No Info Rights Management for Office:Mac says M$!?

I'm only replying to two points, one because I think it's important to clear up a point and another because it's on topic.

Originally posted by hulkaros
Gimme a break... They stop supporting NT even on Wintels... Yeah... Me too, have that Spectrum loading Commando via tape... And of course nobody wanted it because the implementation of that time and because they didn't want to improve it was FUBAR compared to i386... As for CE: I cannot exactly use it for PhotoShop, can I? What's next? You gonna tell me that M$ Watches are the next big thing for computers?

Wrong. Win2K still supports Alpha, it is the last version that supports a non x86 platform. So from NT3.1 to Win2K, that's what over 10 years of supporting some other platform other than x86. The implementation of each NT version (I include Win2K since it is just NT renamed) was EXACTLY the same for ALL platforms they supported. What are you basing your information on here. Did you actually use any of these versions? Where you involved in the corp. world when they were trying to make decisions on whether to run NT on a non x86 platform? Are you aware of the history of NT and the non x86 support. It sounds like you are just stating some opinions that have no basis in reality. To say that they didn't succeed because of FUBAR or because the non x86 versions were not "up to date" is patently WRONG.


What about PGP? Password protected zipped files? Scrumbled files? Etc? These aren't enough? Give yourself a break... YOU are trying to mis-inform us: A feature? Yes! A lock-in feature that is... Because for the average Joe out there he/she will read that the new M$ product has this awesome feature and because other products do not have it (even the older ones from M$) he/she would go ahead and buy it even if he/she will NEVER use it...
Click to expand...

PGP/Password protected ZIP/et al DO NOT give you the same types of features that a well thought out DRM support can. They can't prevent the user from printing the document (either way they can't prevent you from doing screen caps, unless M$ also modifies the base OS to prevent this as well, which would be useful). They can't prevent you from forwarding/copying the document and simply providing someone else with your password. They can't limit the number of times the document is viewed.

And once again, even from a logical standpoint, if one chooses not to apply DRM to their documents, how is this a "locking in" feature? You STILL haven't showed how this is the case. "M$ convinces people that they need it and people will run out and buy it" is your only argument for how this is evil M$ at work?

If I read you ok, my reply is: Since when Evil doesn't like Death? They are one and the same...
Click to expand...

This statement pretty much sums things up. If you can't see the difference then there is nothing more to say.

Like I said, if you want to startup another thread over in Cafe to "discuss" M$ and Intel some more, then I'll be happy to banter. We should try to keep this on topic, ie DRM and Office.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by binaryDigit
Like I said, if you want to startup another thread over in Cafe to "discuss" M$ and Intel some more, then I'll be happy to banter. We should try to keep this on topic, ie DRM and Office.

Nah! I'll make it easier for you: You are correct... I don't know what I'm talking about... M$ is the greatest company... DRM is the next big thing from M$... Wintel is the only computer platform that needs to exist... Wintel people are offering SO many GREAT technologies to the masses almost free... And of course you are the best... Oh! Do yourself a favor and ignore my posts here... I'm trolling and I'm a pro Wintel basher with no logical reasons... Wintel rules!


Still, that doesn't change the fact that Wintel is the Dark Side of the Force ;) :D :rolleyes:
 
Originally posted by sheepguy42
I will send that customer to a URL of software that will inevitably exist that cracks DRM in these docs, and opens them anyway. And I will send them this URL in a secure email from Mac OS X using SSL/SSH whatever security we use for em@il.:)
Click to expand...

If you mean that you will send the person sending you the drm protected doc this url, then they will promptly sue you through the DMCA. If they send you a DRM protected doc and you ask them to send a non DRM protected doc, if they refuse, then don't do business with them. If you have no choice, then well, you have no choice. Keep in mind that one thing that DRM is supposed to do that your emailing through SSL/SSH won't do is prevent the person from forwarding your email on to whoever they felt like. So while no one can peek into your email while in-transit, once it gets to the other person you have no way of preventing them from doing anything (though you could put a more restictive copyright on your email).
 
Originally posted by binaryDigit
If you mean that you will send the person sending you the drm protected doc this url, then they will promptly sue you through the DMCA.
Click to expand...
Why would they sue me for informing them of the inevitable failure of the document's security feature?
Keep in mind that one thing that DRM is supposed to do that your emailing through SSL/SSH won't do is prevent the person from forwarding your email on to whoever they felt like. So while no one can peek into your email while in-transit, once it gets to the other person you have no way of preventing them from doing anything (though you could put a more restictive copyright on your email).
Click to expand...
But this goes back to the point that all one needs is a simple "Print Screen" or screen grab. Then forward the data from the protected doc - which, as this scenario shows - does NOT stop people from forwarding the info contained therein.
 
You'll at the very least lose the editability. AND you need means to open the file in order to copy its content.
 
Originally posted by fryke
You'll at the very least lose the editability. AND you need means to open the file in order to copy its content.
Click to expand...

...similar apps? Aren't more or less the same thing? You can secure them, protect them from editing and stuff... How come and all of the sudden this DRM technology will be any better for documents? Other of course than having DRM work its thing for audio, video, etc. files... I'm talking about DRM documents as in new Office...

Also, isn't this DRM having a big flaw in the first place, like supporting only Wintel (Windows OSes, Windows Media Player, Office, etc)? What about all other platforms out there like:
-Linux (all versions)
-Unix (all versions)
-Mac OS X
-Other potential OSes

If I'm not mistaken this DRM is bad for computing platforms other than the Wintel one and it SO clear that it is another trick to mess the computer world, isn't it? Please Fryke, let us know! ::love:: Thank you in advance... ;)
 
Originally posted by sheepguy42
But this goes back to the point that all one needs is a simple "Print Screen" or screen grab. Then forward the data from the protected doc - which, as this scenario shows - does NOT stop people from forwarding the info contained therein.
Click to expand...

The insidious thing is that that is where they are taking things with the DRM stuff. So when you took your print screen it would not include the actual DRM protected content. It would probably just be blank or have some "Protected Content" stuff sprinkled about where you thought the image would be. That would be assured by the OS and the hardware. The only way to copy the content would be to go via the analogue hole and type it in by hand from the screen or OCR it from the hardcopy if you were allowed to print it.

As someone else mentioned what about Linux and the like. Well they are totally out of the game unless someone is able to produce a DRM enabled version which can make the same guarantees. If not they will not even get the keys to even run on the machine or open the "protected content" in the first place. When you think about the paradoxical implications there it is clear that such a think will never happen or could never honestly claim to be Linux.

The big media companies are actively pressing for laws to make general computers like we all know and love illegal by requiring that every computer include DRM on the hardware level.

Yes you should be afraid.

-Eric
 
Originally posted by lurk
The big media companies are actively pressing for laws to make general computers like we all know and love illegal by requiring that every computer include DRM on the hardware level.

Yes you should be afraid.

-Eric
Click to expand...
I am very afraid. And since I am writing a research paper on that very issue, I have begun visitning DigitalConsumer.org every day.:(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top