

Apparently Microsoft "ironclad" piracy protections aren't really that strong





  • Seed those apps in a torrent for peer to peer distribution
  • Remove XAP security signature: needs work




Comments     Threshold


RE: ...why?
By Motoman on 1/1/2011 5:03:13 PM , Rating: 2
If the masses really cared about all the things you mention, then why are people on all platforms buying up mobile software like no tomorrow?

Because people are stupid and don't think their actions through. They aren't paying attention, and they're not aware of what's going on.

You are not the entire consumer base, so please stop pretending as though you are the voice for everyone.

By pointing out these issues and discussing them in a public forum, I am elucidating said issues and perhaps turning on a few light bulbs in a few otherwise dim heads. And standing up for your rights and interests as a consumer is hardly an activity that should be shunned.

And really how are you punished with DRM in the mobile space?

Even if it was just the fact that you can't get and install applications from any source you want, that's enough. Stop pretending that to discount DRM is to promote's not. It's about taking interest in your rights and privileges as a consumer.

i.e was trying out a piece of software on my jailbroken device

orly? And why would you have a jailbroken device? Shurely you're not trying to get around some kind of DRM...

So please enlighten me, who is being punished here and how? What are you not being allowed to do?

In the specific case of mobile device DRM, as noted above even if it was only the constraint of where you can get and install an app from, that's enough. There's probably more. Therefore, the "who" is every consumer of a DRMd mobile device, and the "how" is by constraints on what they can do with the device. Like choosing where to get applications from. Just one example. Which would be enough to protest about.

Anyone who cares knows how to bypass it, anyone who does not can sit in their walled garden pretending they are safe.

It's not OK to say "those who know how can bypass it" - because you shouldn't have to be a ha><or to be be able to use your device as you desire. It's also not OK to leave the unwashed masses in their walled garden without protest...they are being treated unfairly, regardless of how nice that garden might look.

The fact remains MS had little choice here, developers are not going to stay with a new platform that is not protected, even if that protection is not as great as it seems. The fact that the DRM scheme itself will eventually be infective is completely irrelevant, without it they won't be in business.

Developers will develop for a platform that is going to be popular. Like the web. Which isn't DRMd. If MS put out a platform without DRM, developers would develop content for it. It would be refreshing for someone to finally stand up and admit that DRM is an abject failure in every way, and refuse to arbitrarily limit what their consumers can do with their devices.

Argue for what you believe in but please, use some common sense. Like it or not, its a requirement for a new platform these days as all existing platforms have employed some form of DRM.

No, not it is not a requirement for a new platform to have DRM. To assert that it is is an abject display of ignorance and/or stupidity. DRM is anti-consumer, in every way, without recourse. DRM does not benefit the producer. Developers would develop for the MS platform whether it had DRM or not. Obviously you can argue for whatever you want to...but try to pick an arguement that's not so blatantly anti-consumer and nonsensical.


Related Articles
