Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft’s Android Shakedown

blogs.forbes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 93 posts

Re: Microsoft’s Android Shakedown

#41

Post by nextparadigms »

marcf wrote: post #13
TomOfTTB wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the things Microsoft has done well is to pick the right pricing plan and the right industry. By making it a per unit fee on Smartphones you make it easy for manufacturers to pass the cost on to the consumer who then subsidizes it through a contract with their provider. The $5 per unit HTC pays Microsoft is only $.20 a month when passed directly on to the consumer and spread out over 2 years.

It undeniably hurts HTC's profits though. Sucks for those that have to pay this Microsoft tax. And it also does hurt Google in the sense that this cost is being passed to Google's customers rather than Google taking this burden.

HTC is paying $5 per phone, but they also get protection against Apple. I don't think HTC would've signed the deal with Microsoft, if it wasn't for the Apple lawsuit.

Re: Microsoft’s Android Shakedown

#42

Post by kelnos »

riffraff wrote: post #35
nextparadigms wrote: post #2

I wonder if Microsoft has employees working on trivial things they can patent, so they can go after other companies with similar technology after that. Is it possible to build something without infringing on some patent anymore? (even if nobody is suing you)

notice: everyone is dirty at this game, e.g. google's recent patent application for google doodle "A system provides a periodically changing story line and/or a special event company logo to entice users to access a web page."[1] [1] http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sec...

Sure, but they have to do this. I only consider it evil once a company starts suing other companies that they know can't compete based on patent portfolio size.

Re: Microsoft’s Android Shakedown

#43

Post by kelnos »

BananaRepublic wrote: post #26
webjprgm wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their work is used in the academic community. E.g. they have a suite for examining/debugging concurrency called CHESS which was used in a class I took in grad school and is related to and referenced by some of the research my (former) academic advisor professor does, which work is used by NASA to improve space program software.

Yes, and like their other MS Research projects it's licenced under the 'Microsoft Research Licence' which means that whatever modifications/enhancements you do to the code can only be used within this academic setting. HOWEVER, Microsoft themselves can use your modifications for whatever purposes they want, like sell them. Sweet deal...

As with any other software license (including the GPL), if you don't like the terms, don't use it.

Re: Microsoft’s Android Shakedown

#44

Post by alnayyir »

mixmax wrote: post #23

" You might think Google could deal with this by just not infringing Microsoft’s patents, but that’s not how software patents work. Android has roughly 10 million lines of code. Auditing 10 million lines of code for compliance with 18,000 patents is an impossible task " There's a great startup in that sentence for whoever cracks the algorithmic challenges.

Kids, this is why we learn math. So we don't waste our time on what is impossible.

Not to the business' advantage to know anyway, more damages.

Re: Microsoft’s Android Shakedown

#45

Post by olsonjeffery »

jamesaguilar wrote: post #25
mixmax wrote: post #23

" You might think Google could deal with this by just not infringing Microsoft’s patents, but that’s not how software patents work. Android has roughly 10 million lines of code. Auditing 10 million lines of code for compliance with 18,000 patents is an impossible task " There's a great startup in that sentence for whoever cracks the algorithmic challenges.

s/startup/technological singularity/

function doesThisCodeInfrigeOnSomePatentSomewhere(codeString) { return true; }

Re: Microsoft’s Android Shakedown

#46

Post by BananaRepublic »

Dn_Ab wrote: post #33
BananaRepublic wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, Kinect owes quite alot to PrimeSense so I certainly wouldn't categorize it as a 'MS Research' product.

Balance. In seeking to lift one group you cast aside another hard working group of people. Certainly PrimeSense contributed much, but to discount the hard work of those in MS Research as something less by wrapping them in quotes only serves to despoil your message. You commit that which you wish to redress. See what Johnny Chung Lee said of his time there for a more balanced look of the records.

Ehh, given how much Kinect relies on the functionality offered by PrimeSense, I'd think it would rather be UNBALANCED to claim it to come from MS Research.

Re: Microsoft’s Android Shakedown

#47

Post by rwmj »

hollerith wrote: post #12

Legal question: could MS use patent law to get an injunction against the continued distribution of cyanogenmod?

I guess so, if they were prepared to name the patents in public. So far the settlements have all been behind closed doors and the patents and fees have (mostly) not been disclosed.

Microsoft doesn't want to reveal the full list of patents, because the open source community would go at them like a bomb finding prior art and coding around the few solid patents.

Re: Microsoft’s Android Shakedown

#48

Post by Zakuzaa »

pyre wrote: post #36
kooshball wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Although Microsoft has a small stake in Facebook and has been a partner for a while now, the Skype integration was probably started before the buyout offer.

Impossible! I Could Code That Over A Weekend(tm).

.. FB's scale?

Re: Microsoft’s Android Shakedown

#49

Post by Splines »

DaveMebs wrote: post #20
TomOfTTB wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

F# is probably your only valid point though I'm not sure I'd call yet another functional programming language an innovation. Seadragon is Zooming technology that is, at best, a decent demo at this point (and probably designed to be patented). For people who don't know what we're talking about: http://zoom.it Accelerator I'd never even heard of which is probably because it was introduced in 2006 and no finished produc…

There are going to be plenty of things that come out of MS Research that people don't realize came from there (examples: PhotoSynth, Kinect). Expecting an exhaustive list is unrealistic. Furthermore, MS Research was founded over a decade ago when patent trolling was not as big a deal. It's pretty clear if you read about it that Bill Gates wanted to create the successor to the great post-war corporate research groups…

... and you also get stuff like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WmC28cXWqLc

Don't get me wrong, I think the idea is really cool. The thing is that the 80's midi background track was just a terrible way to implement it.

Re: Microsoft’s Android Shakedown

#50

Post by barista »

crizCraig wrote: post #34
rapind wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. If they weren't cashing in on this problem their shareholder's would be pretty pissed and heads would roll.

Should Google do the same thing to Microsoft? Google has shareholders. If they did, I would lose respect for Google that I have already lost for Miscrosoft. Somehow, I don't think Google will, and not just because Windows Mobile is closed source. I think public opinion/brand reputation is an important thing to consider in these types of situations. For example, this poll shows only 32% of people agree with the strate…

What about Apple? They have used saimilar tactic. How about Oracle? IBM? Cisco? Lost respect for those too? Pretty much every company follows similar tactic to protect its interest. The fact Google does not use it is not because they "do no evil" but that they don't have any patents to ask money for.
Post reply on HN