Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: NicoV who wrote (218434)	12/1/2006 1:36:08 PM
From: g_w_north	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

<The only reason why people are against DRM is because they want to illegally copy music or movies.> I'm against DRM because I want the media I purchased to work with the hardware I have purchased. The industry is becoming a mess and extremely frustrating. I think you may be a little general with that statement and naïve. Apple likes DRM with the iPod because everything has become iPod centric. If you download your music from iTunes your whole world becomes attachments for your iPod to your hardware (not to mention the sound sucks). Companies have seen the Apple model and are now trying to copy that somewhat. We are left with a mess of hardware that does not want to communicate properly on so many levels it is ridiculous. As one who is, or should I say was, an early adopter of new technology I have just had it. I have become disillusioned with these companies. I just purchased an SXRD XBR2 but it will not accept a 1080p signal from my Xbox 360 (never buying another Sony product). I have a $10,000 boutique DVD player that is now a door stop. I have two high-definition PVRs with macro blocking issues. I have CDs that I have purchased that have the red book audio cd logo on them but yet they will not play in my computer (where I do like to rip all the music in red book audio to either play from my computer or stream through my living room home theater) because of some sort of DRM that is on them. Do I download stuff from the Internet? Yes. Music for previewing and programs that I may have missed and burn on a CD/DVD to play in my new Arcam DVD player that also plays DivX files. Do I feel guilty? Not in the least. I pay over $100 a month for basically every channel that my satellite provider offers and if I miss a program that is how I catch up. Are there dishonest people? Plenty of them but these companies need to come together and figure something out instead of holding onto the past outdated business models. Just my $0.00000002...

To: NicoV who wrote (218434)	12/1/2006 1:52:24 PM
From: Magrathea	Respond to of 275872

Hollywood will make sure we pay for the services they provide. And Hollywood might be shocked at how little we think their services are worth. -Magrathea

To: NicoV who wrote (218434)	12/1/2006 3:05:31 PM
From: gzubeck	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

I don't know what your smokin' but I currently only have basic cable and netflix. My bill comes to $33 a month which takes care of 95% of my viewing desires. I prefer to watch things without commercials and I only have basic cable for sports and news. Tried watching tv recently and can't stand watching commercials for twenty minutes out of an hour and I do not want to pay $10 a month for Tivo etc...It will be years before we have the bandwidth setup for 1080p at 25gb a movie for download(Unless you have an HD recorder and record directly and want a $100 a month cable bill!)...DVD and HD-dvd will be around for awhile...

To: NicoV who wrote (218434)	12/1/2006 3:33:55 PM
From: pgerassi	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Dear NicoV: I am against DRM because it goes too far. It isn't digital rights management, but access control. If I buy a movie, say on a DVD, I should have the rights to view that movie using any means I choose. If the movie later comes out with higher resolutions, I should automatically the right to have that for free or, at most, media costs. With downloads, there are no media costs. I have the right to move it onto any media I choose and can use any method to play it on whatever I want it played to. If I want, I should be able to skip past advertizing and any other part of the work and go straight to where I want. And if I want to sell the work to another, I should have to go through everything I have and delete or remove all copies of it or deliver them to the purchaser. That is true DRM which not one of these implementations satisfies except the totally unlocked ones. Every implementation of DRM doesn't take into account the rights of the users, just the makers. No DRM should be allowed that over restricts usage. Any that do, should be ruled illegal and any things they protect should become public domain at once. Pete PS: It should be a requirement to hold a copyright to maintain pristine copies for when a work goes into the public domain, it is completely available. Once it does, the costs of keeping those copies will be borne by the public, usually in some government repositories at a minimum.

To: NicoV who wrote (218434)	12/1/2006 5:40:34 PM
From: bobs10	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

you: Next year (2007), more of the same in HD. Both Blue-Ray and HD-DVD will become irrelevant as the video-on-demand or near video-on-demand (PVR's) gets more widespread. And Hollywood will make sure we pay for the services they provide. me: I think you missed my drift. What I was complaining about is the way the movie studios are degrading dvd in order to move people to hd. What your saying, if I read correctly, is that the market for hard copy DVD/HD is going away. Personally I like to have copies available so that I can review them whenever I want. Some movies like the matrix trilogy or Master and Commander or Prince's Bride, etc. evc. I've viewed many times and will continue to do so. The hard drive on PVRs will probably never exceed 100 GB so keeping movies you copied over the air for any period of time just isn't an option. As far as I'm concerned the only way I can guarantee the studios wont screw with me is if I have a copy of my own and that's something you will never have with your PVR. This is from someone that owns a lot of CBS and Viacom stock from the days when the wife was working at Paramount. I probably know much better than you do what a sleeze bag business the movie business is. There isn't any length to which those guys wont go to screw the public.