PlaysForSure is Growing What?
 Joe Wilcox
Microsoft's baffling DRM music strategy is more confusing than ever. PlaysForSure is now Certified for Windows Vista. |
Microsoft is making the change under the moniker, "PlaysForSure is growing up! Same compatibility promise—different name."
WTH? Microsoft is making the same compatibility promise? And that's supposed to be reassuring? The original compatibility promise wasn't worth much. In the two years from October 2004 to October 2006, I tested plenty of PlaysForSure devices and services. But none worked nearly as well as the iPod or iTunes. Being behind would have been OK, if PlaysForSure really meant "plays for sure." The biggest problems came when mixing content from different PlaysForSure services. You'd assume that content purchased from different stores using the same Microsoft DRM would play for sure, but they rarely played well together in the same music library.
In November 2006, Zune cut off PlaysForSure's head, but Microsoft feigned that PlaysForSure was alive and well because the chicken still clucked around the barnyard, headless though it might be. Zune and PlaysForSure weren't compatible and they are perhaps even less so with release of the new Zune software and online store.
With Zune, Microsoft abandoned loyal partners that aligned with the Windows Media Audio DRM against iTunes and the iPod. Microsoft isn't solely at fault. Music services and music player manufacturers share some blame for PlaysForSure's diabolical demise. However, partners remained loyal; Microsoft abandoned them.
Now, PlaysForSure has taken on a new life as Certified for Windows Vista. But what exactly does the PlaysForSure DRM have to do with Vista? From a marketing aspect, one has absolutely nothing to do with the other.
The PlaysForSure logo was supposed to be a stamp of approval, and an assurance that supporting devices and services would be compatible with one another. Microsoft also made some distinction between devices that supported subscription services and those that don't. Now all that customer and partner assurance and marketing collateral is dead; though, granted, the death really occurred a year ago when Zune launched.
Certified for Windows Vista is a huge logo program, far more expansive than PlaysForSure. The certification really says nothing about what's compatible with what, particularly which devices do and do not support Microsoft DRM subscription services.
The PlaysForSure Web site had offered lots of good information on devices and services, which also benefited Microsoft partners. Microsoft has pulled the information. Consumers are redirected to a Windows Media devices page and partners to a Name That Zune, Microsoft Watch, Nov. 19, 2007
Create, Communicate, Collaborate with IT Professionals at Ziff Davis Enterprise IT Link.
Comments (6)
isn't that going to be a bit confusing if an MP3 player vendor get's his device certified for vista; but doesn't actually use PlaysForSure's/Janus DRM or the associated music stores?
Joe,
have you heard of a new logo coming that's supposed to indicate hw/driver compatibility with the OS?
Or are MP3 player vendors no longer able to certify their hw/drivers for Vista unless they support the PFS/Janus DRM?
Posted by whatever | December 13, 2007 3:06 AM
Hi Joe,
This may be of interest to you... but not directly related to this post...
Our company has created a Microsoft Patch and Update technology that can automatically analyse 1000's of applications for potential conflicts or compatibility issues with Microsoft updates and security patches.
We ran our software against this month's latest release of Patches from Microsoft and found that 6 out of the 7 patches looked pretty good but the IE update (MS07-069) caused conflicts with 20% of our listed portfolio...
Some of the "candidates for problems" included the following;
Adobe Photoshop Elements 2.0.2
Microsoft MSXML 6.0
Oracle 8i
Nokia PC Suite
Oracle Jinitiator
Sophos Anti-Virus
Some of these packages has direct "overlaps" with the patch as the actual MSI package contained elements common to the patch and others merely included dependencies that were affected by the update
Hopefully, this type of information is useful to you,
Kind Regards,
Greg Lambert
Technology Director
ChangeBASE AOK Ltd.
Posted by Greg Lambert | December 13, 2007 3:07 AM
Outside of Microsoft PR, when was the last time any manufacturer even mentioned Playsforsure? This smells like a ploy by some corporate lawyers who are trying to avoid litigation. "See, even though we changed the name and Playsforsure doesn't exist anymore as far as we're concerned, Microsoft is behind all of our loyal licensees 1000%!".
Posted by herbie curbie | December 13, 2007 10:40 AM
What a diaster.
The iPod works with Vista, does that mean my favorite non Apple store will work with an iPod?
What about XP which 90% of people still use. Is that no longer valid?
The average joe schmoe will not get this.
Who runs the naming department of Microsoft?
The Xbox live points are a diaster, this is nonsensical, there are 3438 versions of Vista.
Its hard to like Microsoft.
Posted by HR | December 13, 2007 11:33 AM
There is a deeper problem for Micro$oft for things such as Plays for Sure. One that the corporation mindset of MS seems to not have a clue about. One that I see on a repeat business dealing with customers.
Play for Sure, what is it? Simply it a licensed DRM scheme for Ipod-like, clone devices. I would argue that M$ should never be in a business such as this.
Why? Because DRM, in general is about controlling who can play, how often, how many times, how long, dated length of time, etc. M$ embraced DRM in so many ways. Its embedded so thoughly in Vi$ta as to make a complete mess of the operating system.
One of the questions that we get asked about in the shop fairly often is; "how come my wma and wmv files won't play?" The anwser is of course, is because many of these prioritory windows files are protected with differnet forms of DRM by Microsoft. People tend to get angry with the company MS,that has wasted their time getting these files. Where they got their files is not my concern as a techie, only the paid service on their computers. That and making files using movie maker, may encript wvm files by default, which in turn, when moved to the new computer, does not have the key to play them, making them in effect, for most people, trash. Sure, there are lots of crack sites out there for cracking wma and wvm sites, I love em, as they give me lots of windows cleaning work, with all there trojans they install on windows computers.
The use of DRM and prioritory standards, is something that is starting to come back on MS in the form of user dissatisfation among some that are a little bit more of a power users than the average user. MS should never be in a business that limits what a computer user can do with their computer. Apple neither.
And then there are the standards, which in many ways are like DRM. As they restrict which programs can use certain files. Or MS can charge license fees to another company to allow it to use code to work with these types of files. An example is, OGG, MP3, and WMA. There is really very little differnence between the 3 formats, except for the control factor of DRM in many of the WMA files. And of course the licenses, and who gets paid, and who gets a clean file for free.
What it boils down to is "Conrol" and "Lockin." Two things that M$ wants more than for computer users to have a good experience with their computers. Its time to educate users about DRM and Microsoft, and its heavy use of prioritory file formats.
Posted by chips | December 13, 2007 5:16 PM
Opera files antitrust complaint with the EU
Urges Microsoft to give consumers a genuine choice of standards—compliant Web browsers
http://www.opera.com/pressreleases/en/2007/12/13/
Quotes from the link:
"Opera Software ASA, the only company that can put the Web on any device, filed a complaint with the European Commission yesterday which is aimed at giving consumers a genuine choice of Web browsers.
The complaint describes how Microsoft is abusing its dominant position by tying its browser, Internet Explorer, to the Windows operating system and by hindering interoperability by not following accepted Web standards. Opera has requested the Commission to take the necessary actions to compel Microsoft to give consumers a real choice and to support open Web standards in Internet Explorer.
"We are filing this complaint on behalf of all consumers who are tired of having a monopolist make choices for them," said Jon von Tetzchner, CEO of Opera. "In addition to promoting the free choice of individual consumers, we are a champion of open Web standards and cross-platform innovation. We cannot rest until we've brought fair and equitable options to consumers worldwide."
Opera requests the Commission to implement two remedies to Microsoft’s abusive actions. First, it requests the Commission to obligate Microsoft to unbundle Internet Explorer from Windows and/or carry alternative browsers pre-installed on the desktop. Second, it asks the European Commission to require Microsoft to follow fundamental and open Web standards accepted by the Web-authoring communities. The complaint calls on Microsoft to adhere to its own public pronouncements to support these standards, instead of stifling them with its notorious "Embrace, Extend and Extinguish" strategy. Microsoft's unilateral control over standards in some markets creates a de facto standard that is more costly to support, harder to maintain, and technologically inferior and that can even expose users to security risks."
--------------------------------------------------
Could this be the start of a real problem for MS? Open Standards will remove the prioritory file formats to some degree, and start computer users down a path of limited freedom from some of the evil empires worst products.
Posted by chips | December 13, 2007 5:20 PM