Remember the whole, "Microsoft will ignore your monitor" issue? Is it still for-real?

[Zensunni]

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=26703

I haven't seen any more words on this since the original inquirer article. Since then, it seems everything has been hush-hush. Whatever happened with that issue, anyways?

[Combat Wombat]

Oh god, thats one of the more disturbing article I have read in some time. I am sure there will be an easy way to get past such pointless restrictions, there always are.

[earobinson]

meh I use ubuntu, ubuntu and ....... ubunut

[prizrak]

Does Ubuntu support HD? I know I couldn't play HD trailers from quicktime's site, but that could just be that there is no quicktime player.

[BWF89]

Does Ubuntu support HD? I know I couldn't play HD trailers from quicktime's site, but that could just be that there is no quicktime player.
Do you have the Quicktime video codec installed? If not that's most likely the reason.

[BoyOfDestiny]

Does Ubuntu support HD? I know I couldn't play HD trailers from quicktime's site, but that could just be that there is no quicktime player.

If you monitor is high resolution enough, you should not have a problem. Assuming your content is "free of strange DRMs" of course. ;)

[prizrak]

Do you have the Quicktime video codec installed? If not that's most likely the reason.
I got the codec but it gets all screwed up in the browser window. It's all like uber tiny and stuff. Not that I care all that much was just wondering.

My monitor res is tiny 1024x768 Laptop :(

[nocturn]

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=26703

I haven't seen any more words on this since the original inquirer article. Since then, it seems everything has been hush-hush. Whatever happened with that issue, anyways?

It is still real for now. I think MS will try this and see how bad the consumer lash back. If it threatens their revenues big-time, it will go. If the damage is less then the money they can make of this feature, it will stay.

[disabled_20220313]

I remember reading about this a while back. I think the technology works by having a compataible monitor and a properly DRM'd file.

If you try and play a DRM file without permission on a compataible monitor it will just blank it (or make it unwatchable), but only that part of the screen. If you do not have a compataible monitor it won't play.

All other functions should work fine, ie word processing, net browsing etc.

I wouldn't think MS would create a technology that would render nearly every monitor useless.

[poptones]

Uh, no.. that was never it and never will be (it).

if you do not have an approved monitor, playback of HD content will be limited to SD resolution. That means DVDs will work as always and HD DVDs will play back at plain ol' DVD resolution.

The rest of that was nonsense generated by an ignorant mass that never bothered to RTFM or the relevant specifications. and guess what? There will be no backlash because "most people" simply don't give a **** and can't tell the difference anyway. A recent tech survey showed more than half the owners of HD television sets didn't even have them configured for HD playback - they just saw a picture that was bigger and "different" than the ten year old set it replaced and left it at that.

I have countless friends and family who have basic DirecTV coming into a tv set with, at best, a composite video cable. They all think it's the bees knees and insist it's "as good as a dvd" in spite of the fact I can objectively demonstrate otherwise. Oddly enough the only person I can think of NOT in that camp is my 85 year old father who, one day as we watched the DVD of "Oklahoma" commented how incredibly vivid the picture looked (no, he didn't use those words, but he did notice this on his own). Most of the people I know in their thirties and even their twenties simply don't know the difference and fewer still care. The only people who care about this are geeks, and geeks don't have enough money to matter to Hollywood.