Why is there a closed and open source driver ?

[DeepDayze]

The consumer doesn't have a choice. If a consumer is forced into a situation they're not happy with they'll start looking into alternative solutions. DRM makes many consumers unhappy thus many of them turn to piracy. Some of them still pay for the legal version but turn to the pirate copy for convenience. Some consumers will buy the legal version and remove the DRM themselves. Of course they still will be branded as pirates.

The only way for DRM to be removed would be if manufacturers, agreed amongst themselves, to refused to implement it.

It's not possible to play blu-ray on Linux because of DRM.
It's possible using windows but the implementation is lacking and it's not satisfying. There are very few programs out there who plays blu-ray and every single one of them are too expensive for the average consumer. None of the programs I've seen was stable and used a simple interface.

Conclusion, only the drivers implement DRM but there's no program available to use it. It's a waste of many in my opinion and it makes most consumers unhappy.

@bridgman, tell your executives that your consumers are unhappy about the DRM situation. Tell them that even Windows users have problems with it. It's not worth the time put into it and you're wasting money just by trying to comply with all the restrictions.

When there are restrictions placed on the playback and storage of content, users will always find a way around it for sure. Also in trying to comply with the restrictions the performance and quality of the drivers (not just for AMD/ATI but this covers nVidia as well) will suffer and yes consumers will be disappointed. I'd say that AMD and nVidia should be innovative and find the LEGAL and FEASIBLE workarounds for these restrictions with the least expenditure of their limited resources allowed.

[DeepDayze]

Stupid one minute edit...

One more point is that device manufacturers should develop products that are not overly encumbered with third party IP or perhaps negotiate with such 3rd partied to relax the licensing restrictions.

[bridgman]

Elanthis, with respect you are responding angrily to things I did not say. I never said that consumers want proprietary drivers, or even DRM, just that in order for OEMs to legally *sell* their products in some countries those things need to be in place, and so the requirements are passed down to hardware suppliers like us for all products we want to sell into the OEM market (which is all of them ).

Silverthorn, our execs do understand that DRM is not something customers want, and they have spoken out against DRM in the past (each time the requirements are threatening to be raised again).

That doesn't affect the fact that robust DRM is a non-negotiable requirement for essentially all of *our* customers and that there is a web of legal agreements which guide the DRM implementations and the protection of those implementations.

[bridgman]

OK, maybe I understand the disconnect. When I said "customers" in the last sentence I meant "the folks who buy our chips", ie PC and board manufacturers. Those companies have to live with laws and legal agreements which, in turn, force them to require robust DRM implementations from hardware vendors like us.

Everyone understands that the eventual end user doesn't give a rat's a** about any of this and would be happiest if DRM disappeared and never came back, but the realities of the PC market still require us to implement DRM and to protect the implementation by delivering proprietary drivers only in binary form

[Silverthorn]

OK, maybe I understand the disconnect. When I said "customers" in the last sentence I meant "the folks who buy our chips", ie PC and board manufacturers. Those companies have to live with laws and legal agreements which, in turn, force them to require robust DRM implementations from hardware vendors like us.

Everyone understands that the eventual end user doesn't give a rat's a** about any of this and would be happiest if DRM disappeared and never came back, but the realities of the PC market still require us to implement DRM and to protect the implementation by delivering proprietary drivers only in binary form

That's one of the absurdities with DRM, everyone agrees that the situation would be better without it.

The sum of the realities of the PC market.

- Blu-ray requires DRM.
- The graphics cards implements it.
- The driver implements it.
- The monitor implements it.
- The applications which should bind everything together is missing!

I tried to setup a windows computer for a relative of mine, which should have been able to play blu-ray. I could only find one single application which would do the trick and it's quite expensive. Testing the application doesn?t really make you happy either. Searching google for a solution doesn't improve your mood either because the only thing you'll find is lots of other people also searching for a solution. Every single one of them failing to find a solution. A few months ago I stubbornly believed that only Linux users was effected due to its (blissful) lack of DRM support. Now I know better. Everyone is affected by it and everyone is restricted by it. Including windows users.

It's been years since the introduction of DRM and you still can't use it. There's more software out there which removes DRM than there's which plays it. It doesn't matter if it's open source or closed source. Linux or Windows. You simple can't use it due to the lack of software.

The only place where DRM works is with a standalone blu-ray player and that's the only place where you don't need it. In the computer DRM is rarely used and I doubt anyone would notice if it was removed altogether. DRM is probably the reason why there's so few applications available to use it.

I just shake my head in frustration every time I'm going to watch a blu-ray movie. (Sometimes it takes minutes before you actually get to see the movie). The whole situation is absurd.

[bridgman]

My impression was that there were good solutions available for playing BD on Windows and MacOS but I have to admit that I haven't actually tried any of them - I use a standalone player (and will continue to do so until I can get a laptop with a 104" screen ).

For the record, I'm not claiming for a moment that the current state of things makes sense, just that for better or for worse it *is* the environment we have to operate in today.

[deanjo]

My impression was that there were good solutions available for playing BD on Windows

PowerDVD 10, Nero 10, Total Media Player 5 all seem to play commercial Blurays fine here. I think the software is finally starting to catch up.

[elanthis]

Elanthis, with respect you are responding angrily to things I did not say.

With respect in return, my original comments were to someone else entirely, and then you jumped in to try to correct me.

Don't take the angry tone too seriously. You should know from many of my other comments I respect you and your coworkers work quite a bit. I'm just an irritable jerk who hasn't had enough liquor over the holiday break.

[bridgman]

Actually I was given the BD player for free after I helped a friend set up their new system (which included a much more expensive BD player) so to the best of my knowledge no kittens have been killed (yet).

[bridgman]

yet? i think this is wrong: "I helped a friend set up their new system (which included a much more expensive BD player)"

means you help satan to get more money out of your frend and he will burn in hell for this and you are the helping hand of satan by doing this.

now the MPEG LA satan companys got more money because of you and they are a little step more on the way pushing the human race into darkness.

Hmm. Good point. Sorry.

in the name of GNU burn your BD player and call RMS for help..

We all Pray for your soul and we hope gnu and tux save your soul out of the Hell.

o please gnu help brigman out .

Not until that penguin puts on some pants.