Related
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.
it seems that google buys moto... does this mean android will be moto only now? http://mediacenter.motorola.com/Press-Releases/Google-to-Acquire-Motorola-Mobility-3797.aspx
now we will get good quality stable android phone...!
It got me glad and worried at the same time
Im really glad coz motorola mobility has a mountain of patents that Google could use against Patent trolls like Apple and others.
In fact the huge amount of patents that Motorola owns assures that
Appple et all are cross licensing at least some of the said patents.
I almost wish that Google bought up Nokia also but MS beat them
with their trojan horse.
But it also got me worried that since Google now has its own handset company,
its going to run it as a business with the intention to recover its expenses and make a profit, which is natural but it also means it will be competing with its own licensees like HTC, Samsung, LG etc.
What does this mean in the future for its Android licensees who are now its
rivals in the Android Market?
It almost seems unprofessional for Google to be both License Holder and now competitor yet i cant blame Google for buying up Motorola after the way
Apple is throwing its weight around with Samsung, HTC etc
Anyway Nokia does own Symbian and competed with the same licensees like Sony Ericksonn, Samsung etc in the past.
So I guess Google can do its best to reassure its Android licensees that
its still business as usual.
Google's primary objective seemed to be keeping the patents out of the hands of Microsoft/Apple/trolls. They certainly didn't need more to worry about.
As for their phones... I think (and hope!) that Google plans on treating them the same way they treat Chrome: Use Motorola to make the other players step up their game. Chrome was the first to market with a large variety of security technology, and since then both IE and Safari have started adopting similar technology... the Android ecosystem is currently a security nightmare!
Lets hope, though, that this is nothing like Nokia & Symbian... Nokia's purchase of Symbian was a total failure, everyone around it immediately began abandoning it, and then even NOKIA did! Nokia has also abandoned Meego, only throwing out the N9 to the non-major markets, with no intention of selling it in the larger markets. Symbian is more likely an example of Android crushing them, and Meego of Microsoft paying them a butt load of money (plus management FROM Microsoft!), so hopefully both examples will look totally different.
Yep, this is all about patents.
It won't greatly affect its relationship with giving out Android to other manufacturers. However, we'll hopefully see moto phones be all Nexus like and on every carrier with various styles and configurations.
I've owned 5 or so Motorola phones over the past decade and you couldn't pay me enough to ever use another.
If for some reason Motorola did become the only Android phone or even the flagship, I'd swap to WM7 or iOS.
I read a few articles about this and a few of them worrying about if android wouldn't be open platform anymore. But google's bread and butter is ad market for search. And search market is shifting to mobile from desktop computer. More android device more money for them. Simply they CAN NOT give up android as an open platform. Thats my 2 cents.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA Premium App
Future AOSP builds include motoblur... boo
XD
This was just sent to me.
"Dear MOTODEV member,
Today, Google and Motorola Mobility have announced their intention to enter an agreement under which Google will acquire Motorola Mobility. This is a positive step in Motorola Mobility's evolution and exciting news for the Android ecosystem.
As you know, Motorola Mobility has played a leading role in the advancement of the Android platform globally. With Google, we plan to continue to build upon our 80-year history of technology innovation and take Motorola Mobility's cutting-edge products and solutions to the next level.
We do not expect this announced transaction to have any immediate impact on MOTODEV programs or activities. As the transaction moves forward we will keep you informed as details become available.
As always, technology innovation remains the lifeblood of Motorola Mobility and the success of our developer community remains top priority for MOTODEV.
Sincerely, The MOTODEV team"
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
in other words, really nothing is different. Motorola still makes Motorola phones and Google still makes android and the two will never merge, aosp will never be blur, and Motorola will not be the only android phone manufacturer. all this will ever mean is that Google might sometimes get updates to moto a little quicker, and get access to their hardware patents, etc... nothing really that will affect the consumers.
Sent from my MIUI SCH-i500
hey guys I came across this article on msn give it a read and leave your comments. ANDROID RULES!!!! Typical Apple bulls**t!!!
By Tony Bradley
What If Steve Jobs Is Right?
Apple has been engaged in heated legal battles around the world claiming that Android smartphones and tablets infringe on its patents. Android loyalists see the legal attacks as a desperate, oppressive move by Apple to stifle competition, but perhaps the success of Android is a function of the ways it "borrows" Apple intellectual property.
According to leaked excerpts from the Steve Jobs biography which will be officially released tomorrow, Jobs is quoted saying, "I'm going to destroy Android, because it's a stolen product. I'm willing to go thermonuclear war on this."
Jobs is also credited with stating, "I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple's $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong."
Sleeping With the Enemy
It doesn't take too much imagination to understand how Android could be a knock-off of iOS. Apple and Google were buddies--allies against Microsoft in that "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" sort of way. Google's CEO--now Chairman--Eric Schmidt was a personal friend of Steve Jobs and sat on the Apple board of directors.
Seeing Google and Schmidt as partners against Microsoft--more importantly partners that didn't compete directly in key areas like mobile devices and operating systems--Apple and Jobs would have felt comfortable sharing details of iOS. Schmidt was in a position to get confidential information on the strategy and vision for the future of the iPhone and possibly even the embryonic concepts of the iPad.
I am not suggesting Schmidt set out to infiltrate Apple in an act of corporate espionage. It is possible, however, that Schmidt saw the genius of the Apple roadmap, but disagreed on certain aspects of implementation--like the "walled garden" approach of Apple--and decided to build a more open version of the same thing with Android.
Perhaps Schmidt "stole" from iOS without even being conscious of it.
An Inside Job
When it comes to Samsung, things get even stickier. Not only is Samsung using Android as the operating system in its flagship smartphones and tablets, and now portable music players, but Samsung devices are identical in form and design as well. The Samsung smartphones and tablets are virtually identical hardware to Apple mobile devices, running an operating system that seems to "borrow heavily" from Apple software concepts.
Like Schmidt with the iOS software, Samsung was in a somewhat unique position to know intimate details of the Apple hardware and architecture. Samsung is a key supplier of chips and displays for Apple smartphones and tablets, and may have had inside knowledge that it employed in developing its own competing devices.
Maybe the reason that Samsung is the number two maker of smartphones behind Apple, and the reason that the Samsung Galaxy Tabs seem to be the only Android tablet enjoying some sense of success in the market is because they so closely mirror the Apple iPhone and iPad.
No Surrender
There is some additional evidence to support the quotes from the Steve Jobs biography. Intellectual property and patent analyst Florian Mueller recently uncovered information from legal filings in the case between Apple and Samsung in Australia that demonstrate that Apple is not interested in collecting a licensing fee. It wants the infringing products banned, and its intellectual property protected, and it has no intention of selling it to Samsung, HTC, or anyone else for a few dollars per unit.
A blog post from Mueller outlines in detail some of the passages from testimony that show Apple's commitment to defending its patents. Mueller sums up with, "Apple is prepared to give Android device makers a license to "some lower level patents" but it wants to reserve various design elements and functionalities exclusively for iOS."
What If?
I am not a lawyer, nor am I a patent attorney. I am admittedly speculating.
In general, I agree that patent litigation is getting out of hand. It has become a standard operating procedure and part of the normal business model for hardware and software makers.
I don't agree with patent trolling, or using patent litigation as a strategic weapon to stifle competition. However, I do support the defense of patents and intellectual property that are legitimately being infringed upon. What if the Android OS and the devices it runs on actually infringe on patents held by Apple?
There is no denying that Android has been a tremendous success in smartphones. It has stumbled (repeatedly) out of the starting gate in tablets, but I imagine it will eventually make up ground and one day surpass Apple's iOS in that arena as well. But, it is possible that Android owes its success to concepts and technologies it does not have a legal right to make use of.
If a company came out with a new cola beverage that tasted just like Coca Cola, and its sales surpassed those of the iconic beverage giant we might put that company on a pedestal as a shining example of American ingenuity and commitment to excellence. But, if we later found out that the new cola only exists because its founders served on the board of Coca Cola and literally stole the secret formula for Coke, our opinion of that beverage and the success of that company would change dramatically.
The fact that Android is successful should not have any weight on determining whether it achieved that success by violating Apple patents. The impact an injunction against Android devices might have on the smartphone market should not be sufficient to excuse profiting from the theft of intellectual property.
It's easy to paint Apple as the bad guy and jump to the conclusion that its patent suits are just a sign of sour grapes over the success of Android. It seems apparent, though, that Steve Jobs was absolutely positive that Android is stolen and he had no intention of backing down or compromising with licensing agreements.
What if Steve Jobs is right?
Copyright (c) 2011
Apple's too full of themselves.
They aren't the originator of anything. They can't claim someone else stole from them because they have nothing under their belt that wasn't done before them.
Smartphones? Done before Apple did it.
Home computing? Done before Apple did it.
Digital media? Done before Apple did it.
Portable media players? Done before Apple did it.
Tablets? Done before Apple did it.
...only thing Apple deserves credit for is knowing how to pretty something up to be mainstreamed, professionally inflating figures to overbloat their successes, and knowing how to take advantage of masses of millions who don't research to learn anything. Without out-of-the-know and tech illiterate consumers, Apple would had fallen through long, LONG ago. Of course they want to kill Android; they're scared ****less... Android's claimed more marketshare per month for many, many consecutive month and single handed brought excellence to everything that iOS was mediocre at.
They can claim Android steals from iOS, but look at what iOS5 comes jam-packed with... tons of features that Android users have already had for ages.
If Steve Jobs is right, then mass scale theft is allegedly being commited. And there are two possible ways to confront it. Either the 200 million people who have bought Android devices are content with cooperating with mass scale theft... or it is not mass scale theft. While any sane person would agree to the second idea, that would make the Western economies collapse, as many product makers (Apple most prominently, but most market leaders would do the same) depend increasingly on patentable added-value.
thatsupnow said:
hey guys I came across this article on msn give it a read and leave your comments. ANDROID RULES!!!! Typical Apple bulls**t!!!
By Tony Bradley
What If Steve Jobs Is Right?
Apple has been engaged in heated legal battles around the world claiming that Android smartphones and tablets infringe on its patents. Android loyalists see the legal attacks as a desperate, oppressive move by Apple to stifle competition, but perhaps the success of Android is a function of the ways it "borrows" Apple intellectual property.
According to leaked excerpts from the Steve Jobs biography which will be officially released tomorrow, Jobs is quoted saying, "I'm going to destroy Android, because it's a stolen product. I'm willing to go thermonuclear war on this."
Jobs is also credited with stating, "I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple's $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong."
Sleeping With the Enemy
It doesn't take too much imagination to understand how Android could be a knock-off of iOS. Apple and Google were buddies--allies against Microsoft in that "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" sort of way. Google's CEO--now Chairman--Eric Schmidt was a personal friend of Steve Jobs and sat on the Apple board of directors.
Seeing Google and Schmidt as partners against Microsoft--more importantly partners that didn't compete directly in key areas like mobile devices and operating systems--Apple and Jobs would have felt comfortable sharing details of iOS. Schmidt was in a position to get confidential information on the strategy and vision for the future of the iPhone and possibly even the embryonic concepts of the iPad.
I am not suggesting Schmidt set out to infiltrate Apple in an act of corporate espionage. It is possible, however, that Schmidt saw the genius of the Apple roadmap, but disagreed on certain aspects of implementation--like the "walled garden" approach of Apple--and decided to build a more open version of the same thing with Android.
Perhaps Schmidt "stole" from iOS without even being conscious of it.
An Inside Job
When it comes to Samsung, things get even stickier. Not only is Samsung using Android as the operating system in its flagship smartphones and tablets, and now portable music players, but Samsung devices are identical in form and design as well. The Samsung smartphones and tablets are virtually identical hardware to Apple mobile devices, running an operating system that seems to "borrow heavily" from Apple software concepts.
Like Schmidt with the iOS software, Samsung was in a somewhat unique position to know intimate details of the Apple hardware and architecture. Samsung is a key supplier of chips and displays for Apple smartphones and tablets, and may have had inside knowledge that it employed in developing its own competing devices.
Maybe the reason that Samsung is the number two maker of smartphones behind Apple, and the reason that the Samsung Galaxy Tabs seem to be the only Android tablet enjoying some sense of success in the market is because they so closely mirror the Apple iPhone and iPad.
No Surrender
There is some additional evidence to support the quotes from the Steve Jobs biography. Intellectual property and patent analyst Florian Mueller recently uncovered information from legal filings in the case between Apple and Samsung in Australia that demonstrate that Apple is not interested in collecting a licensing fee. It wants the infringing products banned, and its intellectual property protected, and it has no intention of selling it to Samsung, HTC, or anyone else for a few dollars per unit.
A blog post from Mueller outlines in detail some of the passages from testimony that show Apple's commitment to defending its patents. Mueller sums up with, "Apple is prepared to give Android device makers a license to "some lower level patents" but it wants to reserve various design elements and functionalities exclusively for iOS."
What If?
I am not a lawyer, nor am I a patent attorney. I am admittedly speculating.
In general, I agree that patent litigation is getting out of hand. It has become a standard operating procedure and part of the normal business model for hardware and software makers.
I don't agree with patent trolling, or using patent litigation as a strategic weapon to stifle competition. However, I do support the defense of patents and intellectual property that are legitimately being infringed upon. What if the Android OS and the devices it runs on actually infringe on patents held by Apple?
There is no denying that Android has been a tremendous success in smartphones. It has stumbled (repeatedly) out of the starting gate in tablets, but I imagine it will eventually make up ground and one day surpass Apple's iOS in that arena as well. But, it is possible that Android owes its success to concepts and technologies it does not have a legal right to make use of.
If a company came out with a new cola beverage that tasted just like Coca Cola, and its sales surpassed those of the iconic beverage giant we might put that company on a pedestal as a shining example of American ingenuity and commitment to excellence. But, if we later found out that the new cola only exists because its founders served on the board of Coca Cola and literally stole the secret formula for Coke, our opinion of that beverage and the success of that company would change dramatically.
The fact that Android is successful should not have any weight on determining whether it achieved that success by violating Apple patents. The impact an injunction against Android devices might have on the smartphone market should not be sufficient to excuse profiting from the theft of intellectual property.
It's easy to paint Apple as the bad guy and jump to the conclusion that its patent suits are just a sign of sour grapes over the success of Android. It seems apparent, though, that Steve Jobs was absolutely positive that Android is stolen and he had no intention of backing down or compromising with licensing agreements.
What if Steve Jobs is right?
Copyright (c) 2011
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
tldr........
Android never felt like iOS, so I'm really not sure how it could be considered stolen..
Out of the gate Android's product had different intentions, to be a customizable, to be used on a wide range of hardware, and to be flexible.
Apple's iOS is not customizable, in fact it's set up the way a certain individual likes it, even if you don't like it like that. It's only used on specific hardware, and it's in no way flexible.
Steve Jobs patented the action of inertial scrolling, or scrolling that seemed more natural for touch. Great concept, not a great thing to patent, as it's really the only way it can feel natural to a human, and the idea of "I released it first so you're stealing" is entirely childish. Did Apple really expect Google to incorporate scroll bars instead?
This is the only thing I can really think of where Apple has any sort of ground, as I said before, Android has always felt like an entirely different concept. This whole "Android is a stolen product" thing just seems like a childish way to snuff out the biggest competitor.
It has worked with Samsung. The Galaxy Tab was basically wiped from important markets with its Germany ban.
Android never die
android will kill apple , symbian and f**en windows phone . i'm sure
I like competition. It makes smartphones get better. When android has no real competitors I guarantee you there'll not be update.
This article (and many others) continually neglects the fact that Android (as a company) was founded in 2003, at the same time Apple was partnered with Motorola to put iTunes on the ROKR. Google was not involved with Android till 2005, and at that point there is no way they built a complete OS from Google's acquisition to the Nov 2007 release of Android. They had been working on this thing from the beginning, and I'm sure there were some external influences, but to say that it was stolen is downright wrong. Heck if that was true you could say Apple stole from Palm as iOS functions much the same as my old Palm Pilot did. And Apple has been taking design elements from Android (like notifications) that could be construed in the same way.
Steve Jobs I'm sorry that you are gone, you were an innovator in many things, and a marketing genius and I have tremendous respect for you as a business man. However you served up some great Kool Aid, and your overall megalomaniac attitude towards this just shows that you think you can bully anyone out of your "ideas" when in truth they weren't even yours.
Rogue Leader said:
This article (and many others) continually neglects the fact that Android (as a company) was founded in 2003, at the same time Apple was partnered with Motorola to put iTunes on the ROKR. Google was not involved with Android till 2005, and at that point there is no way they built a complete OS from Google's acquisition to the Nov 2007 release of Android. They had been working on this thing from the beginning, and I'm sure there were some external influences, but to say that it was stolen is downright wrong. Heck if that was true you could say Apple stole from Palm as iOS functions much the same as my old Palm Pilot did. And Apple has been taking design elements from Android (like notifications) that could be construed in the same way.
Steve Jobs I'm sorry that you are gone, you were an innovator in many things, and a marketing genius and I have tremendous respect for you as a business man. However you served up some great Kool Aid, and your overall megalomaniac attitude towards this just shows that you think you can bully anyone out of your "ideas" when in truth they weren't even yours.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree, Steve Jobs was pretty amazing but when something does not go his way (For example A product that is going to kick Apple's ass) then he will just start a lawsuite and cry over it. R.I.P Though.
Steve Jobs made a fortune off of borrowed ideas. He was simply good at marketing ideas that were previously overlooked. The only truly innovative thing he ever "invented" was the Apple II, and that was largely thanks to Wozniak. He recognized good ideas when he saw them, but to say that he invented any of it is ridiculous.
He stood on the shoulders of geniuses to accomplish something as fast as he could, and before he even knew what he had, he patented it, and packaged it, and slapped it on a plastic lunchbox, and now *pounds fists* he's selling it.
Too soon...
Sent from my R800x using XDA App
iliketrains said:
Too soon...
Sent from my R800x using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
pfft! Nothing is too soon I could see if you knew him personally ya but chances are pretty good you don't
Sent from my R800i using XDA App
thatsupnow said:
pfft! Nothing is too soon I could see if you knew him personally ya but chances are pretty good you don't
Sent from my R800i using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Unless he's using the Kevin Bacon thingy theory on Steve Jobs, then he might, lol
Dousan said:
Unless he's using the Kevin Bacon thingy theory on Steve Jobs, then he might, lol
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Aahaha that's funny!
Sent from my R800i using XDA App