Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, Hardware, WWDC
Intel On-Board DRM: Architecture Does Matter
Looking over the responses to yesterday's Stevenote, the only person I think has got it right so far is Jonas Luster. I'm with Scott in not really caring, objectively speaking, whether my computer runs on PPC, Pentium, rabid weasles, or a rack of 2,5000 1.023Mhz Motorola 6502s. Intel Machines are fine with me. I have several running a variety of OSes. I don't think the performance of the Intel dual cores is as good as the performance of the IBM dual cores, but if Apple is confident in the road map, ok.What I do care about is my computer spying on me or telling me what to do. I don't like DRMed software, and I detest DRMed hardware. But that's exactly where Intel is headed, and it's silly to think that the Pentium-D and 945 chips or their successors won't make it into transistioned hardware. In fact, it's probably a large part of Apple's interest in Intel to begin with. The RIAA and the MPAA like on-board DRM, and Apple has a cozy relationship with both. Far from a move to Intel being a poor plan on apple's part, I think it could easily be the first step toward taking iTunes to video and exapanding Fair play into a multimedia, harware-based solution compatible with the Microsoft DRM the Pentium-D is designed to support.
And that sounds like a pretty good business plan. What it may not sound like is something I'd want on my desktop.
![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
tj said 4:19PM on 6-16-2005
To be totally honest, I will follow Apple where ever they go. Steve is an extremely smart human being and I doubt he would do anything that would lead Apple astray. I, personally, think that everyone who is jumping ship don't deserve to use a Mac. Steve is just doing what he has to. Who cares what computer is a couple milliseconds faster? I don't. As long as I'm using the Mac OS, I'm happy.
I'm a film/video editor. I don't really know what this "transition" means for me, but Apple will always continue to innovate and I'll be there.
As far as DRM goes, I don't care unless it gets in my way. iTunes DRM doesn't really bother me because I buy from iTMS, put it on my iPod and listen. I can understand anti-DRM people's point of view because it doesn't feel good knowing the limits are there even if you aren't actually being limited. Law is law though. Apple is just trying to live with it creatively and successfully.
Reply
Mike said 4:19PM on 6-16-2005
What role will DRM play in keeping OS X on Macintoshes only? Will the DRM chips in Windows PC's be a way of impeding OS X's installation on machines not approved by Apple? I wouldn't doubt it.
Reply
jj said 4:19PM on 6-16-2005
See this is what makes me hate windoze, it has been a sad week for the Mac community already....
Reply
Mark H said 4:19PM on 6-16-2005
tj,
What Jay is referring to here reaches far beyond a natural extension of iTunes-type DRM to the hardware level.
The difference between this DRM and iTunes-type DRM is that this has been explicitly designed to force you to give up general control over your computer. It is possible that Apple may start out using it to enable unbreakable DRM for iTunes downloads, and I have no conceptual problem with that limited use, since I pay for my music and my software. Unfortunately however, the DRM technology that is being built into Intel chips has been designed expressly to severely limit your freedom in everything from how often you can open a particular document, to whether you're able to install a particular application (commercial and free), to what operating system you can install, to whether you are allowed to connect to a network, to pretty much anything else you can think of. The potential consequences of both MS and Apple supporting this type of DRM (Microsoft is already adding partial support to Longhorn, though they are trying to portray it in the light of bolstering security) is that your rights related to software choice and personal freedom in general in computing may disappear entirely.
I don't mind that Apple is switching to a new CPU architecture, but the possibility of them adopting support for this so-called 'trusted computing'-type DRM really makes me dread the future. I really hope Apple has enough of a sense of responsibility to the public to keep from following Microsoft down this path, and it would make me very, very happy to hear a public statement from them to that effect.
If you don't believe me, consult Google with the terms 'TCPA', 'Palladium' and 'Trusted Computing'.
Mark
Reply
Jay Savage said 4:19PM on 6-16-2005
Mike,
That's a very interesting point. If it's there, there's no reason for Apple not to use it.
Reply
Fisher said 4:19PM on 6-16-2005
I do not know where I read it, but intel has released a statement saying there is no DRM technology in their new Pentium-D and 945
Reply
Kyle Brown said 4:20PM on 6-16-2005
The best thing to do right now is trust in Apple.
Think about it, Apple serves a realatively small base of custiomers. A large percentage of Apple's consumer base are loyal to them and have been using there products for their whole lives. For Apple to completely mess with the OS and Hardware so bad that it alienates their entire base of loyals seem very unlikely. Apple is too savvy to throw us a short rope here.
When the new machines are released, our "user experience" will be the same great thing that it is today. Maybe a few more limitations, but not serious enough to make people mad, because lets face it, even with Apple's "revolutionary" OS, they still only have around 4% of computer users on their system.
Hopefully Steve Jobs is actually making the company grow by swithnc to Intel. Perhaps he has re-read a few articles where he himself quotes "the power is in the OS". The best possible scenario would be an OS X that can run on a PC, so Apple can start being a real competitior. All of you long time Mac users know, the power has never been in the hardware. It's time to get more OS X users by letting them buy the OS for their machine they already have. Maybe the Intel switch is the first step.
Reply
Michael May said 4:20PM on 6-16-2005
" I don't like DRMed software, and I detest DRMed hardware."
Hmm, I wonder why Jay got in *cough*C.K. Sample III*cough* :P
You make a good point though. I don't know enough about DRM to have a strong opinion on the matter, but I definitely wouldn't like Big Brother to be watching what I do.
Reply
Jay Savage said 4:20PM on 6-16-2005
Fisher,
Intel probably prefers not to call it DRM. But the combination of AMT and a compatible OS--especially when combined with an EDB chip--gives the harware (and/or OS) vendor complete control over just about any I/O operation, and allows those controls to be written to non-volitile memory.
Reply
Rafe H. said 4:20PM on 6-16-2005
DRM is still governed by supply and demand (well, decry and demand). If people hate a chip that controls how often we open a file, and we all will, then why would Apple enforce this? There will always be alternatives. Heck, x86 linux binaries already run on x86 BSD, so the alternatives will only be a click away.
If, on the other hand, DRM on the motherboard is the ONLY way we'll be able to rent a movie without traveling to Blockbuster (only to find nothing but empty covers on the shelves), then I'll happily use it. Happily. Blockbuster already prevents us from copying them, why should Apple be any different?
Plus, people want to be able to watch these movies on any PC in their home, Windows or Mac. Intel will allow this. PPC won't.
Reply
Small Paul said 4:20PM on 6-16-2005
Yeah, guys, it's pretty simple. If you're not keen on DRMed chips, don't buy them. Performance improvements in computers are flattening out, so the machines you have today will perform well for years to come.
The minute you stop giving business people money, then funnily enough, they start getting a bit twitchy. The market will provide a non-DRM alternative to meet demand. Just say no.
Reply