From: "Rich" 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_112D_01C73D9A.1C64BB50
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

   Nope.  They will pay someone or someone will step up for money.  For =
a very obvious example look at all the content protection schemes in use =
not supported by Windows from CSS for DVDs to apple's DRM for itunes.

Rich

  "Geo."  wrote in message
news:45b42e12{at}w3.nls.net...
  It's not required to play the game. If there is no support from =
software=20
  makers for DRM then the content industry has to accept that in order =
to reap=20
  the profits from that market. And as everyone knows, some profits are =
better=20
  than NO profits..

  Geo.

  "Rich"  wrote in message news:45b40c49{at}w3.nls.net...
     Nonsense.  Region coding, encryption (e.g. CSS), expiring content =
(e.g.=20
  DivX) are examples that existed without pre-existing support from =
software=20
  vendors.  These and the other forms of restrictions all exist because =
the=20
  content providers require it.  Microsoft, Apple, real as well as CE =
vendors=20
  (e.g. Pioneer, Creative, Apple) support it only because it is required =
to=20
  even play the game.  Without it you can only sit on the outside and =
watch.

  Rich

    "Geo."  wrote in message =
news:45b407ba{at}w3.nls.net...
    My point is it is the vendors who enable features like content =
expiration
    who are responsible, not the people who requested it, but the people =
like
    Microsoft who make it real.

    Geo.

    "Rich"  wrote in message news:45b405a9$1{at}w3.nls.net...
       The implementation in Windows is a framework with a set of =
capabilities
    necessary to meet the requirements of not just HD-DVD but other =
content as
    well.  It is not a hard coded implementation of any specific =
requirements.
    This is necessary to allow Windows to be  a platform for playback of =
as=20
  much
    content as possible.

       Your example of expiration is something that doesn't apply to =
HD-DVD,=20
  or
    at least I don't think so but I could be wrong.  I'm not at all =
familiar
    with what AACS allows.  It is something that applies to =
distributable=20
  audio
    and video content.  If you see it used, you should contact the =
content
    provider and/or licensor to ask why.  FWIW, an expiration date has =
been
    supported since version 1.0 or WMDRM released in 1999.

    Rich

      "Geo."  wrote in message =
news:45b3c20f$1{at}w3.nls.net...
      If the content protection in vista goes above and beyond that =
found on
    HDDVD
      players then can you really claim it was just to support =
protections
      mandated by the content? For example if vista allows downloading =
content
      that expires after a week, you can't possibly be serious that =
vista=20
  isn't
      directly responsible for extending the capabilities of HD-DVD =
content
      protection.

      Geo.

      "Rich"  wrote in message news:45b2f6e3$1{at}w3.nls.net...
         The extra CPU is to support the protections mandated by the =
content.
    The
      additional functionality is the ability to render that content at =
all.=20
  If
      you don't want to play protected content such as HD-DVD or bluray =
then=20
  you
      should care that increased CPU is required to do so.  If you do =
want to
    play
      such content then you should be pleased that it is possible.

      Rich

        "Rich Gauszka"  wrote in message
      news:45b2ec71$1{at}w3.nls.net...
        The Vista team is hallucinating equating additional CPU cycles =
used=20
  for
      drm
        with additional functionality for consumers.

        from the link
        ------------------------------------------------------------
        Will Windows Vista content protection features increase CPU =
resource
        consumption?

        Yes.  However, the use of additional CPU cycles is inevitable, =
as the=20
  PC
        provides consumers with additional functionality.
        -------------------------------------------------------------

        "John Beamish"  wrote in message
        =
news:op.tmhkksu1m6tn4t{at}dellblack.wlfdle.phub.net.cable.rogers.com...
        > In this vein ... there was the story that Vista imposed DRM in =
such=20
  a
        > manner that if (for example) you were listening to a CD that =
was
    subject
        > to DRM and you were a technician viewing (according to this =
example)=20
  a
        > digital x-ray that the x-ray would be degraded to the same =
extent=20
  that
      DRM
        > required the CD to be degraded.
        >
        > The Windows Vista team replied here:
        >
      =
http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/archive/2007/01/20/windows=
-vista-content-protection-twenty-questions-and-answers.aspx

------=_NextPart_000_112D_01C73D9A.1C64BB50
Content-Type: text/html;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable








  
Nope.  They will pay =
someone or=20
someone will step up for money.  For a very obvious
example = look at=20
all the content protection schemes in use not supported by Windows from = CSS for=20
DVDs to apple's DRM for itunes.
 
Rich
 

  "Geo." <georger{at}nls.net>">mailto:georger{at}nls.net">georger{at}nls.net>
wrote=20
  in message news:45b42e12{at}w3.nls.net...It=
's not=20
  required to play the game. If there is no support from software =
makers for=20
  DRM then the content industry has to accept that in order to reap =
the=20
  profits from that market. And as everyone knows, some profits are =
better=20
  than NO
profits..Geo."Rich"
<{at}> wrote in =
message news:45b40c49{at}w3.nls.net...&nbs=
p; =20
  Nonsense.  Region coding, encryption (e.g. CSS), expiring content =
(e.g.=20
  DivX) are examples that existed without pre-existing support from =
software=20
  vendors.  These and the other forms of restrictions all exist =
because=20
  the content providers require it.  Microsoft, Apple, real as =
well as=20
  CE vendors (e.g. Pioneer, Creative, Apple) support it only because =
it is=20
  required to even play the game.  Without it you can only sit =
on the=20
  outside and watch.Rich 
"Geo." <georger{at}nls.net>">mailto:georger{at}nls.net">georger{at}nls.net>
wrote in =
message news:45b407ba{at}w3.nls.net...&nbs=
p; My=20
  point is it is the vendors who enable features like content=20
  expiration  who are responsible, not the people who requested =
it, but=20
  the people like  Microsoft who make it
real. =20
  Geo.  "Rich" <{at}>
wrote in message news:45b405a9$1{at}w3.nls.net...=
    =20
  The implementation in Windows is a framework with a set of=20
  capabilities  necessary to meet the requirements of not just =
HD-DVD=20
  but other content as  well.  It is not a hard coded=20
  implementation of any specific requirements.  This is =
necessary to=20
  allow Windows to be  a platform for playback of as =
much =20
  content as
possible.     Your
example of=20
  expiration is something that doesn't apply to HD-DVD,
or  =
at=20
  least I don't think so but I could be wrong.  I'm not at all=20
  familiar  with what AACS allows.  It is
something that =
applies=20
  to distributable audio  and video
content.  If you =
see it=20
  used, you should contact the content  provider and/or =
licensor to ask=20
  why.  FWIW, an expiration date has been 
supported since =
version=20
  1.0 or WMDRM released in 1999.  =
Rich   =20
  "Geo." <georger{at}nls.net>">mailto:georger{at}nls.net">georger{at}nls.net>
=
wrote in=20
  message news:45b3c20f$1{at}w3.nls.net...=
   =20
  If the content protection in vista goes above and beyond that found=20
  on  HDDVD   
players then can you really =
claim it=20
  was just to support protections   
mandated by the =
content?=20
  For example if vista allows downloading
content    =
that=20
  expires after a week, you can't possibly be serious that vista=20
  isn't    directly
responsible for extending the =

  capabilities of HD-DVD content   =20
  protection.   
Geo.    =
"Rich"=20
  <{at}> wrote in message news:45b2f6e3$1{at}w3.nls.net...=
      =20
  The extra CPU is to support the protections mandated by the =
content. =20
  The    additional functionality is
the ability to =
render=20
  that content at all. If   
you don't want to =
play=20
  protected content such as HD-DVD or bluray then =
you   =20
  should care that increased CPU is required to do so.  If you do =
want=20
  to  play    such
content then you should =
be=20
  pleased that it is possible.   =20
 
Rich     
"Rich Gauszka" <gauszka{at}dontspamhotmail.commailto:gauszka{at}dontspamhotmail.com">gauszka{at}dontspamhotmail.com
A>>=20
  wrote in message    news:45b2ec71$1{at}w3.nls.net...=
     =20
  The Vista team is hallucinating equating additional CPU cycles used=20
  for   
drm      =
with=20
  additional functionality for =
consumers.     =20
  from the link     =20
  =
------------------------------------------------------------ &nb=
sp;   =20
  Will Windows Vista content protection features increase CPU=20
  resource     =20
 
consumption?     
Yes.  However, =
the use=20
  of additional CPU cycles is inevitable, as the=20
  PC     
provides consumers with =
additional=20
  functionality.     =20
  =
-------------------------------------------------------------&nbs=
p;    =20
  "John Beamish" <JLBeamish{at}rogers.com>">mailto:JLBeamish{at}rogers.com">JLBeamish{at}rogers.com>
=
wrote in=20
  message      news:op.tmhkksu1m6tn4t{at}dellblack.wlfdle.phub.net.cable.rogers.com..=
.     =20
  > In this vein ... there was the story that Vista imposed DRM in =
such=20
  a     
> manner that if (for =
example) you=20
  were listening to a CD that was =20
  subject     
> to DRM and you were a=20
  technician viewing (according to this example)=20
  a     
> digital x-ray that the =
x-ray=20
  would be degraded to the same extent
that   =20
  DRM      >
required the CD to be=20
  degraded.     =20
  >     
> The Windows Vista team =
replied=20
  here:     
>    http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/archive/2007/01/20=
/windows-vista-content-protection-twenty-questions-and-answers.aspx">http=
://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/archive/2007/01/20/windows-vis=
ta-content-protection-twenty-questions-and-answers.aspx

------=_NextPart_000_112D_01C73D9A.1C64BB50--

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