StarDestroyer.Net BBS

The Clicker: Microsoft’s OPM for the masses
Posted Jul 14, 2005, 7:16 PM ET by Peter Rojas
Every Thursday Stephen Speicher contributes The Clicker, a weekly column on television and technology:

A lifetime of computing has taught me one thing: shortly after a new operating system hits the shelves, I end up upgrading my computer. Oh sure… I do my best to limp along with the “antiquated” hardware. After all, my computer is always well within the minimum specs. However, despite my best efforts, the story always unfolds the same way: I begin to crave the speed.

I drool over the new features. I want the latest and greatest. In short, I fold like a cheap suit, and I upgrade. The one bright spot in the upgrade process has always been the monitor. Like the North Star, the monitor is always there to ease the transition. I look to it for comfort, and it stares back at me as if to say, “It’s OK, Buddy; I’m here for you. You’ll always have me.”

Sure, monitors can get a big dated (think dirty beige 14-inch CRT), but when have you had to upgrade your monitor to avoid functional problems in the new OS? That all changes with Longhorn.

Why? With Longhorn, Microsoft will begin pushing opium. Well, technically it’s OPM. However, opium might be a good option for those livid that the video content being sent to their pristine 24-inch Dell LCD monitors is purposefully being “fuzzied” (more on that later).

So what is OPM? The successor to Microsoft’s rarely-mentioned COPP (Certified Output Protection Protocol), PVP-OPM (Protected Video Path – Output Protection Management) is the first play in Microsoft’s game plan to ensure that protected content stays protected. PVP-OPM performs two main functions. First, it detects the capabilities of the display devices attached to the computer. For instance, does the DVI LCD monitor that you’re using have HDCP (High-bandwidth Digital Content Protection)? Second, it manages what, if anything, gets sent to those devices.

If you’re one of those rare people whose display is equipped with HDCP, you’re fine. However, in the world of computers, those users are few and far between. While HDCP has become the de facto standard for display copy-protection in televisions, its penetration in the computer display market would be pleased to merely be called anemic. Whether you’re plunking down money for one of the new ultra-fast LCD displays with 4ms response times or you’re becoming the envy of neighborhood with Dell’s UltraSharp 2405FPW widescreen display, you’re buying a monitor that won’t play nice with premium content in Longhorn.

So what will happen when you try to play premium content on your incompatible monitor? If you’re “lucky”, the content will go through a resolution constrictor. The purpose of this constrictor is to down-sample high-resolution content to below a certain number of pixels. The newly down-sampled content is then blown back up to match the resolution of your monitor. This is much like when you shrink a JPEG and then zoom into it. Much of the clarity is lost. The result is a picture far fuzzier than it need be.

That’s LUCKY?

It sure is — when the alternative is a black screen. If OPM determines that your monitor falls below the security restrictions (i.e. isn’t DVI or HDMI w/HDCP), you could be greeted with a “polite message explaining that [your monitor] doesn’t meet security requirements.”

Who determines when you get the restrictor and when you get the black screen? You guessed it: the content owner does.

“But I use VGA with my monitor,” you say. Too bad. Unless you upgrade your monitor, you too will be hoping your content provider opted for the blurry-but-visible protection mechanism.

Microsoft is quick to point out that many content providers have agreed to not totally block all analog displays. Instead they have agreed to compromise and allow the constricted (down-sampled) versions to pass through. Still — this is a far cry from enjoying the unmolested goodness of hi-def content.

To be fair – it’s not just Microsoft. The next generation of digital content will, by and large, be protected to the display. Recently Toshiba released their HD-DVD specifications and have dictated HDMI/HDCP as a display requirement for playing back high-definition content. Most expect Blu-ray to have similar restrictions.

What makes the PC situation so insidious is that nearly every monitor being sold today will fall victim to this gotcha. Blame whomever you like (the monitor manufacturers should shoulder their portion of the blame too), just be careful when buying a monitor these days. Or at least know that you could be setting yourself up for disappointment.

Tiger Ace wrote:Good, another feature in Longhorns hat, when is the thing coming out? Late 2006? Early 2007?
Nevermind those features, I don't think most will implement it, or it'll be easily crackable.

the .303 bookworm wrote: A throaty, if nasal, howl comes from the Inferi. The Microsoft Code Eaters are on the move.

Tiger Ace wrote:Two notes: Microsoft cannot lock out the AMD using market, which definetly does NOT have DRM yet, so there will be a way to run Longhorn without DRM hardware.

Second, wait for actual results before crying foul.

Can we please keep the damn DRM OMG EVIL!!!ONEONE wank to a minium?

And how about something a little more substantial than someone's wanked typing?

Praxis wrote: LOL, for some reason I thought I was reading a news source. I forgot that engadget is just a mere blog. Well, that makes me feel better unless some site confirms it.

Thanks for the reality check

ggs wrote:Really, DRM just keeps the honest people honest.

Way to encourage us to turn to legal content instead of continuing merrily along with the torrents.

SPOOFE wrote:

Way to encourage us to turn to legal content instead of continuing merrily along with the torrents.

While I certainly agree with you - that most copy-protection schemes only seem to hurt legitimate consumers - may I ask what you, or the body at large, would propose said companies do to protect their copyrighted material? I mean, such things as "don't charge so much" and.... well, okay, that's about it... while such things are all well and good, what steps can be taken to stop piracy that will not hinder legitimate consumers? Or do you think companies should just absorb the losses as a cost of doing business?