Plexter and macrovision together

vbimport

#1

now i heard thrue the grape vine that plextor and macrovision are working together to stop software piracy and there future burners wont be capable of new protections i this true and if so I will be looking elsware when bying my next burner.


#2

No this is NOT true. There was once this rumor but I can guarantee you it’s nonsense.


#3

that’s very good to here because i like plex drive’s and would hate to think that there doing this considering the price of plex drive’s, and would thingk that there tring to improve there drives capabilitys it’s already falling behind on efm encoding but i like the audio capabilitys.


#4

Originally posted by cicotte
that’s very good to here because i like plex drive’s and would hate to think that there doing this considering the price of plex drive’s, and would thingk that there tring to improve there drives capabilitys it’s already falling behind on efm encoding but i like the audio capabilitys.

No drive company is stupid enough to design their drives to combat a certain copy protection scheme. There is always going to be another copy protection - a little different - a little more effective.

neither would they design a drive to enhance or work with a copy protection. This makes no sense at all.


#5

mabee not in that fraze, than why is there drives capable and sum are not some can burn dao96 what about efm modulation pq/pw reading you don’t need this capability if you don’t burn protected cd’s there not going to abvertise this that can get them in alote of heat they no if they put a burner out into the market that can copy protected cd’s it will abvertise it’s self thrue people like you and me that post messeges in forums like this well that’s more than needed to get the word going and there you go they sell burners.its all about cash it’s like if you were going to by a burner what kind are you looking for one not capable of backing up your protected disks or one that is.


#6

Originally posted by cicotte
mabee not in that fraze,

I do not understand what you are saying here, could you perhaps restate it?

Originally posted by cicotte

than why is there drives capable and sum are not why are sum capable of raw dao and sum are not or sum can burn dao16 some can burn dao96 there not going to abvertise this that can get them in alote of heat they no if they put a burner out into the market that can copy protected cd’s it will abvertise it’s self thrue people like you and me that post messeges in forums like this well that’s more than to get the word going and there you go they sell burners.its all about cash it’s like if you were going to by a burner what kind are you looking for one not capable of backing up your protected disks or one that is.

First, the relative capabilities of drives help with certain copy protections and hurt with others. The Sanyo chipset used and modified by plex seems to work well with Audio, but not with the latest SD2.51xxx. The mediatek chipset seems to work well with SD2.51xxx, but not with CDS. There is no chipset on the market that works well with all common copy protections. None of them seem to work with Tages. If developing a copy protection breaking chipset was what a company was after, don’t you think that it would work with most of the common copy protections?

Secondly, if I were macrovision or others in the copy protection business, I would love for a drive company to become known as the drive capable of “breaking copy protections”. All I have to do is buy several of their drives and develop a protection that significantly hinders that drive and my status as a copy protection company goes through the roof. Does the phrase plex cannot do SD2.51xxx have any meaning? You bet! I cannot reasonably think that this was by accident. Many people dropped plex like a rock and headed to lite-on, but it’s only a matter of time before Macrovision can stop Lite-on in its tracks. People will have to find something else, if anything works.

If people can find another drive that works and everyone runs to it, guess what happens? Yes, Macrovision puts the hurt on them. This continues until most people give up and quit buying new drives for the latest copy protection. Copy protections can be changed much easier than new drives can be designed or people can afford to keep buying new drives. All the while, Macrovision or whomever makes a fortune and copy protection wins!

Thirdly, when the inevitable shakedown of the industry comes, the companies that make the best quality drive or the best “bang for the buck” will survive. The others who chase the latest copy protection scheme may make alot of money for a short time, but will be gone soon.

In summary, I like drives that do copy protections with or without CloneCD or CDMate, and I know that some short sighted people may buy (and some companies may make drives) solely on this basis, but the smart companies that want to be around for awhile will try to make the best overall burner they can and let others worry about how to copy protected disks. If their burner helps in the process, great. If not, they still have a product that smart people will buy. Hopefully, most burners are “smart” or they may spend much of their time replacing their drive and making companies like Macrovision rich.


#7

i hear you but in order to keep the money rolling the cycle continuse protection componys like the bizness. Is it going to stop software piracy if burner’s are no longer able to copy protected cd’s you can patch a game in seconds.protection developers like it when a burner can copy it’s protection it keep’s them bizzy that’s what you have sead.and developers keep bizzy making burners, people will run out and buy a new burner that is capable of a new protection i would because im a burning freak.