Microsoft Taking Over the BIOS

dtjohnson writes "According to this story, Microsoft has entered into an agreement with BIOS maker Phoenix Technologies to integrate the BIOS with Windows. This has the potential to turn PCs into Windows-only machines and also could result in widespread incorporation of Digital Rights Management (DRM) technology into new PCs. It looks like Microsoft is beginning to flex their marketplace monopoly muscles again, after taking a couple of years off."

Re:Except

You mean goodbye upgrades.

We'll still be able to hack away on our (ever increasingly) obsolete computers.

Also, take a look at the 8-bit computer enthusiasts. These guys know every inch of their 8-bit computers, and can make them sing. You can probably build one from scratch from common chip parts. The 80886? (err...i'm drunk) Assembly is out there forever, and we can always program on that.

My point is, that even though our dual 3 GHz machines will become obsolete by the time your prediction comes true, we can always hobble along on our own computers. What it takes engineers at Intel to make today, they'll be teaching high schoolers in 20 years. (see 8-bit paragraph above)

Due to saving money for a house, I have been hobbling along on my 400mhz AMD computer since I built it in '98. Can't play the new games on it, but I can still rip & encode [my] CD's and DVD movies on it. Just what the RIAA and MPAA wouldn't want me to do today.

All I'm saying is that your prediction of comptuer armageddon isn't going to happen so quickly or overnight. Blu-ray discs are coming out 'real-soon-now' for the last 2 years. Your 3 years? 5 years? is probably more like 8 years, 10 years. Scared of the BIOS market being stolen by M$? I envision Open-BIOS becoming a reality. Chip burners are becoming cheaper and more common. We can make our own. Or know someone that does. Also marketplace ca$h is what's going to drive all this. China/Malaysia pirate capital of the world will be the last place that moves to DRM. They'll continue to fill the market with non-DRM bios because there WILL be a market for that for a while. Thus add another 2-3 years to your armaggedon date.

Re:Same as what Apple does

they don't BLOCK the booting of OS 9. The ability to boot OS 9 was holding back the hardware development so they scrapped that ability. It's not like they said "ok, let's fuck the users of new machines that wish to use OS 9". they just thought that better hardware was more important than backwards compatibility with an obsolete operating system

Re:Same as what Apple does

Actually the OS9 restriction is at the OS Level. Apple simply didn't write a new System Enabler for the latest revision of their core chipsets. without that, OS 9 can't boot on the new Hardware.

This was done to forcibly EOL OS 9.2.2

history and Compaq

This seems to be taking us back to the days when IBM had a proprietary bios.

In fact, it was Compaq Ahh ... here's the story [oldcomputers.net]

• The Compaq Portable was the first 100% compatible IBM computer clone. Why make an IBM clone? Because the IBM PC was extremely popular, and taken very seriously by businesses looking for a computer system.

  Problem: Compaq couldn't just copy IBM's BIOS to make their new machine guaranteed IBM compatible, this would be illegal, and easily proven by IBM.

  Solution: Reverse-engineer IBM's BIOS. Compaq used two sets of programmers, one group who had access to IBM's source code and another who knew nothing about it. The first group closely looked at the original code, and made notes of exactly what it did. The second group took these notes, and wrote their own BIOS that performed exactly the same. After one year and a million dollars, they were successfull. They had a legal BIOS identical in operation to that of the IBM computer.

In any case, you would think Bill would remember this [pbs.org]. He was around. Unless he's getting daft.

Re:history and Compaq

Except if the BIOS being part of Windows is deemed to be a means of securing Windows and/or encrypted, does that not then put it under the wings of the DMCA?

And thus illegal to reverse engineer?

Yeah, it's like IBM all over again... except that this time the law says that no one could reverse engineer a way out of the monopoly lock-in!

Re:Same as what Apple does

"Apple's special BIOS" is called Open Firmware. And it is called 'Open' for a reason - it is a documented open standard (IEEE 1257) that Apple implemented. Sun and IBM amonug others also use Open Firmware on their systems - it is enough of a standard that Apple engineers have referred people to Sun's docs on Open Firmware on the listservs in the past. The Mac OS may need Open Firmware to boot, but there is nothing preventing anyone from bootstrapping any other OS, and various PPC Linuxes and BSDs all use OF to bootstrap.

Thank goodness for LinuxBIOS

Looks like we need to start checking to be sure our next motherboard's flash can be reprogrammed with LinuxBIOS [linuxbios.org].

Re:Thank goodness for LinuxBIOS

According to the LinuxBIOS page, they have successfully booted Win2k off of LinuxBIOS.

The biggest thing I see as a problem is the limited motherboard support of the project. However, I suspect that after the first one or two motherboards come out with this new MS-BIOS on it, community support for porting LinuxBIOS will increase.

Re:Thank goodness for LinuxBIOS

Oh, yeah, I'm sure Dell and HP and Gateway and all the rest are going to LOVE a requirement to pay a Phoenix tax as well as the Microsoft tax! Not to mention what AMI and Award will think of this.

Re:Thank goodness for LinuxBIOS

Do you think Phoenix will keep their prices the same for this new bios? I expect it to cost Dell, et al quite a bit more because Dell will have no choice -- without the Phoenix bios the latest Windows won't boot.

Unless/until Microsoft pulls a Microsoft and switches vendors [slashdot.org].

wont hurt Dell

Dell does their own Bios.

Re:Thank goodness for LinuxBIOS

AMI maybe, but http://www.award.com [award.com] redirects to http://www.phoenix.com/en/home/ [phoenix.com].

Phoenix have owned Award for quite some time, and practically every board I've seen lately has had an Award/Phoenix BIOS. AMI are making their money mostly on RAID solutions right now.

On the original story: from the press release on Phoenix's site, it looks like the byline might be a bit OTT (ain't it always?). Basically, it looks just like a turfing-out of legacy crud, turning the BIOS into something more like OpenFirmware or a mainframe BIOS. Just because it's in conjunction with Microsoft doesn't always mean it's a bad thing, but we've got to wait and see.

Re:Thank goodness for LinuxBIOS

Ah, I may have misread.

However, I think we'd be at least 5-7 years, and more likely 10 years, from that happening. It certianly won't be part of the Longhorn release. Here's my reasoning:

1) The Longhorn release is nearly to the Beta stage, and we are likely more then a year off from seeing the first motherboards with this particular type of BIOS.

2) Even if they wanted to try and lock people down into "You can only use Windows if you use MS-BIOS," there's still going to be the problem of backwards compatibility. Historically, Microsoft has wanted to push out OS upgrades to as many people as possible as quickly as possible. This means that it needs to be able to run on hardware manufactured during the lifetime of the previous incarnation of windows, if not the last two incarnations. For example, you can run Windows XP on hardware that ran Windows 98 SE, Windows ME, and Windows 2000...You may not be terribly happy with it, but you can do it.

Yeah, there are ways around both of those, and they aren't the only reasons why I don't think we'll see that tight of required integration anytime soon.

However, I do think now is the time to start looking at alternitives. LinuxBIOS is an option, however, it has quite a bit of work to go, and it doesn't have the corporate backing to make it happen that Phoenix and Microsoft can lever behind this.

Much like with DRM, I am interested to see where this will go, and am avidly watching for more news, but until there are some more definate answers, that's all I'm going to do. I'm a network engineer. I don't have the technical skills to design an alternate technology, nor am I in a position where I can affect things politically (other then writing to my representives). I will continue to watch, learn, and comment where appropriate. :)

Re:Thank goodness for LinuxBIOS

Don't forget about Dual-BIOS motherboards. One could be a WinBIOS, the other a Linux BIOS.

Re:Thank goodness for LinuxBIOS

It's going to have to be much sooner than that to replace the PC BIOS with something more modern. There's really only so much you can do with an 8-bit BIOS (which is what we have now, right?). The BIOS should be somewhere you can check RAM and Disk integrity, set up TFTP sessions, simple boot scripts, and get a list of what's actually connected to the computer to pass to the kernel.

OpenFirmware is absolutely INCREDIBLE, and if more companies were on-board it would get even better. On a Macintosh (O.F.) you just hold 'option' at boot and you get a menu of all bootable drives connected to the machine, be they FireWire, IDE, SCSI, or USB (actually USB is disabled out of sanity). You can get a device list even better than most Operating Systems can provide from OF.

All that has to happen is a small system to give OF a GUI for general-purpose stuff that he BIOS handles now, like editing the time and some options. Also it would be nice to have extension APIs for disk checking and basic kernel argument-passing.

LinuxBIOS isn't what you think it is, it's just a way to bypass the normal BIOS to pull a kernel off the network, it's not structurally capable of 'taking over' because it was designed from the beginning as a 'means to an end' for clustering. It has far LESS functionality than a typical BIOS, and the development lag time makes it infeasible for a mass switchover.

We really need to make sure that the 64-bit motherboard manufacurers start using OpenFirmware, it's the perfect opportunity to facilitate a switch to a more modern and sane BIOS. If Microsoft gets involved we're SURE to see major problems and serous bloat on the board.

Re:Thank goodness for LinuxBIOS

Looks like phoenix wants to take a dirt nap.

Right, because we all know that no one uses Windows.

Re:Thank goodness for LinuxBIOS

You automatically lose when your rebuttall is to accuse somebody of working for Microsoft.

Is that a new Goodwin's law???

Re:Thank goodness for LinuxBIOS

"Most of slashdot is disillusioned, thinking windows is 100% shitty."

There's some truth to that. I'm sitting here using Windows 2000, but most of the Slashdotters stopped using Windows back at 95 or 98. Those OS's were 100% shitty. I will never defend either of them (or ME) because they really were incredibly unstable.

Then the switch to Linux happens, and nobody has sat down and used Windows 2000. So they have no idea that the stability is a hell of a lot greater (it's based on NT instead of DOS) or that work can actually be done about it.

I can't say I blame a lot of the peeps here who think the BSOD jokes are funny. I wish they'd understand that Windows development didn't suddenly stop in 1998, though.

Issues beyond stability for Windows

Stability is a bare minimum. It took Microsoft a while to bring Windows up to some semblance of stability, but they have a lot of developers and vendors to bring into line with their product.

I still favor Linux over Windows when it comes to stability, but there are several other facets of the Windows operation system and Microsoft philosophy that turn me (and likely other Slashdotters) off. First, security. I don't like my browser or mail client doing things I'm not explicitly aware of. I cannot use Windows with a clear conscience because of IE's and Outlook's persistent security failures. Add in IIS for Windows incarnations with IIS installed an running. This is compounded by the fact that these pieces of software cannot be uninstalled. I don't really care about the monopoly angle with the bundling of IE/Outlook. Linux distros "bundle" similar items if not more which I like. The difference is that if someone finds a bug in Mozilla that puts me or my network at risk, I can wipe it clean from my hard drive and fall back on alternative software packages.

Cost is another obvious difference, but one that I think will eventually catch up to Microsoft more than any antitrust case or business practice. It's evolution, baby. The personal computer is still a wonderful, versatile thing. I use it to write, program, listen to music, watch movies, capture/edit/burn digital video, and game. But it isn't a new concept on which a business can build on and dominate market share any more. There are a growing number of open source software projects that meet or even exceed their commercial competitors capabilities. OpenOffice, Mozilla, and Apache to name a few. There's three software projects right there that are relevant to the corporate world's preoccupation with information technology.

Commercial software that meets a need or niche that open source solutions cannot fill is going the way of the dinosaurs. They had their chance, but it's not the way I see software evolving. Why depend on a single commercial source for solutions when you can support a core group of developers in producing a piece of software that everyone can benefit from?

I don't so much find Windows to be inferior. It's just that Linux and the canon of open source software built upon it make so much more sense financially, socially, and from an engineering standpoint.

Re:Issues beyond stability for Windows

Other good reasons to use Linux:

* It's incredibly easy to script and build new applications by tying together existing ones via pipes. The results are fast, reliable, and professional -- unlike AppleScript or VB-produced results. This is only relevant to tech users, but it's a big one.

* It's free. Okay, for a professional with a decent salary, the cost of Windows vs Linux itself -- the base package -- really isn't significant. A hundred or two hundred bucks is not a big deal. However, to purchase commercial equivalents of all the Linux apps I use would be extremely expensive. Compilers (think Visual Studio), editors (think Visual SlickEdit), mail clients (think Eudora), system monitors (think all manner of shareware apps), sound editors (think Cakewalk), image editors (think Photoshop), web servers (think IIS), code checkers (think Gimpel Lint), graphing programs (think Visio), math/statistics packages (think MATLAB), and all the rest, there is a *lot* of money involved. Sure, you can pirate it, but that's not an option at work, and pirating software is less and less trivial with the surging prevalance of phone-home features.

* It's secure. Traditionally UNIX (and its apps) have had tighter security design than Windows, especially WRT local security. A couple of Microsoft apps are phenomonally insecure (MSIE, Outlook), and most Windows apps don't have the same emphasis on avoiding attacks.

* It gives better performance. My workstation runs a large set of servers in the background. I don't notice. I have a friend that runs a Windows FTP server that he kills off when he wants to take all the CPU time on his system.

* I can fix bugs that piss me off. If I have an issue, I happen to be a coder, so I can run out and fix it without just complaining to a company's forums and hoping that something happens. I can add features that I want. Obviously, this benefit isn't nearly as good if you aren't a coder, but it's something to consider.

* I can actually see what's going on. Linux has a strong tradition of talking about and letting you see what's *actually* happening on your system. The startup system is just a bunch of scripts that are quite readable. In contrast, if you pick up a book designed for a Microsoft administrator, you'll get a bunch of Microsoft-invented terms ("Enable a service"...am I starting a process listening on a port or what? What the hell is happening?) This also makes troubleshooting much better.

* A richer toolkit. For at least coders, network admins, and security types, good tools exist that have no Windows equivalent. (The reverse tends to be true when it comes to office workers.)

* Choice. If I use Windows, I also must use Explorer, like it or not (and I don't). I can't use the kernel or Windows software without also using the expected file manager (yes, there have been a few hacks to try "replacing" Explorer, such as LiteStep, but they're flaky...more neat toys than pratical tools). On Linux, I have more window managers available than I have fingers. I have a whole collection of file managers. I have docks galore. I can choose my favorite from each category and use that.

* Better design. The fact that Linux uses better file-locking semantics, the fact that Linux uses symlinks instead of shortcuts, the fact that it's easier to write a reliable Linux driver than a reliable Windows driver, all have strong trickle-down effects to the user in the form of fewer reboots, more flexibility in file system layout and control, and a more reliable system.

Re:Thank goodness for LinuxBIOS

"So...do you want to play games which happen to run under Windows, or do you really really want to run Windows?"

Yes.

".for my purposes Windows is completely a throw away OS which I won't even give a second thought about reinstalling if it starts acting up (ala blue screens...etc)"

I don't have the stability problems you problem imagine I'm having. I'm a 3D Artist. My computer has to be stable. It has to run in dual monitor mode. I have to be able to buy hardware from the store and get it up and running quickly. These are not things that Linux cannot do, but it is bonehead simple in Windows to get it all running. I do lots of rendering. I can't afford to lose time on a render. Niether Windows 2000 nor Lightwave has let me down. I don't come back on Monday to find that the render died on Saturday.

"Since I wouldn't run Windows if my games ran under linux, I wouldn't say I want to use Windows...I instead want to play my games and Windows happens to be the only vehicle that will allow me to do that."

Yes, you would say that. However, I have not found that Linux is quite there for me. Though it has become more attractive in recent months. I honestly feel I'll be running on it in 2004 or 2005. I'm not a Windows zealot, but I'm not going to switch to Linux just to flip off Microsoft.

How long?

One only has to wonder how long before TCPA chip will refuse to load Linux BIOS loading only "trusted" Windows BIOS which will of course never load "untrusted" GNU OS. Truely scary perspective especially considering the fact that back in 1997 we all thought The Right to Read [google.pl] was a huge overexeggaration. I think it is time to renew my EFF membership. I believe everyone should do that instead of just complaining on Slashdot.

bleh

so now the bios wont be reliable either?

Re:bleh

"Then again, some upstart company may do the same to Phoenix as they did to IBM when they 'made' BIOS :-)"

One Problem with that, the DMCA. If the DMCA would have existed 20 Years ago, IBM would have sued Phoenix & Compaq under the DMCA, and PCs today would still cost over $5000, because IBM would be the only PC manufacturer around. In other words, if someone reverse Engineers the new M$ BIOS, they would have Phoenix & Microsoft suing them under the DMCA.

BIOS has a new meaning?

Basic Insecure Operating System ?

Re:BIOS has a new meaning?

Aer you sure it isnt
Bill's Insecure Operating System

I think this is outstanding.

Now, I will not even require an OS in order to contract and spread viruses and worms.

It's only a matter of time before Microsoft's superior technology inovators develop a compression algorythm that will allow them to stuff all of Windows XP/2003 into the BIOS chip. Then they will really have a lock on the PC industry.

Could you explain?

Could you explain to me exactly who the lot of companies are? It is my belief that corporations as a whole will either not care at all or will regard this as a very good and important feature that will allow their operating system of choice(Windows) to operate more reliably and securely thanks to DRM and Trusted Computing blah blah blah

Most corporations will welcome this with open arms.

Re:Could you explain?

Mmmmm, want to go and tell that to Valve?

Re:Could you explain?

I think it's still too early to tell if this is a good or a bad thing. It all depends on how its implemented.

If Microsoft uses it to let companies build "Windows only" PCs or to enforce their form of DRM, then I suspect most I.T. managers and staff will realize it's *NOT* a good thing.
(Even if I work for a company that runs all Windows products on the desktop today, that doesn't mean I'd prefer products that don't let me have any other alternatives.) As computers age, they tend to become good candidates for alternate OS's - even in environments using strictly Windows on the user desktops. (If you're not going to elminiate your current crop of dated Pentium 1 and 2 systems, for example, they still make good Linux web servers or print servers. They also make good pseudo thin clients running the Citrix ICA connector. (You can still do that even under plain old MS-DOS, with some limitations, and serve Windows 2000 or XP desktops to an old 486.)

No win here for major PC vendors!

I work for a Fortune 500 that wouldn't touch this. We run Linux, OpenBSD on 100's of machines. I don't suppose IBM, HP and many others would go for a Windows-only BIOS.

This in turn means that Dell et al will either

• Offer a choice of BIOS (Windows or open) with all the support issues that entails.
• Only ship the new BIOS if it support Linux and friends
• Lose a few major customers (yeah, right.)

Re:If Apple does this, it is good

Apple is a monopoly only to those who wish to purchase Apple products (which is a single-digit segment of the market). Microsoft, on the other hand, has been found in numerous courts to be a monopoly on the desktop system market and has been found to utilize illegal methods to enforce such a monopoly. A marriage of hardware to the OS should be illegal in such a circumstance (lack or perceived lack of choice for the consumers).

In short, your comparison is one of "Apples and oranges" and is therefore invalid.

Alternative

Say hello to Linux on PPC. Or, for that matter, some BSD flavor on PPC. Speaking of BSD, there's always the Mac OSX option.

Re:Alternative

Why go from an x86 with propriety BIOS to PPC with propriety BIOS?

what makes you think it's proprietary? it's not. it's called Open Firmware [sun.com] and it's an IEEE standard.

Open, as in, not proprietary, and you can hack it yourself easily, if you feel like learning Forth.

Re:Honestly...

Apple uses Open Firmware, the same as Sun, possibly IBM, and others. You can easily boot Linux on a Mac if you want.

JUST in the sake of fairness...

I feel compelled to point out that there's nothing in the article SAYING the bios would prevent other OSes from being installed. Nor, from the description, there is no reason it would have to happen, unless it was deliberately implemented.

MicroSoft is undoubtedly up to no good with this, but we don't need to go Chicken Little without a little more evidence...

Re:JUST in the sake of fairness...

With any other company I would hold off before passing judgement. However, Microsoft's long history of abuses makes it only natural to assume they WILL implement a windows-only BIOS. I'll take this one step further. Expect a future version of Windows to REQUIRE this BIOS, giving Microsoft an even tighter lock on the market.

Don't be silly...

Next you're going to tell me Microsoft made something called a 'winmodem' that only worked on windows. Sheesh don't get worked up thinking so much. I just sit back and let Clippy tell me what to do.

Re:JUST in the sake of fairness...

You forget that this is Slashdot. If Microsoft does ANYTHING, no matter how good it may be, the people here will accuse them of doing it for some nefarious purpose.

Microsoft Cures Cancer
Posted by michael on Friday October 03, @06:38PM
from the You-know-they're-evil-just-admit-it dept.
Anonymous Coward writes "Microsoft researchers have discovered the cure for cancer, and MS is paying for any cancer patient's medical treatment" Micro$oft is up to their same old tricks - this time exploiting the sick and feeble to further their own agenda. Have they no shame?

-- Dr. Eldarion --

Re:JUST in the sake of fairness...

Microsoft Cures Cancer
Posted by michael on Friday October 03, @06:38PM
from the You-know-they're-evil-just-admit-it dept.
Anonymous Coward writes "Microsoft researchers have discovered the cure for cancer, and MS is paying for any cancer patient's medical treatment" Micro$oft is up to their same old tricks - this time exploiting the sick and feeble to further their own agenda. Have they no shame?

Well, actually, Micro$oft wouldn't exactly cure cancer, they'd put it into remission for two or three years. You'd have to purchase new and "improved" treatments each time it came out of remission, in order to live for a few more years.

Oh, and they wouldn't be paying for the initial treatments out of the goodness of their hearts, but treatment would be funded by vouchers given to victims in prior settlments of court cases against MS.

Re:JUST in the sake of fairness...

Hey Honey?

Yeah, that Dahmer character has invited us over for dinner.

I know, I know. But that doesn't mean he's going to eat us.

This time could be different.

KFG

Re:Its a two-way street...

Besides, if the BIOS "API's" are available to Windows, how long do you REALLY think it will take for open-source developers to reverse engineer it?

I beg your pardon, isn't it illegal to crack digitally protected media? -- And I'm sure, it will be digitally protected.

Years of lobby work finally pay off - in the USA like in Europe.

Re:Is this bad?

Macs havent had a BIOS for years--not in the traditional sense anyway. They use Open Firmware, an architecturally-neutral BIOS replacement (originally?) developed by Sun. It's pretty nifty...

More info here [sun.com].

Re:Is this bad?

The BIOS OS integration on the Mac has always been a thing of beauty, and it makes sense that M$ would (after 20 years) start to catch up by now.

Except Apple sells PCs and Microsoft doesn't. Apple also used a customized version of OpenFirmware (stripped down version of Sun's OF, IIRC), while Microsoft is making it's own BIOS. Microsoft isn't catching up, they're trying to drag the whole PC market into their realm of control.

Re:Is this bad?

Indeed. And if MS emulated this all you would have to do to run Linux would be. . .

Buy a Windows license, install it (making much HD space "worthless"), and boot it (making you need to comply with their EULA).

Cool. Who woulda thunk that it would be Microsoft who discovered the way to make big bucks from Linux?

Do you mind if I sit this one out?

KFG

Re:Maybe I'm lost

Blockquoth the poster:

But the paranoia involving all motherboards in the future to require Windows is obsurd because that is the sort of thing the justice department would not allow Microsoft/Motherboard manufactorers to do.

Of course. Because this Justice Department has shown itself to be the ever-vigilant foe of monopolies, Microsoft in particular. It only took a six-year, multimillion dollar lawsuit among a dozen states and the federal government to end up causing Microsoft to do exactly nothing...
Don't look to the DoJ to fix these wrongs -- Microsoft has the $$.

Apple is Different

Apple has no BIOS on a chip anyware. Yes, there's Open Firmware, which is an open standard -- you're NOT locked into any type of control by Apple. You can run Linux on them. You have full control. THAT'S how it's different than Apple.

Oh, you mean the old "Apple ROMs"? That's been ancient history for at least four years, maybe more. There's no more Mac ToolBox on ROM -- it's all loaded into memory from the hard drive.

I am very, very concerned about this move. I run Linux on my Intel box with the current motherboard. Anyone got a good supply of fast PPC motherboards? I could do Linux that way, I guess....

DRM will be optional.

Right at the end of the article you will notice that the users will have an option to turn off the DRM...

Phoenix said the DRM-enabled CME was not part of Microsoft's NGSCB, but that the technology was complementary. The CME would allow PC makers to embed digital rights management directly into the hardware, though they would have the option of allowing users to turn it off.

Re:DRM will be optional.

[...]
have the option of allowing users to turn it off.

Unless *large number* of users do this, it won't help. Because what will happen is that more and more you will find media that refuses to run unless you have it turned on, and so your choice will be to leave it turned on, or never display any media again. And no amount of explaining the situation to the public will ever work. You'll say, "This sucks because it means I have to run only approved Windows software and I don't even want to run Windows" - and people will hear "Hi, I'm into piracy." And in the battle of public opinion, you can't beat the 500 pound elephant willing to lie.

Re:DRM will be optional.

And in the battle of public opinion, you can't beat the 500 pound elephant willing to lie.

That's one small elephant!

For a while...

Yeah, DRM will be optional for a while. But when 90% of users are switched over to Windows2007, then banks will start to require DRM enabled computers to do your financial transactions over the web (balance transfers, checking the mortage status, etc.). Then the Powers-That-Be(TM) will decide that in order to crack down on terrorists, all on-line banking transactions will have to use a computer with DRM (and it just so happens that all transactions will also be simulatneously logged on IRS computers). Then on-line retailers will get in the act. First the Amazon's and E-Bay's will start to require it to reduce fraud. Then the banks will stiff-arm *all* merchants to only allow credit card transactions from DRM enabled machines. Of course on-line bill paying will go the same way. And now since the majority of people have these computers, other web-site operators will start to think "What kind of 'hacker' is visiting my site without a properly 'secured' browser? And what kind of data mining can I do now that I have a guarenteed identity behind the computer that I can sell to someone else!" So as more companies start to jump on the bandwagon, Grandma complains, "Some ladies in my knitting circle can't see my blog!" So the blogging software companies have to also incorporate DRM. Finally, the only people left using non DRM computer will be linux enthusiasts and criminals/terrorists. And since these two groups are about equal in size it'll be about a 50% chance that any web-surfer using a non-DRM computer is a criminal. Finally, DRM will be mandated by law and all objectors will be (secretly) rounded up and quitely disposed of (via the Patriot VI Act). So I know that I sleep sound at night knowing that DRM is *optional*.

Who do I blame for all this crap?

Is there a definitive point in time, a single event that started this all?

DRM this, RIAA that, MPAA my freakin head is spinning. When did DRM become so damn vital to companies like these? Was it napster that freaked everyone?

Because of all this crap, A friends ISP got shut down because someone complained to his upstream provider that one of his users was sharing software, no warning, no proof, no due process...crazy.

I spend $6000 on an HDTV last year that is already obsolete because it doesnt have the flavor of the month DVI copyrite protection connector. Hey man, check out this bad ass new DVD player that upconverts to 1080i, oh what you dont have DVI with HDCP, oh im sorry youre fucked. We had the 15pin RGB connector, then component video, then firewire, then DVI, then DVI with HDCP, and now we have HDMI. make up your freakin minds.

Or how about a cd I bought that would play in my high end REGA Jupiter cd player because it had copywrite protection.

I upgraded my video card and had to reactivate Windows XP on my workstation at work. What a pain in the a$$ I paid for the windows license.

This shit makes physically ill to the point where I want to start firebombing some of these companies.

I obviously blame these corporations and industry groups, but what started it all? Why are they so convinced that anyone using a computer is out to ruin them.

Why am I being affected by all this crap, I dont fileshare, I dont rip CDs for friend, I dont steal cable. Im a somewhat honest consumer, why am I getting nailed with all this crap that really isnt going to make ANY dent in actual piracy?

Are you listening to me Microsoft, RIAA, MPAA, Sony, Adobe, Disney and all you other fuckers. You cant stop piracy, all youre doing is driving me freakin nutts, and Im your paying customer!!!

Re:Who do I blame for all this crap?

There was no specific event, no. It has been happening ever since people found ways to pirate music/software. First software, I believe. It's been getting more and more important for companies to protect their products. First came CD keys for online play. People came up with CD key generators. Why? It's not to fight back against The Man, it's cause they want free software. Copyprotection right on the CD itself. Protection emulators (www.daemontools.org, I believe, is a good one, or any other disc image emulator). Again, it's not so you can emulate your favorite CD without having to switch CDs. The main purpose is so you can have a virtual CD of a game/program you may or may not own. It's an unspoken truth. The same with those game cracks you'll download. In the .nfo files, that little disclaimer that makes the software pirates seem like reasonable guys by saying "Buy the software! We did!" Yeah, and then you gave it away for free along with detailed instructions on how to make sure this illegal copy works. Great way to support the developers. More protections came up, more people helped crack them. I mean, there are good crackers and there are bad crackers. Good crackers are like Ritz and President's Choice. Bad crackers are those guys who make it harder for software creators of any sort to make money. So, it seems a pretty natural progression from my point of view. The "Man" is saying, "Okay, you want to play hardball, we'll play hardball." Bang, DRM comes into play. The same as always, it's the few ruining it for the many. Of course, it's not all one sided. Bad business practices, muscle flexing of niche markets, unneccesary distrust of the public... They're all factors too. But do NOT fool yourself into thinking DRM was purely some kind of evil scheme to Get Your Money.

I'm not even a halfway to 50...

First software, I believe. It's been getting more and more important for companies to protect their products. First came CD keys for online play. People came up with CD key generators.

Uh first came online CD keys? Try again. Floppys with bad sectors (King's Quest anyone), hardware dongles, serial numbers, sheets printed in unreasonable colors, I've got a full binder of stuff you needed to run a game in the old days. In fact, the scaling back to a simple CD key is because they finally figured out it wasn't effective and it pissed off your legitimate customers.

I use Daemon Tools also on my own, legitimately purchased CDs. If necessary I get the required crack so I don't have to look for the damn CD (if you knew my room, you wouldn't question why). Personally I see it as the last left-over of a time past. True central online services like MMORPGs or the UT2003 central server require CD keys, but for those I consider it part of the ToS for connecting to them, not a copy protection, at least not an effective one.

I recently went back to Windows 2000 from XP. Why? Because when I copied my XP installation from my 120GB disk to my new 160GB disk, XP freaked totally and mentally. Couldn't get to a reactivation screen, nothing. Wouldn't allow me to install over either, just wierd errors. I can pretty safely say, it'll be a cold day in hell before XP or any future XP-line OS ends up on my disk ever again. By the time Windows 2000 is EoL'd, it'll be Linux. Tried using the Red Hat server in the corner as desktop, now if only I didn't miss my Windows apps that much...

Morale is: Pirates will manage to pirate it. Do not piss off your customers in the futile process.

Kjella

Re:Who do I blame for all this crap?

Let me get this straight, you've got the money to drop $6k on a HDTV and now you're in the mood to start firebombing companies?

Ladies and gentlemen, the revolution has begun.

Inevitable, really, if DRM will be the rule

For DRM to have any measure of success, both hardware and software must be closely joined. A software only DRM solution will fail due to the ability to take the storage media to another software (OS). A hardware DRM solution would work, but updating for new file formats would allow a back-door for hackers.

Taking over the BIOS should be just one step toward implementing a total DRM solution. The next step is securing storage media - maybe a 'smart' drive that handles file interaction for the OS and whose internals are hidden (for example - OS/user doesn't need to know/control format on drive).

Some thoughts...

"The BIOS would also allow better control of unauthorised devices connected to a system, Microsoft said."

Why is a protection against "unauthorized devices" suddenly necessary on BIOS-level? Has anyone even been victim of a device that should really have been "unauthorized" (whatever that means in this case) that has been connected to a PC? It sounds like they're talking about hardware, and that's what's puzzling me. Are Microsoft telling us that future devices might be set as "unauthorized" because they don't fulfill Microsoft's demands and standards for an authorized device, or what?

Are Microsoft's customers saying "we should be able to protect ourself against unauthorized hardware" (I'm not hearing anyone), or are Microsoft just trying to shove a new feature down their throats because they need it for their plans?

"Phoenix's Core System Software (CSS) is a next-generation BIOS with a more sophisticated integration of operating system and hardware, for example making it easier for system administrators to remotely monitor the hardware configurations of their systems."

As with all computer software, complexity increases the chance of bugs and often also security exploits. How can Microsoft and Phoenix assure these "enhancements" to the BIOS don't do this? They can't? Well, then we might have an interesting future with really messy exploits ahead (with potential for viruses to gain direct hardware access and control), and also BIOS crashes due to the added complexity.

The BORG are coming!

The BORG are coming!

Your BIOS will be assimilated. Resistance is futile!

Next Microsoft will be selling cube shaped PCs with eerie green lights illuminating it. We must stop the collective from growing.

So was HAL a Microsoft product?

I can hear it now. On trying to install Linux, "I'm sorry Dave, but I can't let you do that"

Not overly concerned...

Maybe a few years ago, this would be frightening, but as it stands, it is far too late to fear the PC industry being locked into Windows. Even if you think the home user base is unimportant, IBM, Dell, HPaq, Sun, Racksaver, and others have a significant investment in Linux in particular, and even if MS managed to get all the current independent motherboard companies on board for this, most any of those players would easily overcome it to keep the Linux revenue stream going.

You have Clustering, server farms, web hosting, and a not so insignificant workstation and desktop market that is heavily leaning in the direction of linux (dominating the first three, and making very serious inroads into workstations and power user desktops). That's a whole lot of revenue for the likes of the big companies to just shrug and give up at Microsoft's whim.

New MS BIOS source code leaked!

Here it is!

F000:E05B call check_for_linux
F000:E061 jc do_error_beep_and_halt
F000:E063 nop
F000:E064 nop
F000:E065 nop
F000:E066 int 19

All kidding aside... I write BIOS code for a living, and this scares the crap out of me. What Microsoft wants is to basically eliminate the BIOS, except for the jump to the OS code (the "int 19" above). Windows already does just about everything that we do in the BIOS, like PCI device enumeration, etc...

No doubt, this would make Microsoft's life a lot more simple, but I think it would give them too much control -- way too much. DRM would just be the start of it.

I wonder what the EFI proponents (Intel) think about this deal...

Soon they'll come to a decision....

I'm a PC maker, MS comes to me with deals.

***MS gives a discount if they only install Windows on all their machines and refuses to sell any without OS's on them** Ok, I can deal with that, there aren't any alternatives right now and if they come up in the future, we can always renegotiate.

(Competition is completly decimated as all the large manufacturers do this)

*Bigger discount if you don't include the CD or documentation.* Sounds good to me.

(More money for redmond.)

*We'll also give you a discount on microsoft brand keyboards and mice which you can rebrand and we'll sell them to you for cheaper than you normally make them. We'll also give you a great discount on office if you promise not to carry anything else* Sounds good.

(Gets your company locked into microsoft products even more.)

*All of your machines require this BIOS in order to run windows, we'll give you another discount if you install them.* Sure, I can go with that, more money for me, w00p. I can always pull out of the agreement later.

(More lockin to windows products, now you've got to change your company somewhat in order to throw them in. At first it's inexpensive, they give a discount, and after a year or 3, they jack up the prices)

*Windows now requires that you use these cheap, fritz chipped celeron processors.* Sure, I spose I can since all my stuff is based off of windows anyway and at this point changing my company will cost millions.

(Microsoft now implements DRM on computers and a lot of bullshit like changing the hardware config requires a call-in to microsoft, opening your files from a different OS is more difficult, etc.)

*Windows will only work with windows-based chipsets, which only we sell and lisence now, they're cheaper than other motherboards.* Er..ok...sure I guess. Makes sense, and the corperate people like it so ok.

(At this point, microsoft will eliminate the motherboard market, giving them control over everything prettymuch. Processers can be dealt with, but motherboards can't. They at this point start eliminating manufacturers 1 by 1, accusing them of bogus bullshit and infringing on their patents on the motherboards now proprietary buses)

*The motherboards can now only run microsoft parts in a microsoft case. You need to buy microsoft parts and microsoft cases, but unfortunatly, they'll cost you 5 times as much as it costs us.) Fsck...where's linux? Where's unlocked fritz'd processors? Motherboard manufacturers? Help meee...

(Microsoft now has complete control over the PC market. And since they have so much more control, they become even more powerful and eventually take control over world goverments since windows is running on everything. They use blackops to take over the goverment using nazi-like tactics, accept they just assassinate anyone who they don't like and twist the media their own uses)

Hackers, at this point, being driven far underground and forced to be a very militant breed (think gattica), exploit bugs in the now somewhat secure Microsoft windows systems which are a modified version of linux in order to eat and live and help their communities. The roaming poor people, unable to find food or shelter and thrown out into the streets because all of the manufacturing and distrobution is done by robots and machines(Think of all the chain stores becoming automated), turn to these hackers for help and education. The black market thrives throughout an underground wireless network which uses wireless devices long ago banned by the goverment. Hackers are persecuted as is thought crime.

The normal people live as slaves in archeologies and are never allowed to go outside but are terrified of all the violent evil people who regularily kill cops and hurt people, a war is regularily burning overseas with china or some other distant country. In 2-3 generations, the archeologies have become full of loyal sheep, while the hackers have become extremly hard

Come on, guys..

If Windows can run faster and have better control over the hardware with this BIOS, then Linux can as well.

Come on, guys.. this is Slashdot! Are you forgetting that a very large pool of very bright individuals read this forum? Phoenix will release the specs for this new BIOS, the kernel hackers will develop a patch to support it, and before you know it, the same benefits that Windows O/Ss gain from it will be found in Linux as well. Minus the DRM, of course.. although I wouldn't be surprised to see that as a patch either.

If MS can benefit from this, so can Linux. The only way that wouldn't be true is if the specs are not public, or are licensed under a RAND license that precludes OSS participation and nobody wants to foot the bill on our behalf. Or if Phoenix tries a DMCA ploy of some sort. I can't picture them charging a license fee for using it when they can more easily enforce an outright fee for the supporting MB installation. Even so, I wouldn't be surprised to see it reverse engineered. Look at WinModems and their rise of functionality under Linux..

---
er.. um.. excuse me. I meant GNU/Linux.

Re:Come on, guys..

Look at WinModems and their rise of functionality under Linux..

Excellent example. Look how long it took Linux to provide even rudimentary support for WinModems. There are still patent issues surrounding WinModem drivers. If even one part of this deal includes patented "technology," Linux will be locked out.

This *is* a dire issue, one that will require intense scrutiny. MS desires complete control of everyone's computing; this is clear both from statements made in the past, and actions leading into the future. If there isn't active and vigorous opposition, they will get everything they want.

At the moment, they are looking at methods of locking Linux out. In the past, they have tried hidden, proprietary software, marketting, and outright lies (which is, I guess, marketting); as this hasn't been too successful, they *will* try to lock Linux out using legal means. (That is, patents.)

Phoenix is not the only vendor...

There's also AMI. [megatrends.com] Also, I really have to wonder if machines with locked-in BIOS sets are going to suffer the same fate as DIVX discs, Microsoft's "Bob," and all the other weird ideas that litter the technology graveyards.

Speaking for myself, I can say with confidence that I would NEVER, under ANY conditions, buy a system that's been locked up as the article describes. I will NOT tolerate some megalomaniacal company telling me what OS I can or cannot run on a system that I buy/own.

The good news is that a move like this could certainly be a shot in the arm for the used computer industry, considering all the systems that are pre-DRM/pre-BIOS insanity/etc.

Your honor,

Microsoft is clearly not a monopoly on the PC market. Why, what... with compeditors like....... err

DMCA

I can see all the thick-skulled cops now..

"Sonny, you clearly circumvented technological security mechanisms by using illegal software (MS didn't give it a run-license) to install Linux. You clearly broke the law and now it's federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison for you. Don't drop the soap, sucker! I despise scum like you."

I hope people will keep in mind what legislation of technology does when they whine to their congressmen about spam. When you beg the government to make certain emails illegal, they have to define "illegal email". Now are you sure you would like the US Congress to define "illegal email" _for you_?

Simple and More Reliable

"Microsoft said integration should mean simpler and more reliable computers."

I cant believe in the face of every virus MS has been responsible for spreading or allowing to spread due to crappy code they think a BIOS with MS system calls in it wont be a problem.

I can see the next ms.blaster worm that wipes your bios requireing you to replace the ROM.

Re:Well

I, for one, welcome our new BIOS controlling overlords.

I, for one, welcome the day when people realize that joke just isn't funny anymore.

All your overload joke are belong to us!