From: "Rich Gauszka" 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0037_01C73D91.9AE1F3C0
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

There's content protection  and there is consumer abuse

http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html

Alongside the all-or-nothing approach of disabling output, Vista = requires
that any interface that provides high-quality output degrade = the signal
quality that passes through it if premium content is present. = This is
done through a "constrictor" that downgrades the signal to a =
much lower-quality one, then up- scales it again back to the original =
spec, but with a significant loss in quality. So if you're using an =
expensive new LCD display fed from a high- quality DVI signal on your =
video card and there's protected content present, the picture you're =
going to see will be, as the spec puts it, "slightly fuzzy", a
bit like = a 10-year-old CRT monitor that you picked up for $2 at a yard
sale [Note = F]. In fact the specification specifically still allows for
old VGA = analog outputs, but even that's only because disallowing them
would = upset too many existing owners of analog monitors. In the future
even = analog VGA output will probably have to be disabled. The only thing
that = seems to be explicitly allowed is the extremely low-quality TV-out,
= provided that Macrovision is applied to it.

  "Rich"  wrote in message news:45b405f9$1{at}w3.nls.net...
     So you think that HD DVD or bluray would have been released without =
any standard for content protection?  In what fantasy world do you live?

  Rich

    "Geo."  wrote in message =
news:45b3c353$1{at}w3.nls.net...
    The specifications from the standards committee is what makes the =
mandate=20
    possible, and in itself mandates the limits of those capabilities.

    Geo.

    "Rich"  wrote in message news:45b38858{at}w3.nls.net...
       You are confused.  Microsoft may have participated in the =
standards=20
    committees on the specifications.  As an implementor and =
consequently an=20
    interested party, membership seems like a good idea.  The =
specifications=20
    don't mandate that content must be protected.  It's the content =
providers=20
    that make this mandate.

    Rich


------=_NextPart_000_0037_01C73D91.9AE1F3C0
Content-Type: text/html;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable








There's content protection
 and =
there is=20
consumer abuse
 
http:=">http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html">http:=
//www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html
 
Alongside the all-or-nothing approach of disabling output, Vista =
requires=20
that any interface that provides high-quality output degrade the signal = quality=20
that passes through it if premium content is present. This is done = through a=20
"constrictor" that downgrades the signal to a much lower-quality
one, = then up-=20
scales it again back to the original spec, but with a significant loss = in=20
quality. So if you're using an expensive new LCD display fed from a = high-=20
quality DVI signal on your video card and there's protected content = present, the=20
picture you're going to see will be, as the spec puts it, "slightly =
fuzzy", a=20
bit like a 10-year-old CRT monitor that you picked up for $2 at a yard =
sale [Not=">http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html#f">Not=
e F].=20
In fact the specification specifically still allows for old VGA analog = outputs,=20
but even that's only because disallowing them would upset too many = existing=20
owners of analog monitors. In the future even analog VGA output will = probably=20
have to be disabled. The only thing that seems to be explicitly allowed = is the=20
extremely low-quality TV-out, provided that Macrovision is applied to =
it.
 

  "Rich" <{at}> wrote in message news:45b405f9$1{at}w3.nls.net...
     So you
think that HD DVD =
or bluray=20
  would have been released without any standard for content =
protection?  In=20
  what fantasy world do you live?
   
  Rich
   
  
    "Geo." <georger{at}nls.net>=20">mailto:georger{at}nls.net">georger{at}nls.net>=20
    wrote in message news:45b3c353$1{at}w3.nls.net...The=20
    specifications from the standards committee is what makes the =
mandate=20
    possible, and in itself mandates the limits of those=20
   
capabilities.Geo."Rich"
<{at}> wrote in message =
news:45b38858{at}w3.nls.net...&nbs=
p; =20
    You are confused.  Microsoft may have participated in the =
standards=20
    committees on the specifications.  As an implementor and=20
    consequently an interested party, membership seems like a good=20
    idea.  The specifications don't mandate that content must =
be=20
    protected.  It's the content providers that make this=20
   
mandate.Rich

------=_NextPart_000_0037_01C73D91.9AE1F3C0--

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5