Vista & XP Media Center Support Community Vista & XP Media Center Support Community Vista & XP Media Center Support Community Vista & XP Media Center Support Community Vista & XP Media Center Support Community Vista & XP Media Center Support Community Vista & XP Media Center Support Community Vista & XP Media Center Support Community Vista & XP Media Center Support Community
Vista & XP Media Center Support Community Vista & XP Media Center Support Community Vista & XP Media Center Support Community Vista & XP Media Center Support Community Vista & XP Media Center Support Community Vista & XP Media Center Support Community Vista & XP Media Center Support Community Vista & XP Media Center Support Community Vista & XP Media Center Support Community
Vista & XP Media Center Support Community Vista & XP Media Center Support Community Vista & XP Media Center Support Community Vista & XP Media Center Support Community Vista & XP Media Center Support Community Vista & XP Media Center Support Community Vista & XP Media Center Support Community Vista & XP Media Center Support Community


Go Back   Australian Media Center Community > Media Center News, Articles & Information > Media Center News

Community Information

A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection
this thread has 41 replies and has been viewed 4623 times
Comment
 
Article Tools
A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection
A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection
Published by Mike
27th December 2006
A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection

written by Peter Gutmann, Department of Computer Science, University of Auckland
Last updated 27 December 2006

Executive Summary

Windows Vista includes an extensive reworking of core OS elements in order to provide content protection for so-called "premium content", typically HD data from Blu-Ray and HD-DVD sources. Providing this protection incurs considerable costs in terms of system performance, system stability, technical support overhead, and hardware and software cost. These issues affect not only users of Vista but the entire PC industry, since the effects of the protection measures extend to cover all hardware and software that will ever come into contact with Vista, even if it's not used directly with Vista (for example hardware in a Macintosh computer or on a Linux server). This document analyses the cost involved in Vista's content protection, and the collateral damage that this incurs throughout the computer industry.

Executive Executive Summary

The Vista Content Protection specification could very well constitute the longest suicide note in history.

Introduction

This document looks purely at the cost of the technical portions of Vista's content protection [Note A]. The political issues (under the heading of DRM) have been examined in exhaustive detail elsewhere and won't be commented on further, unless it's relevant to the cost analysis. However, one important point that must be kept in mind when reading this document is that in order to work, Vista's content protection must be able to violate the laws of physics, something that's unlikely to happen no matter how much the content industry wishes it were possible. This conundrum is displayed over and over again in the Windows content-protection specs, with manufacturers being given no hard-and-fast guidelines but instead being instructed that they need to display as much dedication as possible to the party line. The documentation is peppered with sentences like:

"It is recommended that a graphics manufacturer go beyond the strict letter of the specification and provide additional content-protection features, because this demonstrates their strong intent to protect premium content".

This is an exceedingly strange way to write technical specifications, but is dictated by the fact that what the spec is trying to achieve is fundamentally impossible. Readers should keep this requirement to display appropriate levels of dedication in mind when reading the following analysis [Note B].

Disabling of Functionality

Vista's content protection mechanism only allows protected content to be sent over interfaces that also have content-protection facilities built in. Currently the most common high-end audio output interface is S/PDIF (Sony/Philips Digital Interface Format). Most newer audio cards, for example, feature TOSlink digital optical output for high-quality sound reproduction, and even the latest crop of motherboards with integrated audio provide at least coax (and often optical) digital output.

Since S/PDIF doesn't provide any content protection, Vista requires that it be disabled when playing protected content. In other words if you've invested a pile of money into a high-end audio setup fed from a digital output, you won't be able to use it with protected content. Similarly, component (YPbPr) video will be disabled by Vista's content protection, so the same applies to a high-end video setup fed from component video.

Indirect Disabling of Functionality

As well as overt disabling of functionality, there's also covert disabling of functionality. For example PC voice communications rely on automatic echo cancellation (AEC) in order to work. AEC requires feeding back a sample of the audio mix into the echo cancellation subsystem, but with Vista's content protection this isn't permitted any more because this might allow access to premium content. What is permitted is a highly-degraded form of feedback that might possibly still sort-of be enough for some sort of minimal echo cancellation purposes.

The requirement to disable audio and video output plays havoc with standard system operations, because the security policy used is a so-called "system high" policy: The overall sensitivity level is that of the most sensitive data present in the system. So the instant any audio derived from premium content appears on your system, signal degradation and disabling of outputs will occur.

What makes this particularly entertaining is the fact that the downgrading/disabling is dynamic, so if the premium-content signal is intermittent or varies (for example music that fades out), various outputs and output quality will fade in and out, or turn on and off, in sync. Normally this behaviour would be a trigger for reinstalling device drivers or even a warranty return of the affected hardware, but in this case it's just a signal that everything is functioning as intended.

Contents

Article Tools

<< <    Next Page: Decreased Playback Quality (Page 1 of 13)    >  >>
  #1 (permalink)  
By arkay on 27th December 2006, 09:23 AM
Re: A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection

My God.

If even 10% of what is written here is accurate then we're buggered.

Keep your existing hardware people and boycott Vista and ANYTHING relating to Premium Content.

I'm damned if I'll be made pay more for THEIR protection by fat corps who think they own the world.

If this eventuates then I'll be watching free content encoded ONLY with free codecs.

Even Bill has stated the content protection in Vista is over the top.

It would seem to me that MS has just prevented itself from being in the media race (and possibly the OS market), at all.

At present the majority of MCE users are technically minded people, it never really got to be a household capable product. It stands to reason that with a user base of technical people who understand the ramifications of Content Protection that the whole lot will be dropped like a hot potatoe.

Even worse still is that if the hardware market choose to be led around by their respect di&*s then the future appears very dim.

At least Matrox won't be involved with this and there are other hardware alternatives.

Who knows. Maybe a few new hardware vendors will pop up specifically for the non MS market and computing won't be further destroyed by these rogues.

The level to which these guys will go to protect their markets is sickening and one wonders how it could even be considered legal (though the legal system has no chance of being able to keep up with these clowns).

Seems like one hell of a way to popularise PC based PVR's.... It's more likely that MCE and HD-DVD will become the betamax of the future.

Cheers,

Arkay.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
By ExtremePC on 27th December 2006, 09:41 AM
Re: A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection

Quote:
Originally Posted by arkay View Post
My God.

If even 10% of what is written here is accurate then we're buggered.

Keep your existing hardware people and boycott Vista and ANYTHING relating to Premium Content.

I'm damned if I'll be made pay more for THEIR protection by fat corps who think they own the world.

If this eventuates then I'll be watching free content encoded ONLY with free codecs.

Even Bill has stated the content protection in Vista is over the top.

It would seem to me that MS has just prevented itself from being in the media race (and possibly the OS market), at all.

At present the majority of MCE users are technically minded people, it never really got to be a household capable product. It stands to reason that with a user base of technical people who understand the ramifications of Content Protection that the whole lot will be dropped like a hot potatoe.

Even worse still is that if the hardware market choose to be led around by their respect di&*s then the future appears very dim.

At least Matrox won't be involved with this and there are other hardware alternatives.

Who knows. Maybe a few new hardware vendors will pop up specifically for the non MS market and computing won't be further destroyed by these rogues.

The level to which these guys will go to protect their markets is sickening and one wonders how it could even be considered legal (though the legal system has no chance of being able to keep up with these clowns).

Seems like one hell of a way to popularise PC based PVR's.... It's more likely that MCE and HD-DVD will become the betamax of the future.

Cheers,

Arkay.
It seems to me the reasons for all this ridiculous use of technology is two pronged, one is to keep market share by legislation instead of inovation, the other is content providers assuming everyone is a criminal before the fact.

The former is just wrong on so many levels its so sad.

As for the later is it any wonder, what with the majority of movie and music content these days specifically developed to have a shelf life of weeks or days (read...S H I T music, S H I T movies) who in their right mind would want to pay for drivel that keeps you entertained for only nano seconds.

Arkay I'm with you, Long Live the Revolution!
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
By TiggerK on 27th December 2006, 03:12 PM
Re: A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection

Wow, scary stuff. We'll have to wait and see how it all eventuates. I'm optimistic that solutions will be found, and we enthusiasts will be OK, but as for Joe Public........ not so confident.

As if the whole HD concept isn't already confusing/misleading/overhyped/poorly implemented already, now Content Protection looms large on the horizon.

So, assuming a Blu-Ray/HD-DVD equipped Vista Media Centre PC connected via HDMI to an HDCP capable 1080i/p HD Screen will play their latest HD Bourne Supremacy disc, then probably most consumers will be fine with that. Not ideal for those of us wanting more flexibility though....

It's this bit that really gets me baffled/angry/sceptical/cynical/amazed/not surprised.

Quote:
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. 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.
What the???

Cheers
TiggerK
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
By rosst on 27th December 2006, 09:08 PM
Re: A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection

Well if this is the way Microsoft want's to go I just hope there are improvements to other o/s like Linux.

Then the general public can have a real choice of what O/S they use. At the moment if you have any computing knowledge using Linux is fine but needs to be more user friendly for the basic home user.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
By intrepid on 27th December 2006, 10:53 PM
Re: A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection

Sounds like garbage to me. Sure DRM is a bitch, but Microsoft has to do what the owners tell them to....

As for the other 12 pages... well I saw nothing that sounded unbias to me:
- There were quotes from ATi, taken out of context that 'seemingly' attacked Microsoft's work on Vista - ah, did you know that ATi co-designed the graphics system in Vista???
- Drivers will be better, not worse. x64 systems can only use certified (low-crash) drivers.
- Vista will need better hardware than XP... who wouldn't expect that? It's 5 years newer!

I could go on for ages, but I can't be bothered. This is a publicity stunt.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
By ExtremePC on 28th December 2006, 03:51 PM
Re: A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection

Quote:
Originally Posted by intrepid View Post
Sounds like garbage to me. Sure DRM is a bitch, but Microsoft has to do what the owners tell them to....

As for the other 12 pages... well I saw nothing that sounded unbias to me:
- There were quotes from ATi, taken out of context that 'seemingly' attacked Microsoft's work on Vista - ah, did you know that ATi co-designed the graphics system in Vista???
- Drivers will be better, not worse. x64 systems can only use certified (low-crash) drivers.
- Vista will need better hardware than XP... who wouldn't expect that? It's 5 years newer!

I could go on for ages, but I can't be bothered. This is a publicity stunt.
Intrepid, could you please stay on topic. The issue is about cotent providers and the hoops they are forcing MS through. This will / already has been be implimented in Vista its not garbage at all. And as for being biased your absolutly correct it is, but you've missed the point its biased against us the users.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
By intrepid on 28th December 2006, 05:42 PM
Re: A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection

@ Extreme PC
Your right, I was a little off track. But I was simply defending MS -
Quote:
Originally Posted by arkay View Post
My God.Keep your existing hardware people and boycott Vista and ANYTHING relating to Premium Content.
We should certainly not boycott Vista because Microsoft has implemented the security measures they were told they had to implement - if they didn't do this, we wouldn't have blu-ray/hd-dvd on our PCs! They are in a competitive market and have to do what they have to do.

And as for what I called 'garbage' - yes, these features are a nuisance and will cause minor slowdowns for PCs, but a computer capable of running Vista can handle this stuff without a worry. Hardware may go up in price by a few dollars (literally), but it won't suffer performance losses or loss of features.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
By bella on 28th December 2006, 05:57 PM
Re: A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection

What's actually new? Deep down we knew all of this didn't we?

NO VISTA for me, I am with Arkay and Extreme.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
By arkay on 28th December 2006, 06:33 PM
Re: A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection

Quote:
Originally Posted by intrepid View Post
@ Extreme PC
if they didn't do this, we wouldn't have blu-ray/hd-dvd on our PCs!
and WITH it who wants Blu-ray/hd-dvd?

Quote:
And as for what I called 'garbage' - yes, these features are a nuisance and will cause minor slowdowns for PCs, but a computer capable of running Vista can handle this stuff without a worry. Hardware may go up in price by a few dollars (literally), but it won't suffer performance losses or loss of features.
So easily justified isn't it. Yet your rights as a consumer just disappeared. I'll be buying a Sony Blu-Ray hardware player and Vista/HD-DVD can stay well away.

It's not about the OS, or MCE, it's about the fact that MS will quite happily quash our rights to turn some $$$ and the fact that they are prepared to risk OS performance across the board for this is sickening. Yes, faster hardware, better gfx required.. Really seems to suit the business model. Same old same old and this time, if it gets off the ground, it will hurt far more than the few of us PC PVR people.

Divx tried to implement a dial home pay per view dvd player some time back, sold 1 million players before people got off that road to hell. This is just another path, in the hands of companies all too adept at steering the unwary down that path.

Why the hell they don't just make a hardware PVR (ala Xbox360), closed system, closed codecs, protected to hell is beyond me. They choose to implement this into standard PC software and hardware.

Cheers,

Arkay.
Reply With Quote
Comment

Bookmarks

Article Tools


Similar Threads
Article Article Starter Category Comments Last Post
Vista Licensing Changes - Everything You've Read Is Wrong! supafly Vista Media Center - The Software 0 16th October 2006 10:42 AM
Windows Vista Premium 2007 Requirements Detailed NedKelly Vista Media Center - The Software 24 28th September 2006 12:19 PM
Microsoft Announces Broad Partner Support for Windows Vista Mike Vista Media Center - The Software 1 17th July 2006 12:51 PM
Windows Vista - more version information Mike Media Center News 0 19th March 2006 06:34 AM
Windows Vista - Next OS From Microsoft? Mike Media Center News 1 28th July 2005 08:30 AM

Advertisers
Terms Of Service - Contact Us - Advertise With Us - Archive - Privacy Statement - FAQ -

Microsoft©, Windows XP©, Windows XP Media Center© & Windows Vista© are registered trademarks of Microsoft Corporation.
www.xpmediacentre.com.au has no relationship with, nor is affiliated in any way with Microsoft Corporation.
All original content on this website © 2004 - 2008 xpmediacentre.com.au, All rights reserved
Forum by vBulletin Version 3.7.1 - Copyright Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC7

Article powered by GARS 2.1.8m ©2005-2006 Portal by: VBAdvanced CMPS v3.0.1

Local time now is 10:04 AM AEDT.