Text 6761, 217 rader
Skriven 2005-08-27 23:20:30 av Robert Comer (1:379/45)
   Kommentar till text 6758 av Rich (1:379/45)
Ärende: Re: TPM
===============
From: "Robert Comer" <bobcomer@mindspring.com>

>   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)