Slashdot Log In
Will Apple Follow Microsoft's Lead to Restrictive DRM?
Posted by
Cliff
on Thu Dec 28, 2006 12:10 AM
from the inevitable-or-avoidable dept.
from the inevitable-or-avoidable dept.
Steve Ryan asks: "The direction Microsoft are taking with Windows (for example, the DRM issues in Vista) have led me to believe Windows will soon be an OS which controls the user, rather than the other way round. I like XP, and I find it stable, but I do not want to upgrade to an OS (Vista) which is restrictive. This leaves me with either Linux or Mac OS X. I like Linux, but it may not work with my laptop, so I don't really want to risk it. OS X seems nice. I spend most of my time writing documents and surfing the web, so it should handle everything I want, and I would be happy to buy a lovely MacBook Pro. This leaves me with my question: Will Apple follow Microsoft's lead and implement a DRM loving policy?"
Related Stories
[+]
Apple: Vista Runs Hot on Macbook Pro 214 comments
PetManimal writes "Ken Mingis, Computerworld's Mac editor, has given Vista a spin on his Macbook Pro in order to review and compare hardware performance with OS X. It's not a rigorous benchmarking, but he does notice a few issues relating to power consumption: 'Since installing Vista, I have found that my MacBook Pro runs hot. No doubt Microsoft hasn't worked on power management issues that might affect Apple hardware, which leaves me to wonder whether I'm slowly cooking the motherboard of my laptop. It's not hot enough to fry an egg on the aluminum case, but my laptop is noticeably warmer than when I use Mac OS X. I've also noticed that battery life is substantially reduced. Once again, energy management for Apple hardware is not likely at the top of Microsoft's list. Once Apple writes updated drivers to work with Vista, I'd expect these issues to be addressed.'"
[+]
Hardware: Apple Unveils MacBook Pro with Core 2 Duo 673 comments
daveschroeder writes "Apple has just announced the upgraded MacBook Pro (15.4- and 17-inch models) with the Intel Core 2 Duo ("Merom") 64-bit dual core processor. The standard hard drive sizes have been increased, a FireWire 800 port has been added to all models (again, reaffirming that FireWire, and specifically FireWire 800, is not dead, and that Apple responded to customer requests to add it to the 15.4-inch model), and the optical drive is now dual-layer-write-capable on all models."
[+]
Hardware: Want To Know About the New Apple MacBook Pro? 310 comments
An anonymous reader writes to tell us about an extremely helpful user who is answering questions from all comers about the new MacBook Pro. "A few days ago, a user by the name 'bcavanau' posted on the macrumors.com forums that he had just picked up a new MacBook Pro. Forum members started asking him about features, specifications, and benchmarks. He was happy to oblige, posting responses to everyone's questions. Eventually the forum thread got out of hand, and he set up a website devoted to answering the questions. If you have a question that hasn't already been answered, email him at the address on the site. He is responding daily and sometimes within minutes. This guy is dedicated. Thanks 'bcavanau', you get two thumbs up." The link to the site is cached via the Coral Content Distribution Network.
[+]
Hardware: New MacBook Dual Core 2 Benchmarks 229 comments
ApolloX writes "New Macbook Pro Benchmarks are now available. From the article:
'Like the iMac before it, Apple's MacBook Pro underwent an upgrade highlighted by a chip swap — the Core Duo processor that used to power Apple's pro laptop is gone, replaced by the next-generation Core 2 Duo. And as with our iMac benchmarks, these updated Core 2 Duo MacBook Pro models show a modest performance gain when compared to older systems running on Core Duo chips with the same clock speeds.'
As expected, the new 15-inch Intel Dual Core 2 (2.33Ghz/2GB RAM) is the new king of Apple portables, with results for the 17-inch model still pending."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Will Apple Follow Microsoft's Lead to Restrictive DRM?
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 326 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
No, they won't follow the MS lead (Score:1)
(Last Journal: Friday October 19, @09:21PM)
If you want a Mac so badly, just buy one already (Score:1, Insightful)
Download a risk free Ubuntu Live CD and find out. I don't see what risks there are.
"OS X seems nice. I spend most of my time writing documents and surfing the web, so it should handle everything I want, and I would be happy to buy a lovely MacBook Pro."
Why spend $2000 on a laptop to surf the web and write documents? Most Linux distros come with Open Office and Firefox preinstalled, perfect for what you need.
It sounds like you're just looking for an excuse to buy a Mac. It's true that Linux has some issues with laptops but there is no risk to try it out.
Re:If you want a Mac so badly, just buy one alread (Score:5, Informative)
Does it really matter that much in reality? (Score:1)
Re:Does it really matter that much in reality? (Score:5, Informative)
Contrary to all the FUD, the only DRM you have to worry about is on "next-gen" media, and it looks like until they put the analog protection flag up it can apparently be broken (if this article is correct).
You can still rip all your mp3s or FLAC (with a supported player) off CDs and copy DVDs (with DVD shrink or similar programs). So I really don't see what all the fuss is about [yes, I would prefer no DRM, but at this point it is not very likely. For instance, you are unlikely to see a commercial HD-DVD/blu-ray player (that supports the copy protection flag) for linux, unless linux can provide some means of a protected path for content].
news to me... (Score:2)
Apple already loves DRM (Score:3, Insightful)
(http://www.nsa.gov/kids/)
Anyone that thinks Apple is better than Microsoft needs to take a history lesson. Apple acts exactly like microsoft, but is too small to be effective. Hell, the only reason we use PCs today and not macs is Steve Jobs wanted the whole computer pie and wouldn't settle for just controlling the operating system.
There's DRM and then there's DRM (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://felter.org/wesley/)
Re:Apple already loves DRM (Score:5, Insightful)
- Make sure you don't misplace your product key, in case you need to reinstall later.
- Cross your fingers when Microsoft phones home during activation to discover whether you're worthy of using Windows.
- Cross your fingers again as Microsoft checks whether you're a criminal every time you download patches.
- Cross your fingers yet again as you wonder whether end-of-life means your purchase will no longer activate.
- Remember to opt out of Windows Media Player's helpful tendency to DRM-infect files from CDs you rip yourself.
- Consider whether PlaysForSure or Zune DRM is more likely to be future-proof.
I don't deny that Apple might behave this way given the majority market share, but I think they're a long way from reaching that. If the tables are turned in ten years, I'll just do what I did to the Republicans: switch to the better candidate, even if that means Microsoft.A few mistakes in your post (Score:5, Informative)
(http://nekobox.org/)
2) Apple DRMed songs can trivially (in iTunes) be burned to a CD, opening up to a world of CD players and DVD players. If you choose to re-encode again you can transfer to additional devices other than iPods.
3) Apple has never acted like Microsoft. Microsoft has raised Windows license fees or withheld licenses from companies promoting or developing competing technologies (OS/2 and Netscape). The closest is when Apple withdrew licenses from clonemakers exactly because they did not want to only sell operating systems. Microsoft has also developed competitive technologies rather than endorsing existing solutions so they could extract more control (WMA instead of AAC, WMV instead of MPEG4, Direct3D instead of OpenGL, MTP instead of UMS, etc)
Maybe your point (Apple is a corporation, not an entity) would be better made as, "Don't trust Apple to be good by you unless it also helps them as well".
Apple already tolerates DRM (Score:5, Informative)
Theonly use of which is for OS X to recognize it is running on Apple hardware - it IS NOT USED to prevent you from running Linux or any other OS, or adding your own OS X drivers, as Microsoft had been talking about.
and apple uses DRM on every tune or movie they sell.
That you can easily remove - even the video you can simply re-record with any number of video screen capture software. This is mandated by content providers, not Apple - remember Apple is the one that brought DRM to this loose state. Microsoft is the one giving you protected video paths with Vista.
You can't burn itunes tv shows to DVD
You can if you simply copy it.
you can't transfer music from an ipod to a computer (easily)
Since iTunes recognizes ID3 tags it is childs play to copy a whole directory of music from any iPod you can mount into iTunes, and have the music all show up.
you can't transfer DRMd songs to any player but an ipod.
But you can also choose to move the songs to other formats that lack DRM and move them that way. There is an out.
People like you have been blasting Apple for DRM use for years when in fact Apple is the company that is slowly backing studios out of DRM use. the MP3 sales trial recently on Yahoo would never have been done if Apple had not locked up the popular use of DRM with Apple instead of an indsutry controlled company such as Microsoft.
Doubtful (Score:2)
The answer: Probably. (Score:1)
For those who haven't heard about the Vista DRM "features", please read this:
http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_
User control ended at Windows 2000 service pack 2 (Score:1, Troll)
(http://www.animats.com)
Windows 2000 Service Pack 2 was the last Microsoft operating system where the user was in control. With SP3, Windows Update could make your machine a slave to the mothership in Redmond. In XP, most machines were slaved to Redmond. Remember the day Microsoft rebooted everybody by remote control via Windows Update? Vista just continues the trend - you will obey the commands from the mothership, or your machine stops working.
Obey or Die - brought to you by Microsoft.
Umm.... (Score:5, Interesting)
And OS X will? (Legally?)
Anyway, Linux or BSD is guaranteed freedom while OS X you have to trust a company. It's that simple. We can analyze Apple all we want but in the end it is a company that can decide to turn one way or the other at any moment. Not so with your average Linux distro.
Or play both sides and get a Mac and dual-boot. Keep your files in open or standard formats so you can easily move to other OSes.
Linux... Wow. (Score:1)
Any issues you have can be solved on linuxquestions.org. I guaruntee that you will have all of your hardware working within a month. Most of it (if not, all of it) within a week.
Maybe. (Score:2)
I've used all of them (Score:2)
(http://www.thoughtbug.com/ | Last Journal: Thursday September 27, @05:52PM)
Vista: it's okay (as of RC2). I'm not feeling the DRM though, and will probably remove it from my system in the near future.
OSX: This is what I'm using now. With Parallels/Boot Camp/VMWare, you should be able to use anything that doesn't have an OSX port.
Linux: I really wouldn't use it for a desktop machine. At least not yet. Of course, if you're going to use it for development and not for typical office stuff, it'd probably work perfectly for you.
Anyways, out of those three, I prefer OSX myself. Hope this helps!
Not M$ (Score:4, Insightful)
Intel Macs now come with the beloved Trusted Computing module installed, and while most say that it is not used now, Apple is the only one deploying it widely to their user base. It will get used in the future.
Apple is now, and will continue the move to a media platform. Such a move is going to require very tight control over the content that is deployed to the platform. The only way that Apple can assure content providers that their content is "safe" is by deploying draconian measures to be sure that we cannot really "own" the content that we "borrow" from the rights holders, be it movies, songs, TV shows or newspapers.
Microsoft has less of interest in owning your content, sure they have to assure content providers that their content will not be used in improper ways - however their OS isn't targeted specifically to content creation and consumption. In reality, Microsoft can't really compete with Apple on completeness of media offering because they would be sued for anti-trust violations (and have).
While Microsoft has incorporated HDCP support for high-def content, the drives to play this content for pc's still range in the 000's. You can be sure when Apple starts to ship macs with blue-ray drives that HDCP will become a requirement. You also won't notice that it's there because with exception for the macpro and mac mini there is little need for external displays.
Interestingly, blue ray-discs may be encoded to play high def content via HDMI only at the studios discretion. Given that this capability exists today, Microsoft is not responsible for the movement to protect high def content.
To be clear, MS is not leading this charge. It has been built into the blue-ray standard, the hardware connections, and boards of a wide range of devices. This is a ground up attack at our ability to move content around. The MPAA and RIAA figure if you make the hardware aware of the content, then you can police the content better. They might be right... only time will tell.
If M$ does not deploy support for these standards then we will not have the ability to watch any of the content. The same will happen on OS X except that it will be less apparent due to the lack of HDCP compatibility issues across the most popular macs (MacBook, MacBook Pro). Apple will provide a better "user experience" because they control both the hardware and software that they sell to customers. Of course, Microsoft will look like the bad guy because they have little control over the hardware that ends up in consumers homes.
Re:Not M$ (Score:4, Informative)
That's pretty delusional. Firstly, Microsoft runs a music store, and has been desperately trying to control media on the desktop with Windows Media Player and the Media Center edition of their OS. And their OS is geared towards consumption of products and content. Like Microsoft applications, and third-party applications and games.
Microsoft doesn't just want to own your media - they want to oen your whole system and have the ability to shut your OS down remotely. Hell, Microsoft even tries to put DRM on your pre-existing content - for example, if you rip a CD with Windows Media Player. And their "PlaysforSure" DRM is way more restrictive than Apple's.
Just because Microsoft hasn't been particularly successful with their plans, doesn't mean they aren't trying.
Macs have no TPM! (Score:4, Informative)
(http://www.lkmc.ch/)
Geez, your post reads like you were just making it up as you went along, yet it got modded 5. Fascintaing.
Wake up (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://spiritraveller.blogspot.com/)
They are very interested in making and maintaining sweetheart deals with studios and record companies, so that they can be the middleman who sells the movies and music that those other companies put out.
Only open systems can be expected to protect your freedom. Proprietary systems are by definition intended to take away your freedom to do as you wish with them. They are designed to remove your ability to modify them as you see fit. Your freedom is only guaranteed when source is available. Anything else is just a hope and a prayer.
The short answer (Score:3, Insightful)
The short answer is "Yes."
If you want to sell the Mac in the consumer market. If you want to compete with that Vista media PC from HP or Dell and it's 50 GB HD-DVD or Blu-Ray drive. If you want to sell that big HD wide-screen monitor.
If you want to sell HD content through iTunes.
The mwre title of the next and last Harry Potter novel became headline news worldwide. Think of what the video rights to that series alone is worth. Think of what it is worth to Apple.
Laptop (Score:2, Informative)
I specify Ubuntu because it has a livedisc installer, and I know the partitioning on the installer is extremely easy to do- doesn't hurt that Ubuntu is also a fairly newbie-friendly distro.
That said, if you want to prepare yourself for a switch in general, the best thing to do is replace as many of your current apps with crossplatform and/or opensource apps, and open or standard file formats for all your documents- OpenOffice.org, gAIM, Firefox for more common stuff; xchat ( http://silenceisdefeat.org/~b0at/xchat/win32/ [silenceisdefeat.org] - several builds don't have the $20 fee), and so forth for less common apps. Mostly, applications are interchangeable, files may not be. You need to identify any sticking points first, before the switch- this applies to any platform.
Don't blame linux or os x for being "broken" when "broken" really just means "different". This is generally more a problem with old geezers/technophobes, but also a problem with people who are used to Windows's way of doing things.
It's been said by some that the people who have the hardest time switching are the "power users", because they have a lot of knowledge of "how to do *somewhat advanced thing*" that isn't the same across OSes. An example would be something like changing the screen resolution, or maybe a bit more advanced, setting up a printer; or adding/removing users.
Re:Laptop (Score:4, Insightful)
Consider the precedent... (Score:2)
(http://iconfactory.com/)
Considering that Apple is a hardware company, lost revenue from someone not paying for a license is not a huge issue. The same cannot be said for Microsoft -- they have negative hardware revenue (e.g. subsidies on Xbox and Zune devices) -- lost software revenue hurts their bottom line.
So what makes you think Apple would want a "DRM loving policy"?
-ch
Spend money, but only for OS X? (Score:3, Insightful)
(http://otc.dyndns.org/game/)
You comment that you don't mind spending $2000 for a new Mac so you can switch to OS X, but you don't consider the same scenario for Linux. So, why not consider plunking down $2000 on a ThinkPad and running Linux on it?
If most of your time is spent writing and surfing (Score:2)
(Last Journal: Monday January 02 2006, @01:32PM)
These activities are available to you without problems on Windows, Linux, and OS X.
It looks like you are doing a poor job of rationalizing your desire for a Mac.
Eh? (Score:2)
(http://biglig.blogspot.com/ | Last Journal: Friday November 19 2004, @11:48AM)
Are you just being awkward? (Score:1)
(http://www.alt-control.net/)
I currently have one of the last 12" powerbooks, fantastic machine, OSX is great, but I wish I could run linux instead (lack of 3D support, and sleep ability currently stopping me). The next machine I buy will be linux ready from the very start.
My advice: try to buy a machine which won't restrict your OS choice entirely from the start, it'll be worth it if you start itching to switch later on.
One would think they would be so inclined (Score:2)
They effectively controlled their hardware for 20 years so it isn't like they don't support the mindset. Just an observation from someone who couldn't justify getting a first Mac but who could afford a 10 mhz PC clone XT.
Microsoft's non-AV DRM approach (Score:3, Insightful)
LINUX - Since it doesn't embrasce DRM, content providers are not interested in supplying their creative to it. This means only non-commercial or very small indy media would be available. Further, since Linux is more of a "hacker's OS" it isn't well suited for households where a non-tech may want to jump on the web or download photos from the family digital camera. No Thanks.
Windows Vista - "DRM isn't just for music any more." This should be the Vista theme. Actually it has started a while back. I love how MS office refuses to register becuase the key has been used too many times - no matter the computer hasn't changed, just been upgraded with more RAM and newer hard drive. But MS can't even decide on one DRM schema so they implemented "PlaysForSure" AND a non-compatible "Zune" DRM schema - THIS IS MORE FREIGHTENING! If the DRM provider stopps supporting the DRM content you are SOL. ONE THING IS FOR CERTAIN - Either the Zune will fail or Plays FOr Sure will fail (is it too soon to think both have already failed?) and those who bought DRMed content and expensive players will have nothing to show for it. Which leads me to...
Apple OS X - Making a DRM choice is important. One thing I like about Apple is that there are no license keys to type in. There is no "registering with big brother" even for high end software. Plus Apple is REASONABLE - $129 for a single OS upgrade or $199 for a 5 license Family Pack! Apple doesn't rely on DRM to secure their software, only the media that Apple doesn't even supply. Apple fought for user rights when they negotiated DRM with the RIAA and in my opinion, the rights are pretty good. I can still burn mixed CDs to give to friends, I can play on my work, home, and laptop computers - be they Mac or Windows - and I can use on a variety of iPods. I don't pretend to have super human ears or need OGG support and since I find the convenience of iTunes out weighs the "quality" of buying the CD/DVD I have settled into enjoying the DRM Apple is selling.
This is my opinion. I have switched from Windows to Linux to the Mac and I don't see myself switching again until Windows, Linux, or another OS make radical advances.
So What you are saying... (Score:2)
(http://www.weigel-mohamed.org/ | Last Journal: Sunday August 13 2006, @09:36PM)
OSX may not run on your current laptop -- I doubt you want to risk it. No -- lets be clear... OSX WILL NOT RUN.
On to your question: yes, Apple is DRM friendly. May I recommend that that you just stick with XP? Really, its your best bet. Since you are incredibly biased against Linux, I would rather you NOT try that.
Ratboy
The State of DRM (Score:3, Informative)
(http://www.lkmc.ch/)
As far as I know it boils down to this:
Windows XP
DRM is implemented in individual applications such as iTunes. No fundamental support for DRM. You don't need to use DRM even if you use applications that potentially support DRM (again, such as iTunes).
Mac OS X
DRM is implemented in individual applications such as iTunes. No fundamental support for DRM. You don't need to use DRM even if you use applications that potentially support DRM (again, such as iTunes).
Linux
Kernel-level support for TPM.
Vista
DRM is a fundamental part of Vista. You can't get around it. [schneier.com]
Grow up! (Score:2)
(http://www.sergiocarvalho.com/)
It's not like it eats your laptop whole. Get some good distro and try it out. Stop whining. Waste your time, not other people's.
Follow MS? Follow? (Score:2)
(Append
Let's ask Steve Jobs, shall we? (Score:2)
(http://www.scarydevil.com/~peter/ | Last Journal: Monday September 26 2005, @06:53PM)
What's new is this amazingly efficient distribution system for stolen property called the Internet -- and no one's gonna shut down the Internet. And it only takes one stolen copy to be on the Internet. And the way we expressed it to them is: Pick one lock -- open every door. It only takes one person to pick a lock. Worst case: Somebody just takes the analog outputs of their CD player and rerecords it -- puts it on the Internet. You'll never stop that. So what you have to do is compete with it." -- Steve Jobs
Could Apple follow Microsoft's lead to restrictive DRM? Yes.
Will they? I don't know.
Is it likely? Apple, following Microsoft? Let's ask Steve again.
Our friends up north spend over five billion dollars on research and development and all they seem to do is copy Google and Apple.
Flamebait? (Score:1)
(http://ernst.mulder.com)
Your perception is a bit skewed (Score:2)