Related
I would like to see what people think.
wth!!! that is retarded!!
How can the government even grant most of these patents? You invent the wheel, sure it makes life MUCH simpler for everyone, you deserve a patent. You start using latex instead of sheep skins for condom production - bravo - grant a patent. On the other hand, all these iPhone patents do is stifle innovation and overload the legal system. Plus, most of these "patents" are so vague that they're virtually guaranteed to have precedent by someone other than Apple patent holders. Really hope Google steps into this frey and not only helps HTC to squash Apple's claims, but also publically lay into the patent office for granting these things in the first place.
Good god almighty, those are ****ing stupid patents to grant.
bundys said:
How can the government even grant most of these patents? You invent the wheel, sure it makes life MUCH simpler for everyone, you deserve a patent. You start using latex instead of sheep skins for condom production - bravo - grant a patent. On the other hand, all these iPhone patents do is stifle innovation and overload the legal system. Plus, most of these "patents" are so vague that they're virtually guaranteed to have precedent by someone other than Apple patent holders. Really hope Google steps into this frey and not only helps HTC to squash Apple's claims, but also publically lay into the patent office for granting these things in the first place.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly. I hope this goes toward deconstructing the patent system and exposing for what it truly is--not a protection for intellectual property, but a tool for naked corporate greed.
Steve Jobs is a big fat ****....
He's going after android. Check this http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/02/...lawsuit?icid=sphere_blogsmith_inpage_engadget
Steve Jobs is an idiot. He cant handle any competition, he knows his device is inferior and cant handle that. He is shaking in his boots right now with the rapid growth of android. I really hope Google/HTC give him a big F you and put him in his place.
What's the point of this poll?
Who the heck in this forum is going to vote Yes?
No one will, except of course for DMaverick and pr0cl1v1ty.
Am I the only thinking that this would be the perfect time for google to start showing Ads on TV with the theme of look what our device can do that the iphone cant?
I would pay good money to see the look on Steve Jobs face the first time he sees this.
HTC should sue Apple for being stupid.
Software patents need to go, but how much you wanna bet that this is about Apple pre-emptively suing HTC before HTC sue *them*? I bet this is a face-saving measure. They'll cross-license and that will be the end of it.
I do agree that Apple has at least something to hold against HTC *cough* Android *cough* what comes to the patent infringements. In addition I also think that this is some laughable and needless muscle flexing on Apple's part and to think that it wouldn't be regarded as a proxy attack at Android and Google is just preposterous.
Come whatever may since this is going to get really ugly but I think Apple is not going to be the one coming out on top.
What an easy way to get money by licensing the patents...see what Nokia is doing on Apple...so now even Apple settles a deal with Nokia Apple may not need to get a penny out from its pocket...
Steve Jobs will talk **** about Android but he's too scared to sue Google so he sues HTC..haha thats a good one Steve, how about you go back into hiding
jp_macaroni said:
HTC should sue Apple for being stupid.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Better yet, HTC should pull out the big guns (Microsoft) to sue them
Checkers or Chess?
Not cool Apple....especially since you stole from xerox etc(oh and Steve spoke of blatantly stealing from others)....but if you want to get to the root of it all Apple feels extremely threatened by Google/Android....Google is all about innovation and in Androids infant stages they blew Google off. Remember how much Apple used google maps to sell the iPhone when it was 1st introduced(the irony)....Now Android is growing up and its more of a competitor. But if you go against one you have to go against all of the companies with custom versions of Android in one way or another....I think the company that everyone keeps forgetting about is Palm...They were the catalysts for the mobile OS's we love today....The only reason HTC is in the crossfire is because of the Sense UI. But if you attack Sense UI, then you must attack Blur, Rachael, Dell's custom UI, and TouchWiz....(Thats HTC, Motorola, Sony Ericcson, Dell and Samsung) So instead of Apple focusing on bringing innovative products and services it chooses to contend with Google in a very risky game of chess. I personally feel many of Apple's policies slow innovation and impede competition.(app store**cough**) Apple I hope you get taught a humbling lesson.
If you read the breakdown of all the patents that they claim have been infringed upon, you can easily see that these would not only apply to Android, but a large variety of desktop operating systems and mobile oses as well.
engadget.com/2010/03/02/apple-vs-htc-a-patent-breakdown/
I am sorry but what apple is doing with their iphone and mobile OS platform is just not good for growth long term; i will however give them the benefit of the doubt as far as short term growth but long term they are only hurting themselves unless they really can get the government to uphold all these patents...
personally i think these patents are so pathetic and i do not think the government had any clue what they were patenting when they actually allowed apple to get the patents that they did... the government nor did anyone else have any clue what the mobile world would like like it does now, 3 years ago when those patents were first granted... i mean, can you imagine the money the guy who patented urinal cakes makes if he invented and patented those things right after urinals were invented? some technology is better left unprotected by uncle same for the good of advancement... how the hell can you have a patent on a screen that registers multiple touches to it? that is the most unorthodox thing i think i have ever heard in my life... apple put out a great product, no doubt but they are going about every wrong direction in keeping their product and legacy alive... continue to innovate rather than play defense behind lawyers... i would rather buy from a continuously innovative company that promotes the growth of their products rather than a company who puts out 1 good product and then attacks everyone else to keep their product at the top, and thats just a matter of respect for a business...
I will admit, when the iphone first came out, that was the gadget to have and it was hands down the best phone and to some extent still is... apple has controlled every aspect of the phones growth and has more/less been very opposing to the group of jailbreakers and iphone hackers that have tried to bring 3rd party software to the phones (remember those updates that bricked a lot of peoples phones?). But with that said there comes a time where a company needs to let go, they did great at getting the phone, and to a certain extent, the entire mobile market really moving but after awhile they need to let things go and realize that they have already created a legacy and the users need to take the phone and platform the direction they want to go.
Simplicity is the key to get something started, complexity is the key to keep that same thing interesting...
Apple's only biting because HTC (with Google) are producing sales stealing devices. As far as I am aware, this is the first time Apple has filed patent breaches without first negotiating with the infringing party.
In legal circles, this is truely the response from a very immature, emotional, foot stomping little boy.
GO HTC!! GO Android!! GO you good thing!!
Honestly, I voted that I do agree with some of the patents that they had been granted, not all. Maybe through this mess we'll see some great innovation; interfaces that we've never considered before, alterations to common ideals of the way our phones operate. Google has brought us a good thing. From the perspective of apple, it would be intelligent to stop the source (htc), if there were infringing content being distributed (to be decided I guess). Google provides the best mobile OS available, HTC distributes it. It will end well for the consumer though, I promise.
"We have always been shameless about stealing great ideas."
- Steve Jobs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CW0DUg63lqU
What a f-tard.
From what I can gather, the claims at its core appear to be about android and wm. I would like to see Google and Microsoft join forces on this one and get behind HTC.
Cut and paste....
Microsoft says Android infringes on its patents, licenses HTC (update: talking to other Android manufacturers as well)
By Vladislav Savov posted Apr 28th 2010 at 12:40PM
The lawyers up in Redmond seem to have been woken from their slumber with the sudden realization that -- oh look! -- Google's Android OS infringes on Microsoft's boatload of software patents. How specifically it does so is not identified, but Microsoft believes that elements from both the user interface and the underlying operating system are in violation of its rights. This is very much in keeping with the Windows maker's crusade to assert patent claims over Linux, which in the past has garnished it with cross-licensing deals with Amazon and Xandros, as well as a settlement from TomTom. Lawsuits are not yet being discussed here, but lest you think this is a small-time disturbance, longtime Windows Mobile / Windows Phone partner HTC has already decided to shorten its list of troubles by ponying up for a license from Microsoft that covers its Android phones -- it would be pretty insane if Microsoft sued one of its biggest and most important hardware manufacturers for patent infringement, after all. Even still, it's now an unfortunate fact that HTC is having to pay Microsoft royalties to use Google's operating system. Strange days, indeed.
Update: Microsoft deputy general counsel of intellectual property Horacio Gutierrez just sent us a statement saying that the company's been "talking to several device manufacturers to address our concerns relative to the Android mobile platform." We're taking that to mean the same as above: Microsoft isn't too interested in suing any of its Windows Mobile / Windows Phone partners, so it's trying to work out patent license deals with those companies in advance of any nastiness. It's an interesting strategy: patents forbid anyone from making, using, or selling your invention, so Redmond can protect its partners while still leaving open the possibility of a lawsuit with Google itself down the line. In fact, we'd almost say it seems like Microsoft's agreement with HTC is as much of a threat to Google as Apple's lawsuit -- Redmond's basically saying you can't sell an Android device without paying a license fee, and we'd bet those fees are real close to the Windows Phone 7 license fee. Clever, clever -- we'll see how this one plays out. Here's Horacio's full statement:
Microsoft has a decades-long record of investment in software platforms. As a result, we have built a significant patent portfolio in this field, and we have a responsibility to our customers, partners, and shareholders to ensure that competitors do not free ride on our innovations. We have also consistently taken a proactive approach to licensing to resolve IP infringement by other companies, and have been talking with several device manufacturers to address our concerns relative to the Android mobile platform.
Via Engadget. -----> http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/28/microsoft-says-android-infringes-on-its-patents-licenses-htc/
Seems like interesting times ahead.
It doesn't matter, HTC cooperated nicely with Microsoft. Microsoft brokered a deal licensing their technology to HTC. Engadget (I read this on Phandroid) also states though, in another article, that this could raise the price of Android phones.
m.gizmodo.com/site?t=NhIoa9.xgxKeRWKcnVfXQw&sid=gizmodo
Eclair~ said:
this could raise the price of Android phones.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wonderful (sarcasm).. if this did happen, I hope it happens later in the summer..
I would be curious to know if htc was aware that this was coming before they took a pass on Palm? The deal with Microsoft didnt happen overnight but certainly if they knew it was coming that juicy patent portfolio palm is sitting on would have been more enticing. That ship has now sailed with the HP aquisition announced today so its just an odd tidbit to speculate about at this point I guess.
krabman said:
I would be curious to know if htc was aware that this was coming before they took a pass on Palm? The deal with Microsoft didnt happen overnight but certainly if they knew it was coming that juicy patent portfolio palm is sitting on would have been more enticing. That ship has now sailed with the HP aquisition announced today so its just an odd tidbit to speculate about at this point I guess.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Interesting thought for sure.
The HP deal is huge. WebOS is an amazing platform and now it has the financial backing it desperately needed. I'm mostly excited about WebOS's integration into the HP tablets. I might pick one up if they a good job with it.
Competition is definitely heating up with iPhone 4.0, HP WebOS, Blackberry 6.0 and Symbian 3! Hopefully Android will come out of top!
I hope they all do well, means more options for us.
Sick of these bloated American companies practising lawsuits and claims instead of making better products, don't be evil Microsoft!
And Just as I was typing this, my windows 7 suddenly started to shutdown as if it knew what I was typing... (restart after update reminder popped up, while typing... lol)
man, i'm so sick of everyone attacking Android. Just because it's awesome, innovative, open, and growing because everyone wants it the big companies can't do anything other than try to stall it's growth through litigation.
I'm fed up with all these stupid ass patent infringement cases. I wish the Gov't would step in and clean up how tech patents are granted.. That would allow for more innovation which is good for us (consumers) which are supposed to be what this is all about. Not protecting BIG CORPORATIONS and fattening their pockets.
The government doesnt step up and do anything because they are employees of the various huge companies whose contributions gave them the money to get elected, in other words they are owned by them. Big companies love these things because basically in the patent world you dont need to be right, you just need to have more money. Make no mistake, its not android they are attacking, its google. Everyone fears google, a company who is in a position to become the most powerful private entity that ever existed. This is how their search engine gets stripped out of phones, apple makes kissy face with microsoft, and on and on, you can see it everyhwere.
One last one, America does not have a monopoly on bloated greedy companies.
This debate reminds me of an article I read about the apple lawsuit a month or so ago.
The Ugly Nexus One:
http://www.maclife.com/article/news/ugly_nexus_one_if_apple_wins_patent_suits
I love the power crank.
Oddly enough, I read a theory someone postulated that Microsoft is doing this to, in some way, provide HTC some shielding from the Apple suit a la "No, we're infringing on THESE guys's patents, and we're paying them for it". Definitely an interesting theory, and it wouldn't make sense for Microsoft to deliberately try to harm their largest developer of Windows Phones. Only time will tell, I suppose...
ChillRays said:
This debate reminds me of an article I read about the apple lawsuit a month or so ago.
The Ugly Nexus One:
http://www.maclife.com/article/news/ugly_nexus_one_if_apple_wins_patent_suits
I love the power crank.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Funny thing is that's exactly what 2 of my home screens look like, random groupings of icons, with space for new widgets or apps.
I still can’t believe that you can patent software under US law. Its crazy. You can’t in Europe (well you can, but it has to be part of a patent for hardware).
Cases like this illustrate how stupid unproductive it is. How can one company be allowed claim an exclusive right to software doing something in a certain way…?
BigDamHero said:
I still can’t believe that you can patent software under US law. Its crazy. You can’t in Europe (well you can, but it has to be part of a patent for hardware).
Cases like this illustrate how stupid unproductive it is. How can one company be allowed claim an exclusive right to software doing something in a certain way…?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My thoughts exactly
MaximReapage said:
Oddly enough, I read a theory someone postulated that Microsoft is doing this to, in some way, provide HTC some shielding from the Apple suit a la "No, we're infringing on THESE guys's patents, and we're paying them for it". Definitely an interesting theory, and it wouldn't make sense for Microsoft to deliberately try to harm their largest developer of Windows Phones. Only time will tell, I suppose...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You know I posted that theory on engadget, and if that's the case then by all means good move HTC and way to go Microsoft. I would like to know the fee for said licensing though.
And better yet I would love to know if in fact Linux does infringe on Microsoft's patents. I've read that Microsoft has always went around to smaller companies using Linux and bullied them into paying license fees, but that one company stood up to them and Microsoft backed down. Because Microsoft hasnt ever made it public which code that Linux actually infringes and if is ever released then it will more than likely be yanked from Linux thereby Microsoft would have no way of making money off all these companies when it SHOULDN't be anyway.
I know this forum has a lot of talented guys that know OS's especially Microsoft and Linux. What's your guys take on this?
Another question a person might ask considering the kissy face microsoft has been making with apple lately is why did they not pursue licensing agreements with apple on some of that IP? MS has nearly 11000 active patents in its portfolio including a broad range of touch input patents. Here is an example..... cut and paste...
Multi-touch uses, gestures, and implementation with the following abstract:
A tablet PC having an interactive display, which is touchscreen enabled, may be enhanced to provide a user with superior usability and efficiency. A touchscreen device may be configured to receive multiple concurrent touchscreen contacts. The attributes of the multiple concurrent touchscreen contracts may be mapped to operations performed on the computing device. As a result, a user can trigger the execution of the toggle accessibility aid operation and the screen rotation operation with greater convenience. Moreover, the tablet PC may be configured to map an operation to a hand gesture or input.... end cut and paste.
The patent application filing date is May 12, 2006, or a few months before Apples famous multi touch patent application. So, a simple cost versus profit business decision or part of a grander strategy in light of this latest?
These patent infringements are stretching. They're trying to patent intuitive processes/gestures and not the actual technology. If it flies in court, it will be because the lawyers involved are too stupid to see the difference.
It's like establishing the first road by using the same path over and over, and then claiming to have patented the action of driving on a road and suing all other road builders. That's going to piss off mightily the guy who just spent time and money to develop asphalt, and rightfully so.
Steve Jobs, Bill Gates and his butt-boy Steve Ballmer need to unpucker their asses and shut the hell up.
BigDamHero said:
I still can’t believe that you can patent software under US law. Its crazy. You can’t in Europe (well you can, but it has to be part of a patent for hardware).
Cases like this illustrate how stupid unproductive it is. How can one company be allowed claim an exclusive right to software doing something in a certain way…?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're right.
It's because here in the US, lawyers and judges are by and large too stupid to understand any technology more complex than a toaster. There are exceptions, but they're vastly outnumbered. The worst part is, they seem to multiply like rabbits, they're all hungry and they'll take any idiotic argument they can to court for the off chance of a big payday.
I think actually the license agreement will be to use Microsoft's FAT/FAT32 file system that is on the SD card. FAT and FAT32 is a widely used file system but is microsoft property, is was ignored by microsoft for years and then they realised that they could make money from it, as cameras, photo frames, phones and linux has it.
So the reason there quiet about it is because if it's only the filesystem then no one can dismiss the linux violates the patents news story.
What exactly did Android do to piss Microsoft off ?
This is for those that don't leave this forum
http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/04/microsoft-htc-android-patent/
I admit, I didn't know that forums existed outside of the Hero CDMA until my Apple buddy sent me that link...
both apple & microsoft with wp7 will be no different im afraid. they are both very afraid of android as it is very close to dominating the market.
HeroHTC said:
This is for those that don't leave this forum
http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/04/microsoft-htc-android-patent/
I admit, I didn't know that forums existed outside of the Hero CDMA until my Apple buddy sent me that link...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is actually good for HTC. If you think about it, Microsoft is actually doing HTC a favor. HTC and Microsoft have a long history with each other, especially because the majority of all the WinMobile devices that are remotely decent are developed by HTC and with Microsoft releasing there new WinMobile 7 OS, they're going to need a good hardware manufacturer; who better than HTC?. The title may say that Microsoft "sued" HTC, but I bet there were some backdoor negotiating about how each company could help each other ultimately. It's kinda like: "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" -- Apple being the ultimate enemy here.
By paying royalties to Microsoft, HTC is pretty much "shielded" from anything Apple will try to do in regards to those 20 those patents Apple is suing HTC for. Microsoft has such a huge list of patents, which HTC can now "claim" that they're using in conjunction with Microsoft. With Microsoft in the mix, Apple isn't just dealing with HTC one-on-one anymore, they're dealing with Microsoft as well... who would probably ***** slap Apple. Bill Gates has already done that to Steve Jobs actually
Overall though, like fixxxer said above, the mere fact that either Microsoft of Apple would decide to sue should be an indication that both companies are afraid for the dominance Android could have, but given enough time... Android's overtaking of the market is inevitable, especially when Father Google is the company that's running ship.
Oh and yes, XDA is my virtual home!
pseudoremora said:
This is actually good for HTC.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, it's good for them in the same way that if you're the victim of a protection racket, it's probably "good" for you to keep up on your payments.
Reading between the lines, I'd say the most significant thing about the article is that it sounds like Microsoft is gearing up for a major assault on Android through patent suits. (Not that that should surprise anybody...)
subliminalurge said:
Reading between the lines, I'd say the most significant thing about the article is that it sounds like Microsoft is gearing up for a major assault on Android through patent suits. (Not that that should surprise anybody...)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's what angers me. They are so afraid of competition that they would rather stifle progression than admit defeat and "work together". I thought that concept of working together was forced on us in kindergarten...no?
subliminalurge said:
Reading between the lines, I'd say the most significant thing about the article is that it sounds like Microsoft is gearing up for a major assault on Android through patent suits. (Not that that should surprise anybody...)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's a matter of perspective and yes, at the end of the day -- Microsoft and Apple are both assaulting HTC/Android, but read this article about this whole Microsoft Suing HTC; it's much different than the Wired version above.
http://techcrunch.com/2010/04/28/microsoft-htc-android-apple-patents/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The difference with Apple and M$ is that Microsoft does actually own valid patents on complex structure of code such as memory management where as Apple's patents are absolutely outrageous such as "cpu undervolting during idle for mobile devices" or "multitouch on mobile devices" or "icons for mobile devices."
M$ may claim 235 patent violations and, even though they probably don't have nearly that much, I wouldn't be surprised if 100 of those are completely valid. Novell paid up too, and we're pretty sure Novell checked the code and found some validity.
BTW, Independent review found 260 patent violations with gnu and linux. M$ only claims 235. M$, however, has never sued an open-source organization.
And this is actually good for HTC. HTC does pay for licenses if the patents apply. Not to mention M$ is essentially lending its portfolio in the fight against evil, Apple.
Yea, in reading the statements from both HTC and Microsoft, there were never any threats of a lawsuit. Microsoft just approached HTC and basically just gave them the list of patents that they were infringing on and how much it would be to pay for a license. The fact that HTC paid them just means that HTC was either scared and just did it, or they actually had lawyers look at them and see what the validity of them are and found they were valid. I would guess that a company the size of HTC probably paid their lawyers to actually look at the patents before paying them.
Do think just "paying them off" sets a bad precedence for the future of Google and Android?
I am just speculating that it might spark some "holding back" on Googles progression of Android.
Basically, its a pissing contest and who wins? Does Google have the financial backing to take on M$ if they had to?
Edit: Yeah, I'm a Google phanboy so I guess my opinion might be swayed a little....
http://www.tgdaily.com/mobility-features/54903-is-motorola-getting-ready-to-ditch-android
The article makes several key points:
"Android isn't turning out to be profitable for any company other than Google and even Google's numbers look less than reliable. There are 37 lawsuits on this platform since the beginning of 2010 many filed against companies like Motorola and complaints from the OEM on Google's responsiveness to their concerns are both common and strident," he explained.
"They are not happy and a review of all of this is what pushed HP to buy Palm and avoid Android all together
You have to consider why a company like Motorola would chose to support, or not support an OS - things may not be all that rosy for Google Experience Devices, in fact it sounds like companies like Motorola may actually resent Googles interference, and what they percieve as an inequitable distribution of profit (into Googles Pocket) on these devices.
Developing an operating system isn't something a company "just decides" to do. It takes years, then you have to get the hardware vendors to make systems for it, and the software guys to make software for it. HP already have an OS in WebOS; ditto RIM. Are they swimming in dev love right now?
>"Android isn't turning out to be profitable for any company other than Google"
Moto was near death after the Razr petered out, and was resuscitated back to life with the Droid series. Last I looked, its financials look a lot better than it was before its Android push. Ditto for HTC, which is now riding on a wave of cash. You can check on others.
Every for-profit company in the world is doing things to make...a profit. If it's not profitable, nobody would do it. Now, look at the rate of Android adoption for smartphones. Think all of those vendors are looking to lose money?
The trouble with holding Internet pundits as gospel is that they, like any for-profit entity, don't necessarily care about the facts as they do about sensationalizing them, even to the extent of spouting fibs. The more attention a blog post gets, the more hits, and the more ad revenue. Sad as it is to say, but truth and facts can be boring, and embellishment sells.
I think its all in the informations source. Wasn't there an article a month or two back that essentially discussed exactly how profitable Android is? Essentially calling it Google's most profitable venture ever for both themselves and their partners.
I think the proof is in handset shipments and growth. What is HTC's shipment growth over the past 2 years? Something in the neighborhood of 200%? and their projection is for a 300% increase over that this year? Those handset sales are driven primarily by Android. If they aren't making a profit on those handsets then they would have been unprofitable no matter what, because their prices wouldn't have changed. Whether it be Windows Mobile,Android or Brand Z their new handset is still going to be in the neighborhood of 599-650, so its their responsibility to make sure that price point is profitable for them. I don't see them being able to complain about slow growth since the sales growth and acceptance for the Android platform is pretty much meteoric.
I hardly see Motorola complaining about Android considering it and Verizon essentially saved them from becoming the next Nokia, a brand no one in America cares about. Are they hedging their bets? Possibly. Abandoning Android right now or in the foreseeable future though? I would say absolutely not.
Without Android, its pretty easy to say that Motorola and HTC would be in far worse financial shape than increasing their shipments and profits every quarter than they currently are. (Samsung not so much, they could have continued to be the OEM supplier for screens to HTC/Other brands who want to make phones) But in fact it was so profitable it encouraged Samsung to jump into the market themselves instead of just supplying parts. It gave those companies an instant way to compete with iOS.
Motorola announced today it sold 8.3 million handsets in the second quarter, earning the Mobile Devices division $1.7 billion in sales, and returning the unit to profitability after several quarters of losses. Over 2.7 million smartphones were part of Motorola’s overall handset sales, showing the vast growth in this segment, as the company reported zero smartphone sales in the same quarter in 2009. Although Motorola quarterly results don’t specifically name the biggest catalyst for such a change, it can be summarized in one word: Android.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thats from July of 2010. So from losses to profit, I can hardly see how that "wouldn't be turning out profitable" for them.
e.mote said:
Developing an operating system isn't something a company "just decides" to do. It takes years, then you have to get the hardware vendors to make systems for it, and the software guys to make software for it. HP already have an OS in WebOS; ditto RIM. Are they swimming in dev love right now?
>"Android isn't turning out to be profitable for any company other than Google"
Moto was near death after the Razr petered out, and was resuscitated back to life with the Droid series. Last I looked, its financials look a lot better than it was before its Android push. Ditto for HTC, which is now riding on a wave of cash. You can check on others.
Every for-profit company in the world is doing things to make...a profit. If it's not profitable, nobody would do it. Now, look at the rate of Android adoption for smartphones. Think all of those vendors are looking to lose money?
The trouble with holding Internet pundits as gospel is that they, like any for-profit entity, don't necessarily care about the facts as they do about sensationalizing them, even to the extent of spouting fibs. The more attention a blog post gets, the more hits, and the more ad revenue. Sad as it is to say, but truth and facts can be boring, and embellishment sells.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You both make good points.
Thats when these boards work best. When people actually think through all the facets of a topic and don't just devolve into an Apple good/Android Bad rant.
However, in response to the comment: "Developing an operating system isn't something a company "just decides" to do. "
Certainly it is,
ANDROID is an operating system developed by a company called Google, that just "decided" to create an OS to compete with Apple.
That in turn was developed from an OS called Linux developed by Torvalds as an open source alternative to Windows.
Or take Windows Phone 7 - A company called Microsoft "Just decided to develop" and OS from the ground up to compete with Apple.
Problem isn't developing an OS, problem is marketing it and developing Apps.
Edit: I agree with you that that this is virtually impossible for Motorola. But I would have thought it impossible for HP too and yet, they had the creative insight to buy palm, and now they are doing it. Probably will crash and burn, but bottom line is: They DID abandon android.
Digital Man said:
ANDROID is an operating system developed by a company called Google, that just "decided" to create an OS to compete with Apple.
Or take Windows Phone 7 - A company called Microsoft "Just decided to develop" and OS from the ground up to compete with Apple.
Problem isn't developing an OS, problem is marketing it and developing Apps.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I hope you understand that there difference between software companies deciding to make software and hardware companies deciding to make software.
Microsoft and Google already had experience and infrastructure in place to create new software. Motorola will be starting with...nothing. That is why Palm was purchased by HP, they needed a leg up on software experience to make new software development practical.
_RTFM_ said:
I hope you understand that there difference between software companies deciding to make software and hardware companies deciding to make software.
Microsoft and Google already had experience and infrastructure in place to create new software. Motorola will be starting with...nothing. That is why Palm was purchased by HP, they needed a leg up on software experience to make new software development practical.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Knew that one was coming. Thats why companies hire employess. Thats why companies buy other companies.
Thats why companies like HP which are HARDWARE companies buy companies like Palm which are SOFTWARE companies. Whatever it takes to get the job done.
Programmers are people, they can walk from software companies over to the building where the hardware company is located and start working there, on a shiny new OS as soon as they are hired or aquired.
Edit: Might I also point out that Google started as a search engine, not a software company either.
Digital Man said:
Knew that one was coming. Thats why companies hire employess. Thats why companies buy other companies.
Thats why companies like HP which are HARDWARE companies buy companies like Palm which are SOFTWARE companies. Whatever it takes to get the job done.
Programmers are people, they can walk from software companies over to the building where the hardware company is located and start working there, on a shiny new OS as soon as they are hired or aquired.
Edit: Might I also point out that Google started as a search engine, not a software company either.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
...ok, but in order for them to walk over there they need to be PAID, and an entire new wing of R&D needs to be built to support them. This is a massive investment that is VERY high risk that takes a long time.
Oh you're right, I had no clue Google started as a search engine. That means they are and have always been a software company. Just because "engine" is in the phrase doesn't mean it isn't software
_RTFM_ said:
...ok, but in order for them to walk over there they need to be PAID, and an entire new wing of R&D needs to be built to support them. This is a massive investment that is VERY high risk that takes a long time.
Oh you're right, I had no clue Google started as a search engine. That means they are and have always been a software company. Just because "engine" is in the phrase doesn't mean it isn't software
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sarcasm aside, no, I'm still not sure a search engine is the same as a hardware operating system....
Her is a good article supporting the alternative point of view however:
Moto ditching Android: Silly Rumor
http://androidcommunity.com/motorola-developing-own-os-silly-rumor-20110325/
Note this line: Motorola is working on their own OS? What? Back that up. Several blogs are putting forth the rumor that Motorola’s friendship with Google is waning and that the cellphone manufacturer has been quietly hiring Apple and Adobe engineers with the aim of developing their own platform OS to compete with Android.
Note the part about quietly hiring from Apple and Adobe.
I honestly don't have a strong opinion one way or the other here. I am primarily playing Devils Advocate by throwing the orignal topic out here for discussion, as it is something that people have been talking about quite a bit on Motorola hardware boards.
I was curious to see other peoples points of view on the story-rumor.
Here is an interesting article about why Google might not care if Android ever makes money.
Android May Be the Greatest Legal Destruction of Wealth in History [Android]
TOP STORIES IN TECHNOLOGY | MARCH 25, 2011
http://gizmodo.com/#!5785983/android-may-be-the-greatest-legal-destruction-of-wealth-in-history
tinpusher said:
Here is an interesting article about why Google might not care if Android ever makes money.
Android May Be the Greatest Legal Destruction of Wealth in History [Android]
TOP STORIES IN TECHNOLOGY | MARCH 25, 2011
http://gizmodo.com/#!5785983/android-may-be-the-greatest-legal-destruction-of-wealth-in-history
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for posting this.
I have to laugh. I started this thread, and in effect was accused of being a conspiracy theorist wearing a tin-foil hat. So it makes me feel better knowing that the guys over at Gizmodo have some pretty shiny head-gear as well.
If Motorola leaves the Android community they would be shooting themselves in the foot. I really have a hard time believing Moto would be that stupid.
Where were they before Android? On the brink of death. Leaving now is suicide. Companies really need to stop thinking they are Apple. Apple is the exception to that proves rule.
If they took all the money they put into this rumored OS and sunk it into a better blur (or option to disable blur), better hardware, and FAST updates... they would rule the market.
th0r615 said:
If Motorola leaves the Android community they would be shooting themselves in the foot. I really have a hard time believing Moto would be that stupid.
Where were they before Android? On the brink of death. Leaving now is suicide. Companies really need to stop thinking they are Apple. Apple is the exception to that proves rule.
If they took all the money they put into this rumored OS and sunk it into a better blur (or option to disable blur), better hardware, and FAST updates... they would rule the market.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh hell, some companies like Microsoft shoot themselves in the foot on an almost daily basis. Remember the Kin phone? Here is a quote from an article by Engadget:
"While it's hard to argue that Kin is an awful product, the saddest part of the story is that many of the people responsible for it knew it was -- they were largely victims of political circumstance, forced to release a phone that was practically raw in the middle."
In the end they sold something like 500 of the things.
Remember the Dell streak releasing crippled with Android 1.6?
And then there was windows Vista....
Companies often do things that seem to make no rational business sense.
It would be crazy for them to abandon the platform that single handedly prevented them from going into bankruptcy... Motorola was doing horrible before they teamed up with Verizon and released the Droid OG. Which was an insanely popular device. Motorola should be thanking Verizon and Google for still having jobs right now...
They would be crazy to stop embracing android. Not only is it generating business like crazy (everyone has seen or heard of the enormous numbers of android products being sold, numbers that are unseating the existing leaders of the mobile os market), all indications are that android is still growing. Why abandon success?
Sent from my DROIDX using XDA App
Actually it's as simple as this.. Would you abandon an OS that has the second largest apps for mobile? It would be dumb for any company to do such a thing.. I mean think about it.. What other choices do you have?? WM7, RIM, Palm etc?? It would take years for them to catch up, apps wise.. Right now, what makes these phone manufacturer tick, is the apps behind it.. Hence, that's the reason why I chose Android when I left iphone.. The apps.. So I don't think Motorola would abandon Android and jump ship anytime soon.. Or at all, for that matter..
Yeah I agree. I don't see this happening anytime soon, if at all. Especially looking within a few years down the road.
Motorola should just concentrate on making better quality hardware and leave th software to people who know what they are doing. Motorola use to mean quality, now it's just another phone maker in a sea of the same devices running the same software with nothing really revolutionary to offer buyers. If moto could make an android device with the quality of their razor they would destroy the competition.
The rumor that Moto is hiring software egr's has a glimmer of truth (and subsequently embellished for tabloid consumption). Moto is learning that there is a downside to the Android gravy train, which every co and its sister is jumping onto, and that is lack of differentiation.
Co's are trying different things. Asus is doing the integrated keyboard with the Transformer. HTC has the active digitizer where you can use a stylus. Archos is leaning on its PMP roots with strong multimedia support. But for the majority, differentiation will be minimal (mostly a custom GUI). The main determinant will be price. In other words, Android tabs will be commodity status very soon. This is good for the consumers, but not for the vendors.
This isn't the smartphone market any more, where supply is constrained by the carriers playing as gatekeepers. Price competition will be intense, and slapping on a custom GUI (as has been the practice for smartphones) will no longer be enough. Premium brands in smartphones do not automatically translate to the tablet market.
It'll be a free-for-all. And the guys that win will be those with the best value-add, brand strength, and distribution muscle. For the first, you need software peeps. Which is why Moto is stocking up.
Digital Man said:
Might I also point out that Google started as a search engine, not a software company either.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This sentence does not make any sense
hi_its_ryan said:
This sentence does not make any sense
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just saying that something doesn't make sense isn't very helpful. Try explaining WHY it doesn't make sense.
That would add something to the discussion.
I'm not terribly optimistic this will go anywhere, but I signed it because I consider software patents to be the scourge of the software industry. They are especially deadly for start-ups and small companies working on innovative new products - exactly the people patents are supposed to protect.
http://www.petitiononline.com/pasp01/petition.html
Neo3D said:
I'm not terribly optimistic this will go anywhere, but I signed it because I consider software patents to be the scourge of the software industry. They are especially deadly for start-ups and small companies working on innovative new products - exactly the people patents are supposed to protect.
http://www.petitiononline.com/pasp01/petition.html
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If we get rid of software patents altogether, then startups and small companies will never get off the ground because as soon as they release something bigger companies will just take that work, repackage it, and drown out the small company with their vast marketing and advertising funds.
So who is being helped by eliminating software patents?
MaxCarnage said:
If we get rid of software patents altogether, then startups and small companies will never get off the ground because as soon as they release something bigger companies will just take that work, repackage it, and drown out the small company with their vast marketing and advertising funds.
So who is being helped by eliminating software patents?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Most larger companies are not innovative enough to just uptake a new project. they are usually interested in the profit. Not the innovation.
lithid-cm said:
Most larger companies are not innovative enough to just uptake a new project. they are usually interested in the profit. Not the innovation.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So, let's say that I am an independent developer (I am not) and I come up with an awesome new word processor that has amazing features that are unique and will revolutionize the industry. There are no more software patents so I package up my innovative new software, spend time gathering investors, create a small marketing campaign, and get my software boxed and stocked at Best Buy.
Microsoft sees my software and takes my designs and integrates them into Word. They then spend millions of dollars (pocket change to them, my entire company to me) advertising Word and getting my software pushed down into oblivion.
Where is the benefit to me as the developer in getting rid of software patents, unless I am a FOSS advocate and never intended to make money off my work anyway?
EDIT: By the way, I am not trying to troll or be argumentative just for the sake of it; I am genuinely trying to understand the benefit of eliminating software patents.
I'm not keen on removing software patents all together as I do believe in their ability to encourage innovation.
However, the current system is FUBAR and needs to be scrapped (which will never happen because any move towards reform represents a direct attack on the power base of the very wealthy - any prospective legislation would be DOA before it even got into committee)
Patent term lengths need to be drastically reduced to perhaps ten years tops with progressively higher patent fees to renew the term ($100-$1000-$10,000-$100,000 etc.) they need to be far more specific in scope than they currently are, and the way such infringement is handled internationally needs to be harmonized.
Such reform would have to go hand-in-hand with strong fair use protections for the general public.
Without a strong populist movement towards such a result, I doubt any politician would touch it as it would mean zero campaign contributions from the only entities capable of bankrolling an effective election campaign though.
Patents can only encourage innovation if innovation is NOT stifled by ridiculously broad language and obscenely long patent terms. Lifetime+90 years is absolutely insane.
The realtipping point is likely to be when corporations start uploading simulations of real animal and human consciousness (which will be possible one day soon) to digital storage and start trying to patent them - because the direction this society has chosen to head in will only result in precisely the above occurring.
MaxCarnage said:
So, let's say that I am an independent developer (I am not) and I come up with an awesome new word processor that has amazing features that are unique and will revolutionize the industry. There are no more software patents so I package up my innovative new software, spend time gathering investors, create a small marketing campaign, and get my software boxed and stocked at Best Buy.
Microsoft sees my software and takes my designs and integrates them into Word. They then spend millions of dollars (pocket change to them, my entire company to me) advertising Word and getting my software pushed down into oblivion.
Where is the benefit to me as the developer in getting rid of software patents, unless I am a FOSS advocate and never intended to make money off my work anyway?
EDIT: By the way, I am not trying to troll or be argumentative just for the sake of it; I am genuinely trying to understand the benefit of eliminating software patents.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Logic in the EVO 4G forum? I must be in heaven.
lithid-cm said:
Most larger companies are not innovative enough to just uptake a new project. they are usually interested in the profit. Not the innovation.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is weird argument. It doesn't take much innovation (if any) to steal someone else's innovation. By doing that they also diminish a competitor's advantage, possibly/probably increasing their own profit.
Award Tour said:
This is weird argument. It doesn't take much innovation (if any) to steal someone else's innovation. By doing that they also diminish a competitor's advantage, possibly/probably increasing their own profit.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, that was kind of the point I was trying to make. If companies can just steal ideas from independent developers without consequence, then there's no need for innovation once you become the top dog company. Wouldn't RIM be happier today if they could have repackaged and rebranded iOS during that first year that Apple entered the smartphone market instead of desperately trying make something competitive? Or PALM or anyone else?
Knowing that your hard work is up for grabs the second someone else gets wind of it isn't going to encourage innovation.
I'm opposed to software patents, but not because of some noble ideal about protecting small developers. They don't deserve state-granted monopoly privilege and artificial profits any more than the big companies do. Rather, I oppose them because they stifle innovation. For many, many years, taking existing software and tweaking and improving it was the norm, and it's how software naturally develops. Patents stifle the ability to make things better, and we as a society pay the price.
Frankly I find the idea of patents in general to be counter-intuitive and in some cases outright immoral. Let's suppose we are all cave-men, and no technology exists. We are all naked hairy homo sapiens living in caves. Then one day I figure out how to cut down a tree and build a house out of wood. It's completely insane to think that I could "patent" that idea, and force you to pay me if you want to build your own house out of your own wood. No, you'd see it and you'd build a house of your own and you'd tell me to **** off if I asked you for royalties. And guess what, people will still be motivated to innovate without patents. Patents make innovation a zero-sum game when it doesn't have to be that way.
Just my opinion and I see the validity of both sides. Just sharing my viewpoint, not interested in arguing.
I think it's more important that the patent system get a makeover with more specific rules.
It should not be allowed to get a patent on a product based on the extremely liberal rules descriptions they allow now.
Look at the SG Tab 10.1" versus iPad 2.
Perfect example of what I mean.
MaxCarnage said:
So, let's say that I am an independent developer (I am not) and I come up with an awesome new word processor that has amazing features that are unique and will revolutionize the industry. There are no more software patents so I package up my innovative new software, spend time gathering investors, create a small marketing campaign, and get my software boxed and stocked at Best Buy.
Microsoft sees my software and takes my designs and integrates them into Word. They then spend millions of dollars (pocket change to them, my entire company to me) advertising Word and getting my software pushed down into oblivion.
Where is the benefit to me as the developer in getting rid of software patents, unless I am a FOSS advocate and never intended to make money off my work anyway?
EDIT: By the way, I am not trying to troll or be argumentative just for the sake of it; I am genuinely trying to understand the benefit of eliminating software patents.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are confusing patents with copyright. If Microsoft copied your designs without a license, you sue for copyright infringement.
A decent quote from Wikipedia:
Copyright is the right of an author(s) to prevent others from copying their creative work without a license. Thus the author of a particular piece of software can sue someone that copies that software without a license. Copyright protection is given automatically and immediately without the need to register the copyright with a government, although registration does strengthen protection. Copyrighted material can also be kept secret. Often copyright infringement is relatively easy to determine. Copyright protection has proven to be a method for protecting investment in software innovation. Some people in the software industry have asserted that the additional protection given to one and removal of rights from every single other person is not needed and is not worth the downsides of expense, delay, uncertainty, abridgment of rights, and industry opportunity costs associated with patents. The differences between copyright protection and exclusion and patent protection and exclusion are vast. Where patents provide protection over a created idea, copyright protection only protects a particular manifestation of that idea; hence, patent protection impedes a great many more software developers and without respect for their own independent creation.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I sure do like " this American life."
I understand both point of views but w/o patents, innovation dies.
Sent From My UN-Rooted Evo!
github said:
You are confusing patents with copyright. If Microsoft copied your designs without a license, you sue for copyright infringement.
A decent quote from Wikipedia:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Deleted.
Sent from my Nexus S using XDA App