http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut00...ista_cost.html

"Mr. Arnold" <MR. (E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:B2F72CBC-CB87-4C82-AF37-(E-Mail Removed)...
> http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut00...ista_cost.html

Interesting read. Read some of it. I'll have to read the rest later.
Couple notes:

1. Unless you can find a Vista copy without all the built-in protection then
all those numbers are nothing more then theory. Sure there's overhead but
does the overhead amount to anything tangible? Anything a human sense can
notice?

2. "Sony has refused to license it for playback on PCs (SACD)" - How is this
MS' problem?

SACD is crap anyway. Fork out the cash for DVD Audio!

On Sat, 12 May 2007 01:15:23 -0700, "Justin" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>"Mr. Arnold" <MR. (E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:B2F72CBC-CB87-4C82-AF37-(E-Mail Removed)...
>> http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut00...ista_cost.html
>
>Interesting read. Read some of it. I'll have to read the rest later.
>Couple notes:
>
>1. Unless you can find a Vista copy without all the built-in protection then
>all those numbers are nothing more then theory. Sure there's overhead but
>does the overhead amount to anything tangible? Anything a human sense can
>notice?
>
>2. "Sony has refused to license it for playback on PCs (SACD)" - How is this
>MS' problem?
>
>SACD is crap anyway. Fork out the cash for DVD Audio!

Justin, the ultimate "expert" on nothing.

ROTFLMAO!

Mr. Arnold wrote:
> http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut00...ista_cost.html


Interesting viewpoint and I think quite reasonable.

Particularly with reference to the increasing burdens placed on hardware
manufacturers by DRM requirements it does show the "Microsoft can do no
wrong, it's all the hardware makers fault" brigade who post here with
some pretense of knowledge as the bigots they really are

Not only have people like NVidia been forced to work around specs they
probably don't like much they have also been challenged to produce
systems with ever increasing quality - not easy to make such drastic
changes and yet improve hardware at the same time.

Busting the FUD about Vista’s DRM
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=284

--
Carey Frisch
Microsoft MVP
Windows - Shell/User
Microsoft Community Newsgroups
news://msnews.microsoft.com/



"Mr. Arnold" wrote:

> http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut00...ista_cost.html

On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 08:34:05 -0700, Carey Frisch [MVP]
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Busting the FUD about Vista’s DRM
>http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=284

When isn't it FUD and factual?

Vista is SLOWER and took one step forward while taking two steps
backwards because of useless, unwanted and unasked for "features"
like DMA and poorly implemented crap like UAC.

FUD = Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt

Microsoft hasn't helped their customers "upgrading" to Vista, rather
they've HURT them with drops in productivity due to excessive eye
candy often requiring newer more expensive hardware, slower file
transfers due to phony "security improvements", moved and reconfigured
"features" that users need to locate and relearn how to use all over
again plus the inevitable wait for hardware manufacturers to release
upgraded drivers.

The reality is Vista is a sow in a pretty dress. Underneath it is
still a pig. You put a silk dress and lipstick on a pig... surprise,
underneath it's still a pig.

Microsoft has done what it always does, hype the crap out of eye candy
and questionable "enhancements" while leaving a foundationally flawed,
bloated OS underneath that still demands a future SP1 and probably a
SP2 along with the usual parade of interim security patches, updates
and fixes.

P. T. Barnum would be proud. Customers should be ashamed for getting
conned again. Five years in development and Vista is the best
Microsoft could come up with?

The boys of Redmond aren't known for writing the best software, their
trump card is knowing how to MARKET mediocre software to the masses
and having a clueless army of fanboys sing it's praises.