Slashdot Mirror
MS Buys (Some) SGI Patents
FatRatBastard writes "The Reg. is reporting that Microsoft has purchased the rights to most of SGI's 3D patents. Speculation from the Reg hacks is that MS may want the patents more for crushing OpenGL support than for technology they're building inhouse." Well, crush is strong - but it would give them more leverage with some hardware vendors for sure.
Besides, OpenGL is goverened by a board of companies, not just SGI.
It doesn't matter who "governs" OpenGL. All Microsoft has to do to kill it now is refuse to license their 3D patents to any hardware vendor who chooses to make OpenGL drivers instead of DirectX.
Personally, I think that each state should have at least one rep looking into MS
It is a matter of trust. In this case, past performance is an indicator of future results.
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
What does this mean for the use of OpenGL in open source? Are we going to have to start developing our own open source replacement for OpenGL now?
"I object to doing things that computers can do." -- Olin Shivers, lispers.org
Its a lot better in many ways than OpenGL (at least I think so). Its certainly powerful and easy to code for. It was a load of poo up til at least DX6, but now its surprisingly nice and object-oriented. They are of course targetted at completely different uses: D3D is generally Retained Mode, whereas OpenGL is generally Immediate Mode. I can't be bothered explaining what those mean, so go look in Google, but it does mean that DX is probably better for games, whereas OGL is better for most other things.
Game dev and music blog
They could use these patents to gain royalties on games meant for other platforms, not just ones made for the Xbox or Windows. Say, if Sony were to incorporate some 3D texturing method in the PS2 API that MS just bought.
What it looks like to me is that they are trying to get all the NVidia stuff. NVidia has a deal with SGI to view and write alot stuff that interfaces with SGI machines and OpenGL in order to rape the graphics possibilities. This is also why the linux driver for NVidia cards is half open source and half closed source. If MS can take that capability out of NVidia cards by gobbling up all the patents and not allowing NVidia to do this anymore then theoretically they could force NVidia (one of the biggest manufacturers of video card) to pull out of raping OpenGL for graphics and instead use DirectX. Then MS would be justified in stopping its support of GL.
Au contraire... there is no reason to think that The Register is not just paranoid like the rest of us. Now, obviously, this is a pretty decent analysis of a possible use for these patents. But still these are vague threats to the industry that may have been cooked up to spread FUD about MS.
There is enough actual reason to fear and doubt MS out there already. Before adding potential reasons, and spreading them as actual, can we have a reasonable discussion about them? Or is it enough for someone to make generic statements about "avoiding lawsuits?"
Personally, I would like to know on what grounds anyone would be worried about lawsuits. I won't deny the possible existence of such grounds; I just want to actually hear what they are instead of speculate blindly.
Would someone be kind enough to post a basic description of OpenGL's relationship to SGI's technologies, and to the company itself. Was/is SGI involved directly in the formulation of OpenGL? Could MS have purchased patents that OpenGL relies upon, patents that do not have "free" alternative implementations? Is there a GL that OpenGL is compatible too (like OpenSSH to SSH)?
Does this therefore mean that microsoft can sue Brian Paul (the Mesa Author) for every penny he has and more if they decide to?
It's not so much that Microsoft has the right to purchase these patents as to what Microsoft intends to do with them, now that they own them. It's still too early to tell, of course - even putting aside my own perspective as a "Linux Zealot (TM)" it wouldn't be fair to assume that Microsoft will necessarily Do The Wrong Thing. What worries people (and me) is Microsoft's track record.
You're absolutely right - SGI had the same power to lord OpenGL over the masses, and they have sold that power. What is troublesome is the fact that SGI let OpenGL live, and Microsoft may not.
But what does my opinion matter, I just vote here. It's not like I have any money or anything.
NVIDIA is the graphics (and glue chipset) supplier for Xbox. It is also now the sole supplier of graphics chips for desktop Macs. Apple is solidly behind OpenGL as it's strategic 3D API (as is the entire high performance 3D graphics world, for that matter). I'd be willing to place a large wager that NVIDIA (which has strong SGI roots) will not abandon OpenGL.
One last thought - I think Microsoft would be very ill advised to try to charge more for the use of those patents than SGI was...and that cost should already be part of current hardware prices.
299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
Galileo: "The Earth revolves around the Sun!"
Score: -1 100% Flamebait
> Incidentally if SGI is selling the patent portfolio I doubt that a sale of their other
> assets can be far behind. It is pretty much their crown jewels.
My guess is that this isn't the crown jewels they've let go - remember Fahrenheit? I bet this sale is all the co-developed technologies that came out of that (deadly) partnership.
And I bet SGI is saying 'good riddance' too!
Mr Thinly Sliced
Honorables,
It has come to my attention that Microsoft has recently acquired fundamental patents for 3D graphics technology and techniques from SGI. This is a dangerous situation, as it grants Microsoft significant leverage over the independent 3D hardware manufacturers who are currently supporting the only rival to Microsoft's Direct3D graphics API, OpenGL.
Microsoft has in the past worked to delay and distract advances in 3D graphics technology, such as in the abortive "Fahrenheit" plan with SGI in the 1990s. During that period, SGI was transitioning from selling Unix-only workstations to begin selling workstations running Microsoft's Windows NT. At the same time, OpenGL was gaining on Microsoft's Direct3D in terms of features, hardware support, and developer support. If SGI wanted to sell NT boxes, SGI would have to agree to the Fahrenheit plan. The perfectly timed Fahrenheit deal slowed that advance of OpenGL by, among other things, reducing SGI's active promotion of it, and allowed Microsoft's Direct3D to gain a strong lead.
Yet OpenGL support still survived due to the interest of software developers and the support of third party 3D hardware manufacturers. This latest move by Microsoft to acquire core 3D technology patents would finish the hatchet job, granting Microsoft the power to force third party 3D hardware manufacturers to drop support for OpenGL, and ultimately stifle competition and innovation in the marketplace.
Please do not let this come to pass.
Thank you,
Jason Asbahr
Game Developer
like by using the money I spent on the Xbox,
PocketPC, and Windows to by software
and hardware patents now.
Sure I could live without those
technologies above, but why the hell
would I want to.
-J
Weren't those SGI patents what kept Nvidia from open-sourcing their Linux drivers?
Now with Microsoft owning them, the chance of a fully open-source driver goes...up?...down?...stays the same????
Praying for the end of your wide-awake nightmare.
1. Company A wants to improve their product.
1. Company A wants more profits. (real world)
2. Company A legally learns/purchases/adapts technologies from rival product.
2. Company buys rival company or company's product. They have virtually unlimited assets to do this because they are a monopoly (real world).
3. As a result, company A's product is improved.
2. Company A discontinues rival company's product. Company A's product gains total market share, even though it is inferior (real world).
"Only in their dreams can men truly be free 'twas always thus, and always thus will be."
--Tom Schulman
The Real beauty of it is that MS also has an alibi - they kept SGI in business (maybe), thus ensuring they still have competitors.
You laugh, but it's true!
Remember several years back when Apple was on the ropes and MS bailed them out with $150M ?
You'll also recall that part of the deal included a provision for Apple to start distributing MS IE instead of Netscape Navigator, whose stock symbol has, umm, disappeared.
I think bailing Apple was absolutely critical for MS, since otherwise their market share would have shot up even more alarmingly close to 100% than it is already. It's easier to claim there are competitors when you have only 92% of the market compared to when you have 98% of the market:)
Taken to the extreme, it wouldn't be out of place for MS to buy or bail out a Linux based company either. I think that almost happened with Corel. My own paranoid view on that deal was that Corel developers might have been moving Wine along too quickly to suit MS and they had to throw some molasses into the machine.
"Provided by the management for your protection."
...there are just too many games out there that use OpenGL that are too popular to be crushed.
It isn't just games. There is a lot of genuine industry-driving software out there based on OpenGL. For example, high-end CAD systems on UNIX workstations (that have OpenGL-accelerated graphics hardware).
If Microsoft denied a company, such as Sun Microsystems or IBM, the right to manufacture or distribute OpenGL graphics systems to run OpenGL-based CAD software, then, overnight, a whole enormous aspect of the world economy--mechanical design and manufaturing--needs to be done on Windows-based workstations. This really really really sucks.
If Microsoft builds a world where I have to do software development, mechanical design, everything using Microsoft software and hardware, then that's a world where I will quit my career and become a monk. Having nothing is better than having Microsoft-everything.
Healthcare article at Kuro5hin
Here are the proposals: http://www.3dlabs.com/support/developer/ogl2/inde
Interestingly, while several people speculated that Fahrenheit was intended to kill OpenGL, from what I can see it actually saved it. Fahrenheit encouraged Microsoft to not knife this particular baby long enough to allow a reasonably strong set of OpenGL boards to be produced.
Fairly quickly in the course of the Fahrenheit project, SGI realized that it would not be a good idea for Fahrenheit to actaully be released; because that really would mean the end of OpenGL. So, they dithered and delayed, rewrote and reimplemented, argued and agreed to disagree for a truly critical couple of years. That was long enough.
Eventually the charade could not be maintained any longer, and Fahrenheit disappeared. Up until the last day, though, SGI made every appearance of being totally committed to Fahrenheit -- it was on the front page of www.sgi.com until the day it was killed.
thad
I love Mondays. On a Monday, anything is possible.
People have short memories.
Remember Fahrenheit, the SGI/Microsoft/etc initiative for the next OpenGL plus scene graph?
MS walked all over the specs, doing strange and troublesome things to it, yet only ever had two people actively "working" on it, all while racing to get Direct3D out the door before OpenGL (or later Fahrenheit) could get a hold in the Windows development community.
As I hear it second-hand from an ex-SGI guy, SGI was pouring incredible resources into Fahrenheit, while MS was essentially blocking progress, while waving the promise of MS-acceptance in order to prevent their dropping MS' involvement.
When they realized they were burning cash and talent to go nowhere fast, SGI eventually gave up and said "Stick with OpenGL and Inventor or whatever -- we don't care anymore."