Text 6768, 260 rader
Skriven 2005-08-28 06:56:18 av Robert Comer (1:379/45)
   Kommentar till text 6762 av Rich (1:379/45)
Ärende: Re: TPM
===============
From: "Robert Comer" <bobcomer@mindspring.com>

>   What I read didn't describe how a TPM is needed for osx in any way more
> than a claim that a firewire port is >required.

It's far more than that, OSX wont run without it.  It's an artificial
limitation to force you to buy the proprietary (and more costly) hardware from
Apple.  That same idea may be used by other companies in the future...

- Bob Comer


"Rich" <@> wrote in message news:43114d7f@w3.nls.net...
   What I read didn't describe how a TPM is needed for osx in any way more
than a claim that a firewire port is required.  It isn't easy to judge what is
going on when the prerelease software and hardware are leased restricted use
apple property.  I don't think you can infer much from what apple does in this
restricted application to what apple plans for public release.

Rich

  "Robert Comer" <bobcomer@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:43112d9a@w3.nls.net...
  >   I'm guessing your repeated mac osx references is aluding to apple's
  > statements that they will support it only on >apple systems combined
with
  > the reports that the dev systems have TPMs and some osx software
component
  > uses >it.

  Actually a bit more than that, actual reports of what it does, but it
  matters little, it's an example of what can be done with TPM.  What OSX
does
  with it is just an example btw, not my specific gripe.

  >It would surely is a positive if you wanted to run osx and irrelevant if
  >you didn't.

  Nope, it's definitely not a positive to me -- if I have an identical PC to
  this Apple i386 machine and the only thing that stops me from running OSX
is
  the TPM, that's wrong.  Purchased software is purchased software.

  >I think the negative to which you are trying to refer is with osx which
  >will not run on the large number of >computers that other operating
systems
  >like Windows will.

  Big negative, with no offsetting positive that benefits me.  (I've already
  stated I don't use a PC for anything that would require DRM)

  - Bob Comer


  "Rich" <@> wrote in message news:431112c7@w3.nls.net...
     I'm guessing your repeated mac osx references is aluding to apple's
  statements that they will support it only on apple systems combined with
the
  reports that the dev systems have TPMs and some osx software component
uses
  it.  If so, that doesn't make a TPM a negative.  It would surely is a
  positive if you wanted to run osx and irrelevant if you didn't.  I think
the
  negative to which you are trying to refer is with osx which will not run
on
  the large number of computers that other operating systems like Windows
  will.

  Rich

    "Robert Comer" <bobcomer@mindspring.com> wrote in message
  news:4310dbd2@w3.nls.net...
    > What are the negatives of having a TPM?

    None at the moment, unless you want to run OSX on a PC -- who knows
about
    Windows and other software in the future.

    >   Do you have or have you seen a recent thinkpad with one?

    No, we don't buy that often.

    >How about a recent toshiba laptop?

    Never buy those.

    >Are these lesser devices because of it?

    Yes, and I'll watch for it and plan accordingly.

    - Bob Comer




    "Rich" <@> wrote in message news:4310c98d@w3.nls.net...
       I disagree.

       What are the negatives of having a TPM?

       Do you have or have you seen a recent thinkpad with one?  How about a
    recent toshiba laptop?  Are these lesser devices because of it?

    Rich

      "Robert Comer" <bobcomer@mindspring.com> wrote in message
    news:4310c52a$1@w3.nls.net...
      >   You don't have to use a TPM even if your computer has one.

      Right now, yes, but in the future, I doubt that it's going to be
  optional.
      Look at the beta x86 OSX -- it requires  a specific TPM.

      >If you just want a smartcard you could have had one for years.

      I didn't say I wanted one, just that I maybe could live with in place
of
      TPM.

      >A TPM builtin provides other benefits.

      And negatives as well.

      - Bob Comer


      "Rich" <@> wrote in message news:4310abaa@w3.nls.net...
         You don't have to use a TPM even if your computer has one.  If you
  just
      want a smartcard you could have had one for years.  A TPM builtin
  provides
      other benefits.

      Rich

        "Robert Comer" <bobcomer@mindspring.com> wrote in message
      news:43108b95$1@w3.nls.net...
        >   VT is virtualization.

        Yep, know that, it's my specialty.

        >LT is security.  Neither is what george likes to call DRM.

        True.

        >What he tries to spin as something sinister is the smart card like
        >functionality (e.g. secure storage, hardware crypto) >provided by a
  TPM
        >chip.

        That's the one I don't like.   A smartcard idea I maybe could live
  with,
      but
        it would have to be both optional for the OS and machine, and
portable
        between machines.  Like a key basically, I carry it to whatever
  machine
    I
        happen to be using it at the time, rather than it being tied to a
    specific
        piece of hardware, and you should have the ability to own more than
  just
      one
        key.

        - Bob Comer


        "Rich" <@> wrote in message news:430ff6af@w3.nls.net...
           VT is virtualization.  LT is security.  Neither is what george
  likes
    to
        call DRM.  What he tries to spin as something sinister is the smart
  card
        like functionality (e.g. secure storage, hardware crypto) provided
by
  a
      TPM
        chip.

        Rich

          "Robert Comer" <bobcomer@mindspring.com> wrote in message
        news:430fdaf8$1@w3.nls.net...
          Yep, it looks like it's coming, probably not anything we can do
  about
    it
          either -- it's for the masses to decide about.

          For now, no DRM media stuff for me at all, I refuse to use it.  I
    don't
      do
          any media other than broadcast TV on my PC.  I'll probably get a
new
          processor soon, with VT, dual or quad core, and yes, DRM, but that
      doesn't
          mean I have to allow the DRM part to make any difference to what I
    want
      to
          do.

          Eventually there will probably be some computer/OS company that
will
        emerge
          to satisfy our computing needs, but for entertainment, we're
screwed
      until
          everyone else catches up and they revolt.

          - Bob Comer



          "Geo" <georger@nls.net> wrote in message
  news:430fbaa3$1@w3.nls.net...
          > All this DRM crap is nothing but a power grab so that technology
        companies
          > can enforce more restrictions on how we use technology in order
to
        extort
          > more money for the same shit.
          >
          > Once it becomes possible to prevent you from upgrading your OS
    without
          > upgrading your computer, or to prevent you from upgrading your
      computer
          > without upgrading your OS, do you really think Intel or MS will
be
      able
        to
          > resist the temptation? Do you think a computer sold with windows
      should
          > allow the user to remove windows and install Linux cause I
somehow
      think
          > that's the kind of limitations we are headed for.
          >
          > Intel is going to have to include that type of tech to make
Apple
      happy,
          > especially in light of the recent news that OSX was running on
non
      Apple
          > PC's already...
          >
          > Geo.
          >
          > "Robert Comer" <bobcomer@mindspring.com> wrote in message
          > news:430eed74@w3.nls.net...
          >> I don't know if any do yet, but they agreed to do drm hardware
  for
          > palladium
          >> just like intel did.
          >>
          >> - Bob Comer
          >
          >

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5
 * Origin: Barktopia BBS Site http://HarborWebs.com:8081 (1:379/45)