Comments on: This Is the House that DRM Built http://blog.schmichael.com/2007/03/27/this-is-the-house-that-drm-built/ good good study, day day up Fri, 10 Feb 2012 11:50:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Dan Coulter http://blog.schmichael.com/2007/03/27/this-is-the-house-that-drm-built/comment-page-1/#comment-5977 Dan Coulter Tue, 27 Mar 2007 16:02:59 +0000 http://michael.susens-schurter.com/blog/2007/03/27/this-is-the-house-that-drm-built/#comment-5977 I just did a couple of tests, naturally being skeptical of the "64k link using only 256mb of RAM" claim. I duplicated a Debian ISO (105mb) in all of the tests Vista, 2GB of RAM, SATA/150 drive: ~5s (just over) Debian (no gui), 2GB of RAM, SATA/150 drive: ~1s (just under) Win2k Server, 512MB of RAM, SCSI Drive: ~25s So it is quite a bit slower than Debian (which is definitely to be expected), but hardly what the commenter claimed. But then, you can't expect the Register to bother to do research, can you? I hate the DRM as much as the next guy, but it is primarily in place because they are required to have it to license the HD content. If they did not have the HD content, people would be whining about that. I just did a couple of tests, naturally being skeptical of the “64k link using only 256mb of RAM” claim. I duplicated a Debian ISO (105mb) in all of the tests

Vista, 2GB of RAM, SATA/150 drive: ~5s (just over)
Debian (no gui), 2GB of RAM, SATA/150 drive: ~1s (just under)
Win2k Server, 512MB of RAM, SCSI Drive: ~25s

So it is quite a bit slower than Debian (which is definitely to be expected), but hardly what the commenter claimed. But then, you can’t expect the Register to bother to do research, can you?

I hate the DRM as much as the next guy, but it is primarily in place because they are required to have it to license the HD content. If they did not have the HD content, people would be whining about that.

]]>