Windows Vista HD Woes
By Alexander Grundner |
August 24th, 2006
Comments (7)
[UPDATE] Is it just me, or is Microsoft going through some kind of funk? I mean… with key employees leaving the company recently (Matt Goyer for one), Vista and Vista MCE development hitting road bumps, revelations that Vista’s WMP11 will NOT support HD DVD (or Blu-ray) out of the box (will work with third-party apps like PowerDVD or WinDVD BD), premium video content can only be outputted via a secure DVI or HDMI connection with HDCP (of course this requires you to have a TV or monitor that supports HDCP), and now the announcement that high-definition DVD playback will require a 64-bit processor, is there any way they can successfully launch their next-generation product?
APC Magazine adds: “PC users will now have to choose between a PC that can play high definition content (64 bit) versus one that can potentially run older devices that only have unsigned drivers available (32 bit).” Whoa. That’s a harsh choice.
So why the requirement for 64-bit processor?
Senior Program Manager at Microsoft, Steve Riley, tells APC Magazine: “This is a decision that the Media Player folks made because there are just too many ways right now for unsigned kernel mode code [to compromise content protection]. The media companies asked us to do this and said they don’t want any of their high definition content to play in x32 at all, because of all of the unsigned malware that runs in kernel mode can get around content protection, so we had to do this.”
I don’t know about you, but all these hardware requirements and imposed DRM technologies make me uneasy, and to say the least, not interested in upgrading. Of course, this is my personal opinion, but I’d rather have a PC that lets me configure or mod it any way I like and buy a separate high-definition DVD player and rent or buy a CableCARD set-top box. In reality, TiVo should take this opportunity to add a new SKU to the product line that offers dual CableCARD support like its upcoming Series 3 and add a HD DVD or Blu-ray drive. Now all your bases are covered and your PC is left to be, well, your PC – not some studio sanctioned, locked down Frankenstein box.
What’s your take?
UPDATE #1: It looks like CNET news followed up on the story and found out through a Microsoft representative that the “decision of whether to offer that support [referring to 32-bit or 64-bit processors] won’t be made by Microsoft but rather by the third-party software makers that create DVD playback software, folks like CyberLink and InterVideo.” Yuck. This is worse news than before. At least we knew that a PC with a 64-bit processor would be required. Now, it turns out — if you read the rest of the article — that it’s up to the software vendor and its agreement with the studios. Hmmm. So I guess the million dollar question is: Let me check with the HD application I want to use before I make a buying decision? That’s just lame. Something doesn’t smell right.
It wouldn’t be so bad if the reason was because each vendor only had limited resources to develop code on one platform over another — that would make more sense.
My advice: Just buy an Intel dual-core 64-bit Vista PC when they launch and hold off on buying anything different if you’re planning on viewing high-definition DVD movies. And if you want CableCARD support, check if the PC maker offers CableLabs certified PCs. The idea here is that you want to configure your next PC with all the bells and whistles BEFORE you take it home.
Thanks for the tip, Chris Lanier!
UPDATE #2: New coverage on the “clairification” available at:
Windows Vista Team Blog
APC Magazine
Engadget
Red Herring
Personally, I like the way Thomas Ricker of Engadget sums it up: “So while Microsoft has shifted the blame, the position of the studios certainly hasn’t changed. Now who do you think is going to cave, the studios or the ISVs, once Vista is launched?”
August 24th, 2006 at 11:59 am
I’m under the impression the PMP doesn’t matter in the 64-bit vvs. 32-bit world. It should work the same under both. I don’t think everything is right here.
August 24th, 2006 at 12:06 pm
I didn’t particularly have any inclination to upgrade to Vista anyhow as it’s hardware requirements seemed ridiculous to me but this seems like the final nail in the coffin.
If I ever choose to build a HTPC, it’s looking much more likely that I’ll be choosing between a Linux distribution or something that doesn’t currently exist from Apple.
I can’t imagine that Microsoft is particularly happy with the media companies right now, this is a horrible and ridiculous position for them to be put in. Microsoft has done their job which was to make Vista annoying when it comes to cracking next-gen DVDs or other media. However, now they are being forced to make it “bulletproof” to tampering which is absolutely impossible and usually just irritates end users enough to flee to other platforms.
It is technically impossible to make the perfect lock on non-trivial content (especially media) and anyone who thinks it’s possible hasn’t got the necessary background in security.
Boy did I go off topic
You’re right Alex, this is an excellent opportunity for everyone other than Microsoft and I really pity their technical team. I would hate to be on that project with this set of requirements.
Jotham
August 24th, 2006 at 4:50 pm
False. I’d expect a few stories to roll in about it soon. 32-bit and 64-bit will both work.
Chris
August 24th, 2006 at 5:06 pm
What exactly are you saying is false? I may be misunderstanding but the point I got was that next-generation high def protected content would not play on a 32-bit platform. So, if the content providers choose not to protect their content, it should work fine on any 32-bit as well as 64-bit.
August 24th, 2006 at 6:08 pm
The story is false. Vista will support HD playback on 32-bit systems.
Here’s one of those stories that I said would roll out.
http://news.com.com/2061-10794_3-61…09427&subj=news
August 24th, 2006 at 6:38 pm
This is actually worse news. I’ll add an update with my thoughts.
August 24th, 2006 at 6:59 pm
To me, it’s an interesting strategy by Microsoft and reasonably consistent. They are following a similar approach as in the past, let third party groups work out the issues first then bundle it in.
It’s also a little bit of a slap in the face to content providers basically telling them that since they can’t offer a solution that Microsoft can realistically deploy, they will defer the problem to others.
Lastly, it could be a licensing/negotiating strategy between Microsoft and the content providers.