more on Why the Intel switch is bad

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: Jeff Porten <civitan () jeffporten com>
Date: June 7, 2005 9:37:58 PM EDT
To: dave () farber net
Subject: Re: [IP] Why the Intel switch is bad


Monday proved that I don't always know what I'm talking about.  But  
for anyone who is interested in where I think this is going to go,  
I've got an essay on the topic posted at <http://www.jeffporten.com/ 
portentia>.  Precis: sooner or later, Mac OS X is going to run on non- 
Macintosh hardware, and Apple is going to exploit all sorts of  
crossover angles before and after.

Following up on some points made here:

Richard Forno wrote:



> Intel has already started selling CPUs with DRM built in that  
> facilitate Hollywood's control over content played/processed by  
> Wintel PCs.   What if the change to Intel is designed to "protect"  
> Apple from MPAA lawsuits etc or at least "better position it" (in  
> Hollywood's eyes) from a technological sense if/when it starts to  
> offer video-on-demand type stuff via iTunes?

Apple has proven that they have nothing against DRM or trying to  
enforce it.  The most likely scheme I've read about to enforce "Mac  
OS only on Macintosh" involves chip-level DRM.  But as I say in the  
essay, this is the biggest, juiciest target for the hacker community  
since... well, my metaphor generator fails me.  I've been generically  
convinced by Cory Doctorow that DRM is doomed to fail.

Assuming I'm right about this, eventually the Mac hardware  
restriction goes the way of the same restriction for iPods.  Apple is  
buying some breathing room so they can see what happens to hardware  
sales for the first year.  Dual-boot capability will move more  
hardware into Windows-only enterprises, so eventually they can take  
the much smaller relative hit and start selling OS X for non-Mac  
hardware.  I'm predicting that after Leopard ships, they can fire  
sale Tiger for $20 and take a serious run at the belief that people  
run Windows because they want to.

Jonathan Shapiro wrote:



> If I wanted to *prevent* this behavior, it's very very easy. I take
> advantage of the DRM technology on the latest generation of  
> Pentiums to
> ensure that the OS only runs successfully on machines shipped by  
> Apple.

I would love to hear from the computer scientists here on whether  
they think it's possible for Apple to ship bulletproof DRM.  My  
thinking is, all they can do is restrict it to people who are willing  
to run off-license (and even then, good luck enforcing that against  
someone who purchased the software; you might be technically correct,  
but you'll get excoriated), and to people with the technical chops.   
Depending on the way this is written, they might be able to stop me  
from selling the setup service to my clients, but they won't be able  
to stop my clients from doing this on their own.  Unless I'm wrong  
about bulletproof DRM.

Ross Finlayson wrote:



> Personally, I'm concerned for Apple - not because of the technical  
> challenges (they are surmountable) - but because of the likelihood  
> that Apple has now 'Osbourned' themselves.  For example, I had been  
> planning for some time to replace my aging Intel laptop (running  
> Windows NT) with an Apple PowerBook.  But I now wonder if I should  
> wait a year or so until Apple comes out with a (presumably much  
> better performing) new Intel-based PowerBook.

Go ahead and buy it.  This is the topic of my next essay.

If Apple stays on schedule, then in 12 to 18 months you'll be able to  
buy the first generation of the new Intel hardware and you'll be  
exposed to all of the issues of first-generation machines.  If the  
schedule slips, then you'll get to do the same thing 6 to 12 months  
later.  That's presuming that the model you want isn't already  
scheduled for 2007.  By then, your aging laptop will be downright  
geriatric.

My plan is to augment my workhorse 17" G4 PowerBook with an iMac G5,  
and that hasn't changed.  I need the processor cycles now, not in  
2007.  Then I'll let other people guinea-pig themselves on the new  
hardware, and I'll replace my laptop as needed, as I have been doing  
since 1993.

Last question for the computer scientists here: is there enough  
competition between Intel and AMD to prevent a chip monoculture from  
forming?  Or are there evolutionary concerns now that both major  
platforms will run on the same hardware?

Best,
Jeff




-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as lists-ip () insecure org
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/