Two questions

On 2015-09-23 02:41:13 +0000, Tony Cooper said:

On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 16:42:44 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2015-09-22 22:42:11 +0000, PeterN said:

On 9/22/2015 9:57 AM, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2015-09-21 20:15, nospam wrote:

apple is anti-drm and fought the record companies to have drm-free
music.

They certainly are hard core DRM where video is concerned.



Also their propitiatory code.

Is that some weird gland?

Should it be surgically shreaded?

Only if that procedure is covered.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 15:47:33 +0100, David Taylor
wrote:

On 22/09/2015 14:55, Mayayana wrote:
[]
If he's on Win7/8 his C drive could be that
much. It grows like a weed. To some extent
the mess *can* be cleaned up, but it's not
necessarily a simple task. (Unless he just
doesn't know to empty the rubbish.

Relatively easy:

Right-click the partition (e.g. C
Properties
Disk Cleanup

There's also a Cleanup system files option which may help you recover
significantly more space. I would avoid the "Compress files" option,
though.

It used to be that compressing files would speed up the machine.
Compression/decompression was faster than read/write.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

Note that the new Apple TV just came out. Nothing about a 3rd party
security module or s/w in there.

And I don't believe there is one. It will be interesting to see what
happens in the next year or so.

believe what you want, but an apple tv can decode apple fairplay drm,
which itunes movies have.

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

as i said the other day, vidity need apple more than apple needs vidity.

Is Apple a Vidity customer? Have you thought there may be no
commercial relationship?

you said that apple would have to incorporate vidity in future macs,
which would make them a customer.

No I didn't. Go find a quote if you are sure you are right.

here you go:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

I can't imagine Apple building 4K machines which will not handle
vidity. In that case they are limited to whoever can provide Crypto
Management hardware.


In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

If Vidity becomes a power in the land then Apple will have to
incorporate Crypto Manager or be left out.


In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

No I'm not. I'm saying a 4K machine without Vidity capability will be
handicapped in the market.



apple has enough clout and existing relationships with the movie and
music industry that they can easily say **** off to vidity.

none of this matters anyway. it's just a bull**** diversion. it stemmed
from the statement that apple might transition to arm-based chips for
some macs at some point in the future. whether they do that or not has
absolutely nothing to do with vidity whatso****ingever.

You absolutely know that, do you?

yes.

the choice of processor is completely separate to whether or not
something uses vidity.

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

I suggest you take a look at the iTunes store and Apple TV for the
catalog of movies, videos, and other shows available, for rental,
purchase, subscription and streaming. I have a feeling that Apple isn't
going to have too much of a problem getting content, music, or video for
their purposes.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1295663/FileChute/screenshot_318.jpg

That isn't the point of contention. It is about evolving (per Eric) DRM
requirements and whether Apple will follow Vividity or not. (IMO they
will ignore it completely and continue to do their own thing. And the
video distributors will be stupid to ignore them whether or not they
follow Vividity).

That's quite a strong possibility.

that's what i said at the start of this insanity.

apple has enough clout in the entertainment industry as well as
consumers to completely ignore vidity.

In article , Tony Cooper
wrote:

when peter says essentially the same thing (actually worse because he
threatened the cashier), you give him a free pass.

Yeah. Peter's pretty much a nice guy, and you're an asshole. People
get treated the way they treat other people.

i'm nice to those who aren't assholes.

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

If it comes to the point that the final display (a television) requires
a Vividity device then you can be sure the attack on the device will
ramp up.

Sure.

See http://www.samsung.com/us/video/tvs/UN65JS9000FXZA for example.

where does it say that has vidity?

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

There's also a Cleanup system files option which may help you recover
significantly more space. I would avoid the "Compress files" option,
though.

It used to be that compressing files would speed up the machine.
Compression/decompression was faster than read/write.

even more so now.

rOn Tue, 22 Sep 2015 23:04:11 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

as i said the other day, vidity need apple more than apple needs vidity.

Is Apple a Vidity customer? Have you thought there may be no
commercial relationship?

you said that apple would have to incorporate vidity in future macs,
which would make them a customer.

No I didn't. Go find a quote if you are sure you are right.

here you go:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

I can't imagine Apple building 4K machines which will not handle
vidity. In that case they are limited to whoever can provide Crypto
Management hardware.

That doesn't mean that Apple _have_ to incorporate Vidity in their
TVs.


In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

If Vidity becomes a power in the land then Apple will have to
incorporate Crypto Manager or be left out.

That doesn't mean that Apple _have_ to incorporate Vidity in their
TVs.

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

No I'm not. I'm saying a 4K machine without Vidity capability will be
handicapped in the market.

That doesn't mean that Apple _have_ to incorporate Vidity in their
TVs.

apple has enough clout and existing relationships with the movie and
music industry that they can easily say **** off to vidity.

none of this matters anyway. it's just a bull**** diversion. it stemmed
from the statement that apple might transition to arm-based chips for
some macs at some point in the future. whether they do that or not has
absolutely nothing to do with vidity whatso****ingever.

You absolutely know that, do you?

yes.

the choice of processor is completely separate to whether or not
something uses vidity.

Tell us what you know about CryptoManager.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 23:04:11 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

I suggest you take a look at the iTunes store and Apple TV for the
catalog of movies, videos, and other shows available, for rental,
purchase, subscription and streaming. I have a feeling that Apple isn't
going to have too much of a problem getting content, music, or video for
their purposes.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1295663/FileChute/screenshot_318.jpg

That isn't the point of contention. It is about evolving (per Eric) DRM
requirements and whether Apple will follow Vividity or not. (IMO they
will ignore it completely and continue to do their own thing. And the
video distributors will be stupid to ignore them whether or not they
follow Vividity).

That's quite a strong possibility.

that's what i said at the start of this insanity.

apple has enough clout in the entertainment industry as well as
consumers to completely ignore vidity.

You should reassure Tim Cook.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens