lucky", the content will go through a resolution constrictor. The purpose of this constrictor is to down-sample high-resolution content to below a certain number of pixels. The newly down-sampled content is then blown back up to match the resolution of your monitor. This is much like when you shrink a JPEG and then zoom into it. Much of the clarity is lost. The result is a picture far fuzzier than it need be."

( Read More... | 772 of 964 comments | it.slashdot.org )
http://it.slashdot.org/it/05/07/15/155216.shtml?tid=109&tid=172&tid=158&tid=155




http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/doh.gif

I knew that the MPAA and TV manufacturers wanted to do this to HDTVs and DVD players but I had not idea it might happen to computer monitors. I don’t think this will catch on but it’s something to think about.

This is about as stupid as a story I read about requiring a finger print to play a movie in future DVD players. I don’t think that will happen. http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif

[DudeMiester]

Another good article here

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=24638

I hate DRM so much. Steam is shit! Longhorn is an anal dildo! Trusted Computing is the work of Satan! And DRM is the worst thing since Nazis!

[Geo-King]

I feel so torn. I really want to switch my main computer to Suse (http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=suse) OS but I cant right now. I wish I wasn’t so dependent on windowz. I guess ill have to wait a year. FuXoRZ!!!

[Mountain Man]

Dual boot.

[Geo-King]

I hate Dual booting. If something goes wrong with windows and i have to reinstall, The installation wipes out the boot sector of the hard drive witch means I have to find an alternative method to access my Linux partition.

I have been thinking about getting a hardware IDE A/B switch like old computers used to use so there is no possible way of corruption.

[RugerMK1]

What one man can create with relation to security, given enough time another man will find a way to break it.

And I'm not upgrading to Longhorn because I don't see anything that lures me to it particularly. Microsoft will continue to support XP heavily until its market share drops below a certain point.

[DudeMiester]

Geo-King said:
I hate Dual booting. If something goes wrong with windows and i have to reinstall, The installation wipes out the boot sector of the hard drive witch means I have to find an alternative method to access my Linux partition.

I have been thinking about getting a hardware IDE A/B switch like old computers used to use so there is no possible way of corruption.



What you can do is have them on two disks, and change the boot order when you want to boot from the other drive.

[mental stampede]

Geo-King said:
I feel so torn. I really want to switch my main computer to Suse (http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=suse) OS but I cant right now. I wish I wasn’t so dependent on windowz. I guess ill have to wait a year. FuXoRZ!!!



SuSe is really nice, and its an absolute breeze to set up and use. It seems like novell/suse has been specifically trying to make a linux distro that is as easy to use as winblows is. My main machine is currently XP pro only, But its definately going to be dual boot when Suse 10.0 comes out.

And I don't plan on getting a copy of longhorn. Ever.

[Kolusion]

From what I've seen of Windows Vista, its just got thrown in automated repair features...

Though, who the hell lets a wrecked computer fix itself?
The second my computer becomes compromized by even the smallest error, out comes the windows disk for a chkdsk.

I bought my copy of windows xp pro, and think it has been well worth it.
Since I have become security concious, I no longer touch secondary source software... You just donno whats been injected into ISO's, and for people that say dont be para, then why do ALL ISO sizes on the net very in size, hmmm?

Anyway, back to the point. Windows Vista wont offer much I beleive over XP.

Infact, its probably going to be loaded up with so much crap, its unbeleivable.

Windows XP stock has alot of junk turned on, though I find it inefficient, and have turned alot of it off... even the mouse shaddow, and have made the cursor plain 255,0,0.

Windows XP SP 1 is great. Stable, none-forcing. Not much bull shit in it... Just imagine Vista... ****in, desktop search, bla bla bla, alot of online shit, and from Microsofts reputation in networking, it will be the next SubSeven. haha

Microsoft are getting way to ****in cocky... There purposly making alot of other peoples stuff not compatible with there products, services, etc, and any doubt, that the next version of MSN Messenger, will require SP2... You cant download Windows Messenger btw anymore people... Its been embedded within SP2.

I could go on and on why I think boycotting Vista is worthy but I dont wanna cause 3D Realms web hosting account to exceed there transfer limit. :P

[Mountain Man]

Geo-King said:
I hate Dual booting. If something goes wrong with windows and i have to reinstall, The installation wipes out the boot sector of the hard drive witch means I have to find an alternative method to access my Linux partition.


That's what live discs are for.

Alternatively, install Windows on your secondary drive so it doesn't mess with the boot sector of your primary drive.

[Geo-King]

I don’t think I will be getting Vista but the 3D desktop sounds awesome!! I hope some Linux distro does something similar. I use Knoppix right now but it just not the same…

Oh and by the way even if you install both OS’s on different hard drives (primary-win/secondary-nix) and you have to reinstall windows it still ****s things up. I know from experience. Then I will have to use a Linux start up floppy (annoying) However good for security! Can you run most newer windows games and apps with WINE? Don’t worry ill switch some day soon.

[Geo-King]

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!



Windows Vista - Designed by the MPAA and the RIAA?

psoleko submitted by psoleko 1 day 10 hours ago (via http://news.com.com/Hollywood%...)

It seems like Windows Vista is going to make certain video and sound processes in the OS protected from user access. Even worse certain devices, such as monitors and TVs that don't support this standard may not work with next generation content. Content moves forward, user rights move backward.




http://news.com.com/Hollywood%2C+Microso...l?tag=nefd.lede (http://news.com.com/Hollywood%2C+Microsoft+align+on+new+Windows/2100-1025_3-5844393.html?tag=nefd.lede)


Vista hahahahaah! http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/hhg.gif

[Mountain Man]

Geo-King said:
Can you run most newer windows games and apps with WINE?


Newer games and apps, not really. Older games, maybe. Wine has certainly improved over the years, but it still has a ways to go. Seriously, if you want to play PC games then you're going to need Windows for the foreseeable future.

[Kevin Wolff]

Hefty hardware requirements for Windows Vista (http://www.apcstart.com/teched/pivot/entry.php?id=6)
This is insane.


"One of the things you'll notice about Vista beta 1 is that it runs dramatically quicker than Windows XP. The reason is the GPU is now doing a lot of work that the CPU used to have to do. There are a couple of gotchas though. The GPU needs a very high speed bi-directional bus to communicate with main memory. That has not been the case in the past, and what it means is that AGP will not be optimal.


So it'll be faster on ten times the hardware... http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif


"In Longhorn, the computer determines that a video card is not faked or being intercepted, so there's a lot of onus on the writers of the drivers. It also checks If there are digital or analogue drivers. If only digital outputs are in use, it will then check a display has HDCP capability – high bandwidth digital content protection. The communication between the video card and the device is encrypted and only decrypted by the display device itself. If all that is true, the operating system says, "ok, gotcha, we are running on a protected video path which is OK for premium content… HD-DVDs, BluRay, or a video file that someone has marked."

"If you don't comply with PVP, we're going to downscale the quality upon playback; you're going to get a lower quality version; you're not going to get the high def content the way it was intended to be viewed. You'll find that most plasma displays have HDCP already. But this isn't available in computer monitors. I have not been able to find a single monitor that supports it. We are going to see a lot of change in this space.




"In a 32 bit environment, half a gig of RAM is heaps. It's going to fly. For 64 bit you're going to want 2 gigs of DDR3 RAM.

"If you move from 32 to 64 bit, you basically need to at least double your memory. 2 gigs in 64 bit is the equivalent of a gig of RAM on a 32bit machine. That's because you're dealing with chunks that are twice the size… if you try to make do with what you've got you'll see less performance. But RAM is now so cheap, it's hardly an issue.

"In terms of disks, you're really going to want S-ATA 2hard drives with NCQ capability because it gives the OS the ability to get on with stuff while disk tasks complete. All the tier 1 and tier 2 vendors can provide this capability today.

"Thirdly, the graphics card and system bus is essential. PCI x16 is going to be very important. Any of today's 3D GPUs will be fine… we're not waiting for some mystical monster that may or may not come out. But they need to have 128MB of RAM on it. If they've only got 64 don't panic.



However, better news...

"We acknowledge that many corporate notebooks have fairly low-end integrated graphics chips. They're not exactly high performance graphics systems. For those users, we will provide a classic UI that looks like XP, and then we will have Aero that will start to make use of the GPU, and then there's Aero Glass that will demand the higher level.



They've officially lost it. http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/redface.gif

[Mountain Man]

So you're going to need a beast of a computer just to run the operating system. That's insane.

[DudeMiester]

I don't think the specs are that bad really, it's just the DRM crap what with buying a new monitor and such that pisses me off.

[Mountain Man]

You don't think it's bad to have to at a minimum double your computer specs just for an operating system?

[DudeMiester]

Yeah, ewll consider that it can unload all the extra processing if you're doing something intensive, such as gaming, it's not as bad as you would think. Also 90% of that is for the GUI alone, and personally I think it's a good thing. It'll really up the bar for the capabilities of the PC gaming market and keep it competitive with consoles.

[mental stampede]

I shall not be buying Longhorn, or any system with it pre-installed. As of right now, I have a windows machine for gaming, but the next pc I build/buy is looking more and more like a linux only box.

I just wish game developers would develop linux ports. Damn DirectX.

[Kevin Wolff]

I think it's a good thing. It'll really up the bar for the capabilities of the PC gaming market and keep it competitive with consoles.


How do you mean?

[DudeMiester]

Well if everyone needs a beefy computer for Vista, and since Vista unloads all of it's intensive stuff when a game runs, it means a LOT more beefy computers game developers can take advantage of. This means they can target a much higher range of PC, thus keeping PC games more technologically competitive.

[avatar_58]

DudeMiester said:
Well if everyone needs a beefy computer for Vista, and since Vista unloads all of it's intensive stuff when a game runs, it means a LOT more beefy computers game developers can take advantage of. This means they can target a much higher range of PC, thus keeping PC games more technologically competitive.



Or so we hope. I thought the same thing, but we don't know how well this "unloading" works. I mean, would programs like Xfire and such still work in the background? Would firewalls and Virus scanners be deprived of resources? I'm not sure its a good thing for online play.

Then again maybe we have control over how much is "freed up" through the program's shgortcut. I guess we have to wait and see.

[Kevin Wolff]

DudeMiester said:
Well if everyone needs a beefy computer for Vista, and since Vista unloads all of it's intensive stuff when a game runs, it means a LOT more beefy computers game developers can take advantage of. This means they can target a much higher range of PC, thus keeping PC games more technologically competitive.


Why should the entire PC market - which includes tons of non-game players (or those who play Solitare and similarly intensive "games") kowtow to the needs of gamers by continuing to buy overpowered (for them) hardware?

[avatar_58]

Kevin Wolff said:
Why should the entire PC market - which includes tons of non-game players (or those who play Solitare and similarly intensive "games") kowtow to the needs of gamers by continuing to buy overpowered (for them) hardware?



They do it right now anyway....reminds me of the Simpsons episode where Homer needs a PC for email and the internet and is conned into buying an expensive rig. http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

However windows has always had steeper than usual "minimum" requirements listed on the box. However its always proven wrong in the end. I mean, do you know how slow of a PC windows 95/98 can actually be installed on? Even XP is exaggerated in requirements.

Also...I'm dead sure you can remove the fancy look of vista and go back to a win95 look. All they need to do is have an option in the install to run with low visual detail. Or...have a very good autodetection system.

[Kevin Wolff]

They do it right now anyway....reminds me of the Simpsons episode where Homer needs a PC for email and the internet and is conned into buying an expensive rig. http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif


Well, it's only really started to happen recently, as computers have gotten powerful enough to provide almost nonexistent gains in speed in basic software. Like, web browsing 1GHz vs. 3GHz is a lot less different than say, 200MHz vs. 1GHz.


However windows has always had steeper than usual "minimum" requirements listed on the box. However its always proven wrong in the end. I mean, do you know how slow of a PC windows 95/98 can actually be installed on? Even XP is exaggerated in requirements.


Of course Windows can *run* on less than required...I've read about guys doing weird mods to a Pentium machine to make it run at 20MHz, and then running XP on it. It's possbible. But when it comes to running *well*, the listed requirements have never been that close. Windows 95 "required" a 386DX with 4MB RAM. It needed about 24MB RAM to actually be usable, sometimes 16. 98 required 24MB, was good on 32-64MB (depending on who you ask). I've seen XP run on 64MB RAM...not a pretty sight. 128MB, XP's "recommended" listing, wasn't so bad. Of course, it'll *run*, but hey, running is only half the fight. (I rant way too long about this topic, every time...heh.)


Also...I'm dead sure you can remove the fancy look of vista and go back to a win95 look.


Of course. This doesn't solve the entire problem, but thankfully, most of it. Also, I heard that the low-end look was gonna be basic XP, not 95.


Or...have a very good autodetection system.


Apple has something like this, where it'll turn off stuff it knows the video card model can't handle. Not really hard for Microsoft to do that, it's the same video cards.

[DudeMiester]

Well the problem is only hardcore gamers have that kind of rig. Part of remaining competitive is keeping a large market, so if everyone has a beefy computer then there are more new gamers that developers can market to. For example, kids whose parent's wouldn't otherwise buy such a computer would have one, thus allowing those kids to play high end PC games and get hooked.

[Mountain Man]

That's assuming lots of people will run out and buy expensive top-of-the-line hardware just for Vista.

[avatar_58]

Mountain Man said:
That's assuming lots of people will run out and buy expensive top-of-the-line hardware just for Vista.



Which I doubt they will....unless they are morons and feel their current PC isn't "good enough". Either that or gamers.

Personally I'm using XP until I have need to upgrade. Hopefully by then 64-bit will have taken over and I can go the whole 9 yards.