Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Balmer to the rescue..HA!!!

Balmer and his group of marketing weenies CANNOT and WILL NOT make a dent. They will, by the nature of being Microsoft, screw this up too.

Let's look at their track record. Yup, over the last 20-odd years, Microsoft has garnered a HUGE chunk of the personal computing real estate by the nature of the market and basic consumer stupidity. That was the magic of Bill Gates..he figured out that by dangling a few shiny trinkets in front of the generally moronic public he would sell "Windows" with all of it's warts - basically forever.

THEN something drastic happened. Netscape started it when they tried to take a large chunk out of Microsoft's ass and almost succeeded... but I'll guarantee you that it got their attention. Then others, both on the hardware front but aggressively on the software with a flood of offerings hitting the market, the technology consumer getting a WHOLE lot smarter about what and how technology could be used, and as of today, they have BYPASSED Microsoft both in skill, market savvy and the ability to maneuver at a vastly quicker pace than the lumbering giant.. Balmer and his gang of weenies can't keep up. Neither can AT&T..

So let's see what happens over the next 3-6 months, with the holiday season, end-of-year strangeness of deals being done to clear product out of pipelines to tidy up the 2010 books and then a rash of new stuff coming down the pipe EARLY next year.. I'd be willing to bet ($1 dollar) that Balmer and his weenies are gone from this market as a player in either phones or tablets by the middle of 2011... They just can't do it..it's the nature of being Microsoft.
 
It's relevant in the respect that, as the public portion of the claim is written, looks as if Apple is also in violation. I wonder why Microsoft is only targeting Motorola...

Motorola can't go toe to toe in a battle of software patents with Microsoft.... Apple can. That's why.

This isn't about who ripped off who, it's about who ripped of who more.
 
First, a 5 billion dollar loan then this!

MS put the SCO in mobile computing. Ballmer is Darryl McBride's kindrid spirit. Can't be good for Mobile 7 with the opinion leaders.
 
ALL Google's Open Source marketing is all BS. The truth is Android is "Openly Stolen Intellectual Property".

- Stolen Multi-touch interface from Apple.

- Stolen App store from Apple.

- Stolen intellectual properties from WinMo.

- Stolen JAVA from SUN/Oracle.

- Stolen Location Service from Skyhook.

- Stolen Logo/Icon name from Atari.

Agreed, but they didn't steal anything from Microsoft, but they stole from Apple. The Android is a total knockoff. But really, how do you make a smartphone and NOT steal the app store? It's kinda a given.
 
Balmer and his group of marketing weenies CANNOT and WILL NOT make a dent. They will, by the nature of being Microsoft, screw this up too.

Let's look at their track record. Yup, over the last 20-odd years, Microsoft has garnered a HUGE chunk of the personal computing real estate by the nature of the market and basic consumer stupidity. That was the magic of Bill Gates..he figured out that by dangling a few shiny trinkets in front of the generally moronic public he would sell "Windows" with all of it's warts - basically forever.

THEN something drastic happened. Netscape started it when they tried to take a large chunk out of Microsoft's ass and almost succeeded... but I'll guarantee you that it got their attention. Then others, both on the hardware front but aggressively on the software with a flood of offerings hitting the market, the technology consumer getting a WHOLE lot smarter about what and how technology could be used, and as of today, they have BYPASSED Microsoft both in skill, market savvy and the ability to maneuver at a vastly quicker pace than the lumbering giant.. Balmer and his gang of weenies can't keep up. Neither can AT&T..

So let's see what happens over the next 3-6 months, with the holiday season, end-of-year strangeness of deals being done to clear product out of pipelines to tidy up the 2010 books and then a rash of new stuff coming down the pipe EARLY next year.. I'd be willing to bet ($1 dollar) that Balmer and his weenies are gone from this market as a player in either phones or tablets by the middle of 2011... They just can't do it..it's the nature of being Microsoft.

Hehe, remember when MS said that the iPhone 4 was Apple's Vista? "And I'm okay with it."

Well Apple just completely flipped MS off while pwning them in the face by A. Not losing consumer interest
B. Preventing a further news campaign against Apple
C. Giving free cases to prevent a Toyota-like disaster

MS just got pwned.
 
Agreed, but they didn't steal anything from Microsoft

I wouldn't be so sure about that. I haven't read all the details of MS's complaint, but from what I've seen, a growing number of Android phones are able to work with an Exchange server which is proprietary and owned by MS. The iPhone can work with Exchange out of the box because Apple licensed Exchange ActiveSync from MS, but I'm wondering how many of these handset makers are actually bothering to license it from MS or if it's being done with some reverse-engineering.

Let's look at their track record. Yup, over the last 20-odd years, Microsoft has garnered a HUGE chunk of the personal computing real estate by the nature of the market and basic consumer stupidity. That was the magic of Bill Gates..he figured out that by dangling a few shiny trinkets in front of the generally moronic public he would sell "Windows" with all of it's warts - basically forever.

I'm no fan of Windows or Microsoft, but your re-telling of history is appalling. MS did what they did on the desktop for one reason only and it had nothing to do with Apple or the quality of Windows. It was called DOS. Windows bridged the gap between the vast resources available for the DOS-based PC and a Mac-like PC user experience which allowed a load of legacy PC hardware and software to continue to live on in this new GUI/mouse-based computing world. Apple never gained a significant foothold because it was the odd man out, compatible with almost none of the existing PC hardware and absolutely none of the software.

It had nothing to do with consumer stupidity or shiny trinkets. That's an amazingly arrogant and condescending reading of the history of desktop computing.

THEN something drastic happened. Netscape started it when they tried to take a large chunk out of Microsoft's ass and almost succeeded... but I'll guarantee you that it got their attention. Then others, both on the hardware front but aggressively on the software with a flood of offerings hitting the market, the technology consumer getting a WHOLE lot smarter about what and how technology could be used, and as of today, they have BYPASSED Microsoft both in skill, market savvy and the ability to maneuver at a vastly quicker pace than the lumbering giant.. Balmer and his gang of weenies can't keep up. Neither can AT&T..

Huh? I don't even understand what you're trying to say. Netscape was not and never was going to be a threat to Microsoft. MS went after Netscape because they realized if Netscape controlled the default browser on the PC, then they would have control over the user interface for the Web. But it had nothing AT ALL to do with MS being afraid of Netscape taking them on. To believe that, you would have to believe that the circa-1995 MS had the amazing foresight to realize a day would come when web-based apps could rival the desktop computing experience. You can't simultaneously say that AND that they were idiots. It's one or the other.

So let's see what happens over the next 3-6 months, with the holiday season, end-of-year strangeness of deals being done to clear product out of pipelines to tidy up the 2010 books and then a rash of new stuff coming down the pipe EARLY next year.. I'd be willing to bet ($1 dollar) that Balmer and his weenies are gone from this market as a player in either phones or tablets by the middle of 2011... They just can't do it..it's the nature of being Microsoft.

MS has had a lot of duds in the last few years, but when they do score, they score big. I don't care about their success either way, but I wouldn't necessarily bet against them.
 
Well, they've just announced that Windows Phone 7 will have a licensing cost for handset manufacturers because they will cover liability for patent lawsuits :

http://www.goodgearguide.com.au/article/362876/patent_protection_key_windows_phone_license/

This suit seems to be just to drive the point home that "hey, don't go for Android, use our stuff and you'll be safe from us... err.. those patent things!". Motorola was probably picked because other handset manufacturers that use Android also ship Windows Mobile units (HTC, Sony Ericsson, Samsung) right now, and suing your own partners is never good for business.

HTC, SE etc pay the licence fee (as do Apple), Moto used to when they made Win6.5 phones but stopped as, hey, we got this "free" Android OS.

The reason M$ have gone after Moto is the same as why Apple have hit HTC - suing Google would be pointless as they have no income from Android that could be seen as damaging to the patent holders. It will hit them indirectly as Google have said they will support manufacturers using Android.
 
And that kind of attitude is exactly why these companies will garner more and more information about us unopposed.

It has to stop somewhere, "Surveillance Media" or not.

Until collective society stops demanding "the hot gos", surveillance media will be here to stay indefinitely.

If I walked up to your home, walked into your front garden, and proceeded to take photographs of your home so "I could find my way back home because I've never been here before", you'd be entitled to toe my nuts and send me on my way.

Actually I wouldn't care.

A, That means I would have a garden.

B, Someone would be noticing and appreciating my hard work.

Also the Google van drives on the street, not on your garden. Its no more invasive than a community member walking down the footpath.

High chances are you volunteer to participate in surveillance media.

Yep. If you're on the grid the only real privacy you've got is in your bathroom behind a locked door.

Or you know, buy some !@#$ing curtains.
 
What the patents are actually about

First, I miss having our resident patent authority Cmaier free from stifling contracts, so he could comment as well :)

I've been wondering exactly what all the supposed "ActiveSync" fuss was about, and finally found some time to read the patents in question.

Holy smokes. Talk about old but basic patents... ones that describe what they do in so few words, they cover a lot.
  • Two are about the filename system used on many storage cards.
  • One is about clearing Flash memory when more is dirty than clean.
  • One is about using software APIs to talk to radio hardware. (!!)
  • One is about popup context menus. (!!)
  • Two are about synchronizing calendars/etc between computers. (!!)
  • One is about apps registering for notifications. (!!)
And my favorite of all... a patent on what to do with a phone call: either update a current contact's call history, or automatically enter that call's info (like the number) into a new contact entry, with the user adding other info (like the name). Which is pretty much how every modern phone works.

Wow. Just wow. They all look basic and major. Every other patent suit we've seen reported here for the past few years seems like kid's stuff in comparison, since they usually were about detailed methods that could be gotten around. Methinks Microsoft wants to force a cross-license agreement with HP, instead of money.
 
I think it does affect Apple because it is not getting sued.

This means that Android is the Nemesis of Windows Phone7, not the iOS.

Android has taken the place of WindowsMobile in OEM manufacturers, now Microsoft wants is place back.

+1

Patent bust-ups happen every other day, and this doesn't even directly involve Apple.
 
#2 at market capitalization for public businesses in the entire world.

Why would that stop Microsoft from suing Apple over violations? Market Cap is just a value placed on the company via investors, nothing else.
 
Why would that stop Microsoft from suing Apple over violations? Market Cap is just a value placed on the company via investors, nothing else.

Because I'd say that Microsoft and Apple already have a patent sharing agreement - why do you assume that such an arrangement would be impossible? Microsoft had a similar arrangement with Sun Microsystems for example so it wouldn't be out of the question for there to be an arrangement with Microsoft.
 
Microsoft is the same company that patented the "Page Up" and "Page Down" buttons in 2005, 20 years after they were invented by someone else!!

http://www.zdnet.com/news/microsoft-patents-page-up-and-page-down/218626

That is definately patent trolling, and this seems like it might be as well.

Umm, how about reading the patent application instead of just reading the article form ZDNet:

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-...66.PN.&OS=PN/7,415<br /> ,666&RS=PN/7,415,666

You'll find that it is a lot more than just 'page up' and 'page down' button - it is a specific way of handling scrolling through a document - something that you over looked.
 
Because I'd say that Microsoft and Apple already have a patent sharing agreement - why do you assume that such an arrangement would be impossible? Microsoft had a similar arrangement with Sun Microsystems for example so it wouldn't be out of the question for there to be an arrangement with Microsoft.

No, the user claimed that MS wouldn't sue Apple as Apple has a larger market cap. I would like to know why they think the market cap would have anything to do with getting sued
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.