Suse/NovellThis Forum is for the discussion of Suse Linux.
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Introduction to Linux - A Hands on Guide
This guide was created as an overview of the Linux Operating System, geared toward new users as an exploration tour and getting started guide, with exercises at the end of each chapter.
For more advanced trainees it can be a desktop reference, and a collection of the base knowledge needed to proceed with system and network administration. This book contains many real life examples derived from the author's experience as a Linux system and network administrator, trainer and consultant. They hope these examples will help you to get a better understanding of the Linux system and that you feel encouraged to try out things on your own.
Click Here to receive this Complete Guide absolutely free.
Okay, I understand that it has been a while since anyone posted here, but I have an opinion on the subject as well.
Now, certain distributions have legal Linux DVD players that supposedly work out of the box. The thing is that the two I know of are from companies not based in the US.
Mandriva has Intervideo's LinDVD. Mandriva is French, I believe. Turbolinux also plays DVD, and it is based out of Japan.
So, if playing a video game in Linux under Cedega is leagl, and playing a movie under so and so's free, open source DVD player in Windows is legal, why isn't someone coding an extension to Wine that successfully installs WinDVD, Interactual, or some of those other DVD players that come on the movie disc?
Why wouldn't that be a legal, and viable solution? I would be willing to suffer through a Wine/Interactual combination so long as it worked (satisfactorily) and was legal.
Why is this not like the Anti Trust suuits that made Microsoft play a litte more micely? Think about it. Video games not being available for Linux because the programmers don't care to make them compatible is simple short-sightedness. But the DVDs that we purchase, or otherwise legally acquire, we should be able to play them on every Operating System available.
People are going to copy data illegally no matter what legislation and copy protection software is put into practice, but why should the general public be forced to keep Microsoft Windows simply to utilize their legally acquired digital media? This looks an owful lot like Microsoft, whether intentionally or not, has secured a way to keep their OS on every American computer, if not in other countries trying to keep favor with the MPAA or the many other organizations that want to protect their right to charge way too much for a product that makes the filthy rich even filthier and the not so financially fortunate, less fortunate.
I am all for protecting the rights of those who have copyrights. I wouldn't want someone else making money off my work and creativity unless I get a fair cut. I think that the DVD Encryption is stupid though. The whole region code thing is stupid. So is the whole NTSC/PAL incomatability on VHS. Why can't I watch a video cassette from the US on a German VCR?
These people trying to protect copyright should learn a thing or two from books.
I have many books. On most of them, there is no special ink or watermark that fades or disfigures the copies if I try to make a photocopy or try to scan it. There is a simple copyright on the page that states whether or not copies can be made, and by who's authority.
What about if all scanners, cameras, and copiers had the ability to scan a barcode in the watermark that would automaticall notify some agency that a certain piece of literature had been digitally reproduced without the consent of the author or publisher?
What if God zapped everyone that worked on cloning live tissue?
Here's a better one, what if using a recipe out of a cookbook for an unintended purpose meant jail time?
Doctors prescribe medicine that was intended to treat one set of symptoms for an entirely different purpose because it will treat the patient better in that doctors professional medical opinion.
So, why can't I install a Windows intended application onto my Linux machine? I am the doctor for my PC, I see that the symptom is a lack of DVD playback, and I prescribe WinDVD, or an acceptable substitute at a lower cost, to my Linux computer because that will fix the problem. The thing is, my Linux box won't run a .exe natvely because that is the fole format for a WINDOWS application. My patient, my computer, lacks the ability to interface with the .exe pills I want to prescribe it orally, so I have to go with the introveinous supply. I have chosen to administer my medication of choice through the added interface of a well placed needle; Wine...
just install vlc. Go to the suse wiki and search for 'smart' it will talk you thorugh installing the smart package manager. Once you have that setup type 'smart install vlc' and thats it done. All your DVDs and any other filetype wil play (except wmv)
Well, I still don't see where that makes it legal. I use Mandriva 2007 and I used the built in package manager to install VLC. I won't know about DVDs until I get home tomorrow, but I do know that I have no sound now. There must be some conflict between the VLC packages and my ALSA.
Wolfton, in my opinion, any licensed application that legally plays DVDs should be OK, regardless of the operating system. The only problem is that most of the licensed DVD playing apps will only run natively in Windows. (An exception, LinDVD, seems to be a port of WinDVD, but only available if you purchase the commercial version of Mandriva.) Still, if you have a copy of PowerDVD (for example) and can use Wine or Cedega to run it in Linux, I think that would be legal as well. The problem is not having a "licensed" operating system, but rather having a "licensed" application.
IMHO: The purpose of DRM isn't to protect the content author. It's purpose is to get us to pay over and over for the same thing. This is most obvious with music. I buy a CD to play on my stereo then buy it again to listen to on my iPod. If I decide to replace my iPod with a Zune -- I get to buy it again. If you think this is bad, just wait till you see what changes Microsoft is having hardware vendors make to give Vista the power disable our equipment. Thank God for Linux.
I wonder if DRM, DVD CSS, the fact the no Linux has had DVD software for so many years and Vista's power to muck things up a bit aren't just another attempt by Microsoft to secure them as a monopoly in the OS arena.
Microsoft, in order to keep them preferred over Linux by users like us may offer incentive to certain vendors of goods and services to intentionally and deliberately write code to keep anyone not using proprietary Microsoft OSes or applications from accessing services that would ordinarily be accessible, and even free.
I cannot go to any of the Microsoft websites in any broweser other than IE, and of course, there is no Internet Explorer for Linux. I don't even know if there is still a Mac version, but there was.
There are certain other websites that will offer content only to IE users, or offer reduced compatibility.
Is it a mere coincidence that content-rich sites with steaming media and applications are available only to Windows and IE? Or is it because they have been bought out?
If Microsoft were to be investigated for ensure that they are not in any way coaxing ot limiting the rights of Linux users to freely available services unless they use Windows AND Internet Explorer, would that not be in line with the anti-trust suits? Is it merely good business practice? Even if it were not an intentional side effect, would Microsoft not be just as guilty if they didn't provide the code for IE that could be intergated into the other browsers so as to allow access to that content?
I wish a lawyer would look at this and see if there is a valid case. Winning a suit like this could make a career as well as enhance all of the happy computing that Linux users crave without having to reboot and choose Windows.
IMHO Microsoft is evil. I have no doubt they coerce people but power also comes from their monopoly. Without standards a developer is force to pick which proprietary scheme to develop to. Shear numbers almost force that decision to the benefit of Microsoft. Microsoft's latest evil is impacting hardware. Changes are being made to hardware components like video cards so that Vista can cripple their operation when Microsoft determines DRM breaches have occurred. This will add to the cost of hardware and make it more difficult to write drivers. The power to end this garbage lies with the consumer but the consumer doesn't have a good track record when it comes to Microsoft. Lets hope that the user manipulation built in to Vista will drive consumers to the Linux door. The key to that is for us to make sure the average consumer learns how they are being abused by the Evil Empire.