Knowing MS's business practices, they are prabably waiting for Apple to license the DRM instead of giving it away for free. I guess it's possible that OSX is more 'open' than Linux, but my guess is that the 'MS dev's' on AVSForum are really igornant tech support personnel. MS claims their DRM can be used on practically any device and it already has been licensed to a Linux vendor. My guess is they have two developers keeping up the old WMP code considering the app itself (not the codec) has not been updated in 3+ years.Īgree 100%. Note they also state a 'close' relationship with ATI as the foundation for WMV9 yet haven't located the Mac ATI team for driver support of WMP. I believe it is from the top down that the DRM issue as 'OS X is too open' is code word for we aren't going to support Mac OS X because they are the competition because the 'open' angle is pure crap. They don't respond to their support newsgroup posting or emails. Lets not forget we went almost two years with an installer for WMP that didn't even function. When the Mac is brought up, they are very crass and state 1)'OS X is too open' for our DRM specifically DRM >2 and 2) The product, though originally only available with the OS X Office product for 4 months a few years ago is only supported for corporate uses and not for media playback. It also documents a massive CPU overhead to get through the DRM clips. They've also recently licensed it to the developer of Zoomplayer for Windows who stated multiple frustrations not only obtaining the license but countless bugs in Windows and the DRM that prevented his initial release of a product with it requiring personal intervention by a single developer who without which the license would be worthless.

To me the response they gave was in the context that WMV was not a closed codec and a self promoting aspect for HDDVD inclusion, they implied it's for license and quote some rare devices that support it. That OS X is an OS for smelly hippies who live on a collective farm and spend their time trying to 'open' their minds and DRM>2 can only be applied to content viewed within the confines of a corporate cubicle? That OS X is not 'tight' enough security-wise? That the DRM code would be exposed and allow people to reverse-engineer it? What exactly does 'open' mean in this context?

Vlc for mac os x 10.3.3