might give Linux OS 2007 a go

[The Jackal]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

Tell me, got legit licences to watch those DVD's?

Last time I installed linux (about 9 months ago) I couldn't watch DVD's without installing a load of other stuff, and even then it was poor quality.

[1]
Have you got ANY ACTUAL facts to back this up ?

FYI DVD playing on linux is a grey area and basically the MPAA has given up its efforts on TRYING to prosecute linux users due to losses like this :

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3341211.stm

[2]
Do you always just give up if a newly installed program doesn't quite do what you want it do do on Windows ?. For the record I actually don't watch DVDs on Linux but tried it yesterday and yes the default player, like the default player in windows -wmp, was crap and so I installed something else.

I mean why don't YOU use windows media player as the default for playing DVDs, mp3s and other media as is intended by the Windows Operating System ?

[punky]

Originally Posted by Matt D

Very happy with Ubuntu, so far.

Me too, for what it is. The trouble is with it, is that 'official' NTFS-write support is experimental/beta, and I just can't risk my data on that. So using Ubuntu is kind of limited for me. Just a shame there isn't a single file system that is universal to all.

I do like the way that both Ubuntu, Mandriva and Gentoo happily recognised my NIC whereas Windows needs an additional driver off the mobo CD.

[c1rcle]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

Because a license to decrypt the DVD is not included in the price of the DVD.
The DVD player under your TV, PowerDVD and WinDVD etc on your XP box, have all paid for the ability to decrypt DVD's so they can be watched legally.
Linux being free can't pay for these licenses, so you either have to buy a linux dvd player which covers their cost of the license, or do it illegally using software which has cracked the code.

Wouldn't that actually come under the heading of fair use? I should be able to use a DVD I've paid money for on any machine capable of playing them.

---------- Post added at 12:00 ---------- Previous post was at 11:57 ----------

Originally Posted by Gavin

Me too, for what it is. The trouble is with it, is that NTFS support is experimental, and I just can't risk my data on that. So using Ubuntu is kind of limited for me. Just a shame there isn't a single file system that is universal to all.

I do like the way that both Ubuntu, Mandriva and Gentoo happily recognised my NIC whereas Windows needs an additional driver off the mobo CD.

It's actually the NTFS write support that's experimental at the moment, reading is perfectly safe, well as safe as anything to do with windows can ever be.

[Graham M]

Originally Posted by Gavin

Me too, for what it is. The trouble is with it, is that NTFS support is experimental, and I just can't risk my data on that. So using Ubuntu is kind of limited for me. Just a shame there isn't a single file system that is universal to all.

I do like the way that both Ubuntu, Mandriva and Gentoo happily recognised my NIC whereas Windows needs an additional driver off the mobo CD.

Support for FAT32 (vFAT) has been there for a long time in R/W support so I just tend to have a smallish (1gb maybe) FAT32 partition for sharing info between the Operating Systems.

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by CrC-3rr0r

[1]
Have you got ANY ACTUAL facts to back this up ?

FYI DVD playing on linux is a grey area and basically the MPAA has given up its efforts on TRYING to prosecute linux users due to losses like this :

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3341211.stm

[2]
Do you always just give up if a newly installed program doesn't quite do what you want it do do on Windows ?. For the record I actually don't watch DVDs on Linux but tried it yesterday and yes the default player, like the default player in windows -wmp, was crap and so I installed something else.

I mean why don't YOU use windows media player for playing DVDs ?

I tried Wine and others, a real pain installing library after library, hunting through forums to try and find how to get everything to work, which it eventually did, but playback was poor in all the players I tried.

Originally Posted by c1rcle

Wouldn't that actually come under the heading of fair use? I should be able to use a DVD I've paid money for on any machine capable of playing them.

The point is the players aren't legally capable of playing encrypted DVDs
Think of it like this, just because you can get in a car, turn it on and head down the street, if you don't have a license to do it, you can't do it legally.

Now if someone were to tell you how to circumvent the encryption so you can play encrypted DVD's without a license through this forum, technically that'd be encouraging and aiding others to breach copyright (we're not in Norway).

[punky]

Originally Posted by c1rcle

It's actually the NTFS write support that's experimental at the moment, reading is perfectly safe, well as safe as anything to do with windows can ever be.

But what good is a HD if you can't write to it??

As Zeph said, better to try a FAT 32 HD and use it to buffer between the two OSes, but its a pain.

[c1rcle]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

The point is the players aren't legally capable to play encrypted DVDs
Think of it like this, just because you can get in a car, turn it on and head down the street, if you don't have a license to do it, you can't do it legally.

I know you're right but it just doesn't make any sense to me, I've already paid them for the privilege of watching the films so why should I have to pay them again to play it on a different OS? that's more than a little unfair especially when you consider 99% of software/Movie thieves are using Windows.

[The Jackal]

Originally Posted by Gavin

But what good is a HD if you can't write to it??

As Zeph said, better to try a FAT 32 HD and use it to buffer between the two OSes, but its a pain.

Well if Microsoft documented the NTFS subsystem then we would have had an NTFS linux driver years ago.

Read this :

http://lkml.org/lkml/2004/5/30/110

Besides why would you want to write to NTFS in the first place ? Just to use that partition for extra storage ?

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by c1rcle

I know you're right but it just doesn't make any sense to me, I've already paid them for the privilege of watching the films so why should I have to pay them again to play it on a different OS? that's more than a little unfair especially when you consider 99% of software/Movie thieves are using Windows.

Well the people producing the player software are the ones who should be paying.
The same would go with any free DVD player software on Macs or Windows.
Buy a new DVD drive for Windows and get a "free" copy of WinDVD? It's included in the price of the drive, and in that price is the fee for the licensing of all the technologies involved, from DVD decryption to simply reading the DVD by the drive.

I know you're not meaning it, but you're basically saying "I've bought this DVD, and I should have a free dvd device to play this"

[c1rcle]

Originally Posted by Gavin

But what good is a HD if you can't write to it??

As Zeph said, better to try a FAT 32 HD and use it to buffer between the two OSes, but its a pain.

I need to get a bigger HD before I start mucking about with extra partitions but it's something for me to consider when I do They'll probably have the NTFS write support fixed by then anyway.

[dev]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

Because a license to decrypt the DVD is not included in the price of the DVD.
The DVD player under your TV, PowerDVD and WinDVD etc on your XP box, have all paid for the ability to decrypt DVD's so they can be watched legally.
Linux being free can't pay for these licenses, so you either have to buy a linux dvd player which covers their cost of the license, or do it illegally using software which has cracked the code.

last time i checked that only applies in america and their crazy copyright laws, playing dvds on linux is perfectly legal in countries except america which is why a lot of distros distribute US only isos with the dvd functionality removed

Originally Posted by zinglebarb

course any old Joe can install windows its all wizard run as any old Joe should be able to install Linux however its what happens next thats the problem.

i wouldn't say the average joe could install windows tbh

Originally Posted by zinglebarb

I spent a lot of time learning what I know and im no No0b however if linux worked out the box with easy to install drivers and run everything I need for day to day computing without having to compile everything then I woudl consider learning other aspects of the system.
Why should I have to read paragraphs of text to install a driver? or a piece of software? no thank you. If linux is ever going to become mainstream it will need to more user friendly if it does not then it wont

most drivers are either included in the kernel and to the average joe, the distribution, any other drivers are binary-only ones and come with their own wizard like installers, no reading necessary. Regarding software, its not exactly "paragraphs" more just a few lines with the commands, the rest of the docs is just like the help in windows programs and details of what to do when things go wrong.

Originally Posted by zinglebarb

one thing I have noticed is when I express my views on Linux I get talked down to by the Linux fanboys something to be honest im not prepared to tolerate

i'd say thats because your views come across as being too lazy to learn the differences and over exagerate what needs to be "learnt", maybe if you actually knew more about linux and what you really do need to learn, not what you think you need to learn it'll help all involved

imo anyone can know how to use linux, its not hard, just different, that isn't going to stop it being mainstream, what is though is that game developers and hardware manufacturers lack of support for it. game developers cant develop games if theres no opengl drivers and the hardware manufacturers wont make drivers if theres nothing to use them. this of course is slowly changing so when games become cross platform linux will pickup in the mainstream

[The Jackal]

Xaccers FYI :

DVD Decoding over the Years

DVD has an encryption mechanism called CSS (Content
Scrambling System.) They also wouldn’ t make Linux versions.

Though many had quietly cracked CSS, in 1999 a Norwegian
teenager Jon Johansen was the first to publicly reveal how
trivial CSS was with his "deCSS" decoder.

On Jan 3, 2000, SVLUG helped EFF pack a courtroom in San
Jose and defeat a Temporary Restraining Order against 500
web sites with deCSS source - first shot in the DVD CSS war.

On May 29, 2003, EFF won in the California Supreme Court.

The DVD Copy Control Association abandoned CSS as a trade
secret. So now no one questions the legality of playing a DVD
that you legitimately own on Linux, BSD or other Unix systems.

This wouldn’ t have started if they had allowed a Linux player.

[c1rcle]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

Well the people producing the player software are the ones who should be paying.
The same would go with any free DVD player software on Macs or Windows.
Buy a new DVD drive for Windows and get a "free" copy of WinDVD? It's included in the price of the drive, and in that price is the fee for the licensing of all the technologies involved, from DVD decryption to simply reading the DVD by the drive.

I know you're not meaning it, but you're basically saying "I've bought this DVD, and I should have a free dvd device to play this"

I agree it does sound like I'm saying that, it just seems to me that these people are getting more & more greedy every day, How many times do they want to be paid for the same thing? I have a film (paid for) I have a DVD drive including player software (licensed & paid for) I choose to use a different OS that doesn't need the licensed software so I'm a criminal? I'm not the one charging twice for a product am I?

[The Jackal]

What a thread ! Just to remind people that here is the question/topic posted by the OP

http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/sh...54&postcount=1

[punky]

Originally Posted by CrC-3rr0r

Besides why would you want to write to NTFS in the first place ? Just to use that partition for extra storage ?

Again, what is the point of a HD if you can't write to it? Firstly, all my work is there, which can't be updated. Secondly its where all my storage space is. I can only download upto the limit of my ext3 petition which is about 20 gig