Intel to cut Linux out of the content market?!
nux at blueyonder.co.uk
Thu Jul 21 08:07:36 UTC 2005
On Thu, 2005-07-21 at 14:20 +0700, Chanchao wrote:
> Hello Ezra,
> Thursday, July 21, 2005, 1:12:46 PM, you wrote:
> ET> Mayday ?
> ET> http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=24638
> Not at all. Companies are ALWAYS trying to find ways to lock people
> into whatever it is they're selling. Lots of everyday stuff around you
> is what it is because it was specifically designed to lock you into
> something of their own and out of something else made by a competitor.
> Yet nobody can force anyone to use a particular device, or format. All
> companies do it. It's strange Microsoft always gets such a bad rep,
> because Sony and Apple and Intel and Vodaphone and just about everyone
> else are just as bad. Heck you can't buy a printer or a vacuum cleaner
> without the thing being specifically designed to accept some
> proprietary kind of consumable.
> So Intel is making some widget thingy that doesn't run on Linux. Big
> deal; When Toshiba or Sony or Apple make some media device it also
> never runs (on) Linux, and Linux doesn't care. :)
> And, the more you try to force people into something, the more the want
> to be free..
You're missing the point. This isn't Microsoft coming up with a new
codec that everyone except Linux users can use. This is Microsoft coming
up with a plan to lock the entire planet to one set of codecs that only
Microsoft own, that only Microsoft get paid for (per use) and that they
get to say who can use and who can't.
Once the content providers start using it, alternatives will be stifled
and choked. (Not actually cut out just marginalised to death).
Think of it this way. You own a record label and a TV station. Piracy is
a problem. Along come M$ who say "use this codec on everything and pay
us per copy". Your content is safer because no one will be able to share
their content (not even with their own mp3/media players). Once it takes
off everyone will have to go out and rebuy all their cd's/DVD's again.
Since Windows is on at least 90% of all world PC's you daren't say no
(if other companies go along and you don't you're screwed, if you do and
they don't, you get to advertise as "Windows media compliant" and
trumpet your anti-piracy stance). No one would dare risk having their
catalogue unavailable for the Windows platform so they will comply.
Bill's vision is "one world, one web, one program". I don't see that
vision diminished. This is just one step nearer.
P.S. Prove me wrong. Please!
More information about the ubuntu-users