Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Patent Envisions Free Computing

Dotnaught writes "A Microsoft patent application published on Thursday shows the company contemplating free computers and software for its customers. It suggests 'a service provider such as a telephone company, an Internet service provider, or a leasing company may provide computer systems or components to users at a reduced charge or for free in exchange for targeted advertising delivery.'"

157 comments

  1. They tried this already by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    And it won't work until computers are even cheaper than they are now. I mean hell, you can't even give away unlimited internet access and still make money.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    1. Re:They tried this already by nine-times · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually, I like everything about this idea except for the words "targeted" and "advertising".

      Seriously, if the offer is that someone can data-mine everything on my PC and send me lots of pop-ups, spam, and flash banners, then no thanks. If computers are really cheap enough to make this business model viable, then I'd just as soon buy the really extra-cheap computer myself anyway (if it's cheap, why not?), which means the business model still wouldn't be viable.

    2. Re:They tried this already by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 1

      Aren't there mobile phones which cost hundreds of pounds to buy normally but come free on a contract?

      As long as the perceived gain outweighs the cost, people will suggest such ideas.

      --
      liqbase :: faster than paper
    3. Re:They tried this already by drinkypoo · · Score: 1
      Aren't there mobile phones which cost hundreds of pounds to buy normally but come free on a contract?

      Yes. Your phone bill is padded out enough to pay for your phone upgrade every year. You pay for a phone upgrade whether you get one or not, which should be motivation to get a new phone every year. Some providers will even give you the subsidy codes, so you can unlock your old phones, and sell them. (Better to tell them that you're going to use it out of country.)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    4. Re:They tried this already by Basehart · · Score: 1

      "Aren't there mobile phones which cost hundreds of pounds to buy......."

      Depends on what you're using to barter with. Hundreds of pounds of flour won't buy much in this neck of the woods, but hundreds of pounds of small carved novelty items would buy several "mobile phones" I'd wager.

    5. Re:They tried this already by Andy+Gardner · · Score: 2, Funny
      Actually, I like everything about this idea except for the words "targeted" and "advertising".

      I like everything about this idea except for the words "Microsoft" and "patent".

    6. Re:They tried this already by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who cares if it won't work? If the history of computing has shown us one thing it's that Microsoft can line up suckers^h^h^h^h^h^hpartners, for failure after failure with the promise that they'll eventually get it right. And as long as Windows and Office continue to shovel money in, it doesn't matter if they demand that you wear a free propeller hat while you compute. They own you. Until somebody with balls inhabits the US DOJ, they will continue to own you.

    7. Re:They tried this already by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This is incredible! I think it is absolute genius to take ownership and control away from the consumer and put it in the hands of big business!

      Why should you own your own computer, your own OS, your own software, your own data, etc. when you could be told what to use, what to do, how to do it, when to do it, and allow others to basically own your personal data!

      Anyone else here old enough to remember when the PC was about decentralizing computing, taking control of your own data, and empowering yourself? This was Micro$oft's big selling point against IBM.

      This is also why cell phone applications suck even though phones have multiple megabytes of memory, high resolution color screens, etc. that computers didn't even have a decade ago.

      Now things have gone full circle and we are back to handing everything back over to big business. Only today that also includes a lot more personal data, choice, control of one's destiny, etc, etc.

      Then again the general public doesn't seem to care about protecting their personal information, personal life, DNA, etc.

    8. Re:They tried this already by Geoffreyerffoeg · · Score: 2, Informative
      by nine-times (778537) <nine.times@gmail.com>

      Actually, I like everything about this idea except for the words "targeted" and "advertising".

      I can't stand the irony here. Gmail wouldn't exist if it weren't for targeted advertising.
    9. Re:They tried this already by cheater512 · · Score: 1

      Ah but smart people use ordinary POP3 or IMAP email. :P

    10. Re:They tried this already by aichpvee · · Score: 2, Interesting

      People have done this before. Given away from computers that required you to view ads while using them, and usually required a certain amount of time spent with the computer connected to the Internet for retrieving new ads.

      Could someone who cared enough to read the article explain how this patent is different than what those companies were doing in the late 90s?

      --
      The Farewell Tour II
    11. Re:They tried this already by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It IS a great idea!!!

      They'll have to subsidize the cost of the hardware (just like consoles) but once you have a customer they'll almost never leave.
      With the US Army (and i bet everyone else dumb enough to think TPM is good). With Microsoft approved TPM riddled PCs going for a few hundred $ and non-TPM models at 3 times the price, people will jump at the offers..

      How about $75 per month for a PC (updated every few years), internet, TV & phone access, , all the rubbish software they do in one easy to market bundle and people will jump at the offers.

      Charge the users a monthly fee for the OS, AV & other security software, Office and MediaPlayer (to show HD content at full resolution?).. This can be tied in with your broadband connection, phone service (bye skype), IPTV, and all the other rubbish they'll try to bundle.

      Anyone stops paying, they lose access to their services/internet... its a winner for MS.

    12. Re:They tried this already by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      And what's to stop people from wiping the hard drives and installing Linux, thereby using the computer without seeing the targetted advertising? Unless they used their own proprietary hardware, it would probably be pretty easy to run any software you wanted to on them (ala XBox). If they used anything too specialized, the extra costs created from the custom hardware would defeat being able to sell it at a reduced cost compared to regular PC hardware.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    13. Re:They tried this already by quanticle · · Score: 1
      And what's to stop people from wiping the hard drives and installing Linux, thereby using the computer without seeing the targetted advertising?


      I suppose you'd use some kind of trusted computing to lock down the hardware, making installing new software more difficult. You could also configure some kind of check-in server that would monitor the computer usage by having the computer contact it every time it got connected to the internet. An extended time without a check-in would prompt some kind of intervention.
      --
      We all know what to do, but we don't know how to get re-elected once we have done it
    14. Re:They tried this already by AutopsyReport · · Score: 1

      Seriously, if the offer is that someone can data-mine everything on my PC and send me lots of pop-ups, spam, and flash banners, then no thanks.

      Are you kidding? You already pay for that with your Internet subscription. But you might reject: "No I don't! Everything is blocked". And you would be right. Except the only way those things are circumvented is due to third party software and/or knowledge, likely not your own. You are paying for advertising, you just aren't seeing it. Everytime you visit Slashdot or another website, you are paying for advertisements whether you like it or not.

      So really, is it necessary to complain that much? Advertising is a fact of life and we've already established that you pay for it. So what's the problem with a free Internet (and hardware) that runs the same advertisements that will be seen by paying customers anyway?

      --

      For he today that sheds his blood with me shall be my brother.

    15. Re:They tried this already by callingalloldhippies · · Score: 1


      Their machine, their software, their targeted ads =
                perfect Propaganda delivery system.

          Sometimes FREE is too big a price to pay

      --
      "Never try to teach a pig to sing. It simply wastes your time and truely annoys the pig"
    16. Re:They tried this already by Richy_T · · Score: 1

      In Soviet Microsoft it's

      3)Profit
      2)??????
      1)90s dot-bomb business plan

      Rich

    17. Re:They tried this already by eonlabs · · Score: 1

      This sounds more like one of those patents people file to prevent other people from actually doing it.

      I highly doubt Microsoft will be doing anything in this direction in the near (5 yrs)future.

      --
      I wouldn't consider the mad hatter mad. Just reality impaired. He sure can make a mean cup of tea.
    18. Re:They tried this already by couchslug · · Score: 1

      The locked down machinery ("extra cheap computer") needed for this to work is fun to play with after the business plan fails.
      The I-Appliance BBS (begun during the I-Opener days) is still active, and those interested can scroll down the list of orphan gizmos.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    19. Re:They tried this already by rtb61 · · Score: 1
      While that may be true, those phone calls that are made are not party calls with a third recorded voice spewing marketing hype during your private conversations.

      Why don't they patent free contact lenses with marketing banners embedded into the lense so no matter where the wearer looks they will see the add, sure to be really really popular ;).

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    20. Re:They tried this already by kenh · · Score: 1

      Years ago there were PCs sold at very low prices ($199, IIRC) that included Windows O/S, and a year of internet service with a bundled in browser that was similar to the old Alta Vista "Free" Internet service - you had a screen that was surrounded with small ads, tied to the pages you visited. The typical user would be forced to view the ads, while a more sophisticated user would minimize the supplied browser nad run their own. In the past 5-7 years, PCs have dropped more than $199 in price...

      PCs are not that expensive (MIT $100 laptop - batteries + bigger screen), internet access is not that expensive (dial-up), and ad revenues are such that it could just be profitable. The trick woul dbe to provide a large enough screen (physical and resolution) to enable "useful" browsing and including the ads on screen. an 800x600 screen trimmed by a border of ads would be unworkable, but 1280x1024 on a 17" display with a 1024x768 usable area might just work...

      But this is something you can patent?

      Ken

      --
      Ken
  2. Prior Art by femtoguy · · Score: 3, Funny

    I seem to remember about a zillion companies in the 90s that did this. A good example is PeoplePC. Does this patent things have no sanity.

    1. Re:Prior Art by ackthpt · · Score: 1

      I seem to remember about a zillion companies in the 90s that did this. A good example is PeoplePC. Does this patent things have no sanity.

      Ah, but this is Microsoft. They've just invented it so it must be be new. They even have the Buckets o' Lawyers necessary to make that true if they so desire. Wouldn't be the first time they threw billions down a hole, probably won't be the last.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    2. Re:Prior Art by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      And the I-opener was subsidized in a similar manner.. That was a wonderful success.

      I say go ahead MS, give us free machines to install Linux on..... Hee Hee

    3. Re:Prior Art by frostoftheblack · · Score: 1

      I used PeoplePC. ISP was free with the purchase of a computer for a certain number of years. After that number of years, it was $10 a month for dial-up. Strangely, we still have that dial-up account here in the house. It's useful for when the cable goes out :)

      --
      Do not mark in this space. For official office use only.
    4. Re:Prior Art by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      It's a little more specificl, in that it is specifically based on targetted advertising. But looking through the patent, it seems - like most business method patents - to be pretty obvious. The only reason we don't have prior art is that remarkably similar schemes have been tried and failed dismally.

      But who am I to argue. I think business method patents are fundamentally stupid anyway. They don't promote the art of business. They only serve to create artificial barriers to the competition (this is after all what a petent is for). Competition is generally good for businesses.

  3. Free as in... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It's newspeak. Microsoft free, free as in prison.

    1. Re:Free as in... by JeanBaptiste · · Score: 1

      It's newspeak. Microsoft free, free as in prison.

      Well lets see, prisoners get more free time, more television channels, better food, more sex, more movies, and better workout equipment than I do/have, all at the cost (to them) of zero dollars. -sounds pretty good to me --maybe not the sex part

    2. Re:Free as in... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Well lets see, prisoners get more free time, more television channels, better food, more sex, more movies, and better workout equipment than I do/have, all at the cost (to them) of zero dollars. -sounds pretty good to me --maybe not the sex part


      More free time? And you think more television channels is somehow better? Better food compared to...? Well, if you like to get fucked in the ass and to lose your freedom for some minor superficial benefits, you have just demonstrated the mindset of Microsoft victims / customers.

  4. They've invented the Wayback Machine!! by davmoo · · Score: 1

    Didn't People PC and a few other companies try this already...and give up on it after it didn't work?

    --
    I want a new quote. One that won't spill. One that don't cost too much. Or come in a pill.
    1. Re:They've invented the Wayback Machine!! by ackthpt · · Score: 1

      Didn't People PC and a few other companies try this already...and give up on it after it didn't work?

      Yes, something like that at Fry's. PC's for about $200 back in the late 90's because you had to sit and look at all the avertising that came with it, since you had to connect with a internet provider as a condition of purchase. Later came eMachines which were inexpensive, but required a longterm contract with AOL or sommat.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    2. Re:They've invented the Wayback Machine!! by kosmosik · · Score: 1

      Actually it did work - think adware which in my opinion falls under this description of patent - giving computer resources for free - software is computer resource/asset. Many companies did it and do it on daily basis, think Google (you are using their computer resources while reciving their ads). Etc.

      The patent description goes then to specific implementation when the system downloads targeted ads to use locally or untargeted when it does not know the target.

      The only thing in it that is just not-so retarded is the fact of storing adds localy (cache anyone?). I am sure loads of adware programs did it before.

      In summary - retarded patent aiming at Google, so retardet that it is pathetic and funny actually. I wish MS to spend more resources on shit like that. Good way to go for them (not like they have an major operating system release on due which is like 3 years late and still in early beta) . :)

  5. hello? by gmack · · Score: 4, Funny

    Hey microsoft it's the year 2000 calling.. they want their buisness plan back.

    Seriously. Wasn't exactly this done already? How can they patent this?

    1. Re:hello? by geekoid · · Score: 1

      maybe the submitted the patent in 1998?

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:hello? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Seriously. Wasn't exactly this done already? How can they patent this?

      Because the patent system is useless except for employing lawyers and extorting innovators. It isn't that this is innovative, but because it is now a patent it can be used to sue a smaller company that does not have billions to defend itself.

      Or perhaps Microsoft is making mockery at the patent system? Or maybe Microsoft is getting ready to create it's next virus infected spyware trojan adware (Vista) operating system and want to protect it.

    3. Re:hello? by AmberBlackCat · · Score: 1

      Maybe they're getting the patent now so they can go back and sue all those people from years ago...?

    4. Re:hello? by mrscorpio · · Score: 1

      I want to know how this could be patented anyway, as it's an idea or business plan? How can that be protected by patent?

    5. Re:hello? by Moofie · · Score: 1

      Buisness? Strong Bad, is that you?

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    6. Re:hello? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      I knew it! MS invented time travel. That's where they get their software from.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  6. That's never been done before????? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I guess you'd have to go over the claims in great detail to find something novel here. At face value this business has been tried before.

  7. Sooo... by Poromenos1 · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'm taking bets on how many minutes this'll take until it's cracked to show no ads.

    --
    Send email from the afterlife! Write your e-will at Dead Man's Switch.
    1. Re:Sooo... by durnurd · · Score: 1

      -x Where X = number of minutes between time the "Format C:" command was invented and the time the business model is executed.

      --
      --Edward Dassmesser
    2. Re:Sooo... by Kijori · · Score: 1

      It's not that simple. You don't have to break the computer program, you have to break the legal system backing it up. If their 'tamper proof' system detects that something is wrong, they come and check nothing is. If you're using the system without seeing ads, they sue your ass out of existence. Whether it's difficult to break or not is largely irrelevant.

  8. Yeah, right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Patents are never filed because someone plans on doing something.

    they're filed because someone wants to stop someone from doing something else. this is the case here. I hope it doesn't get accepted.

    1. Re:Yeah, right. by CSHARP123 · · Score: 1

      Bingo. I agree with you. MS wants to stop these kinds of things happening. This would not generate business for them. Companies can use Free OS on those machines to keep the cost low. This is a defensive patent from their point of view. They would not attempt to get into this kind of business. But in case google or some other company tries it later for targeted ad, here is how MS will fight.

  9. Didn't we have this already? by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 3, Interesting

    CompuServ + Circuit City. PeoplePC. Altavista. Walmart.
    Free hardware and/or online access.

    Didn't work too well last time, either. Once you let the marketing guys fingers into it, they screw it up, by pushing too much.

    1. Re:Didn't we have this already? by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      CompuServ + Circuit City. PeoplePC. Altavista. Walmart.

      Better yet, ABC, NBC and CBS they've used this business model for years.

    2. Re:Didn't we have this already? by Moofie · · Score: 1

      That's funny. I've never seen a free TV from a television network.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    3. Re:Didn't we have this already? by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      Most TVs are relatively inexpensive and the service from the broadcast networks is free, being paid from via advertising. The Microsoft proposal doesn't say the hardware would be free, by the way.

  10. Unbelievable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    People give away a free service and make money on advertising. I'm sure nobody ever though of that before!

    Is there some sort of prizes for most ridiculous alleged "invention" or are they just working within to destroy the whole patent system? What the hell is the invention supposed to be?

    1. Re:Unbelievable by kfg · · Score: 1

      Is there some sort of prizes for most ridiculous alleged "invention"

      In the Been There; Done That catagory - Peanut butter sandwich still in the lead, with the cat exercise "device" following closely and putting toys out for kids to play with coming up in third.

      Microsoft will have to work in seamonkeys somehow if they want a shot at standing on the podium.

      KFG

    2. Re:Unbelievable by Hope+Thelps · · Score: 1

      Haven't seen the ones on peanut butter sandwich or putting toys out for kids to play with. I still vote for US patent 6368227 "method of swinging on a swing"

      "A method of swing on a swing is disclosed, in which a user positioned on a standard swing suspended by two chains from a substantially horizontal tree branch induces side to side motion by pulling alternately on one chain and then the other."

      --
      To summarise the summary of the summary: people are a problem. ~ h2g2
    3. Re:Unbelievable by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      I believe the peanut butter sandwich patent is #6,874,409. Which is actually a patent on Smucker's crustless PB&J sandwiches. Premade peanut butter sandwiches sound a little lazy to me, crustless or otherwise. But at least they're selling the product. I'm not sure what the patent is on putting toys out for kids to play with, although I'm sure it's something to do with putting toys out for kids to play with while in the waiting room at the doctor's/dental offices so they don't get bored. I hope this patent is real old, because I remember my dentist doing it in 1985.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
  11. MS wants its OS monopoly tied to telecom monopoly? by Burz · · Score: 1

    Thats what it sounds like to me.

    Also sounds like a return to the old Bell system.

  12. Umm by utopianfiat · · Score: 0, Redundant

    This is completely non-unique and there is so much prior art behind it.
    Hey, let's look at qdb.us, they provided a service in exchange for adwords revenue! What difference does it make if you serve computers for ad revenue?
    Not to mention the huge implication of legitimized monopolism implied in patenting a fucking business model.

    --
    +5, Truth
  13. Commidization by QuantumFTL · · Score: 1

    This shouldn't be surprising - computers have almost become as commoditized as cell phones, which are often given out for free by phone companies. I don't know if Microsoft is the best one to pull this off (I'd put my money on someone like Dell which has the infrastructure and logistics in place), but it's going to happen sooner or later.

  14. I want to patent a software monopoly by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 2, Funny

    And then charge Microsoft money.

    Seriously, next thing you know, you'll be telling me that information just wants to be expensive and that spam is good for me.

    But I'd trust Microsoft offering free hardware and software about as much as I'd trust someone "accidentally" phoning me and leaving me a message about this insider stock tip she just "happened" to pass on ...

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  15. Let me be the first to suggest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "A method of filing trivial patents out of sheer boredom."

    I think patent examiners should be given a large wooden mallet to whack people who come up with this crap.

  16. Network effect by DJ_Perl · · Score: 1

    We're not helping Microsoft fast enough. So they say, "let us help you help us better". The more people are online, the better for everyone, especially a company like Microsoft. Read "What are Mr. Gates and Mr. Buffett up to?"

    --
    -- Subvert the dominant paradigm. Repeat as desired. http://ownlifeful.com/
  17. targeted advertising delivery by MORTAR_COMBAT! · · Score: 1

    oh god, not desktop banner ads again ... no no no ....

    --
    MORTAR COMBAT!
  18. People like paying for hardware, not software by gilesjuk · · Score: 1

    People are used to buying a computer and getting free applications. They simply won't be happy getting free hardware and then having a huge bill for software.

    Consumers aren't that dumb, they don't like printer ink prices and use alternative brands where possible. So this idea will arouse suspicion.

    1. Re:People like paying for hardware, not software by DragonWriter · · Score: 1
      People are used to buying a computer and getting free applications. They simply won't be happy getting free hardware and then having a huge bill for software.
      OTOH, I'm sure many people would be amenable to paying a reduced cost for broadband access (compared to the charges of traditional providers) that came with a free computer [of course, a vendor lock-in device that didn't allow you to run arbitrary software] with basic functionality, and many of those people could then be sold additional add-on "software-as-service" at small monthly fees (that, over the lifetime of the software, added up to more than they would have paid with "traditional" software with a normal computer). And the service/system provider would make big profits.
  19. Distributed computation? by QuantumFTL · · Score: 1

    Just a thought: Microsoft isn't paying for the electric bills, might they not want to sell/donate extra CPU cycles to get extra revenue/reputation?

  20. Obligatory by Bryansix · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This is patently absurd!

    Seriously, consumers need a lobby just dedicated to patent law reform. First step, outlaw patenting business plans and most intellectual property. Second step, open up the process so anyone can prove prior art and throw out a patent application on those grounds. Third step, go back to requiring a working model of anything physical to be patented.

    1. Re:Obligatory by Threni · · Score: 1

      > Seriously, consumers need a lobby just dedicated to patent law reform.

      I need some beer. Are you going to get me that, or do you have your work cut out suggesting that other people should do something else you think is a good idea?

    2. Re:Obligatory by Bryansix · · Score: 1

      I have the time to form a lobby but not the money.

    3. Re:Obligatory by stunt_penguin · · Score: 1

      Sorry, someone patented patent law reform, so they don't want to pay the extortionate licencing fee :|

      --
      When the posters fear their moderators, there is tyranny; when the moderators fears the posters, there is liberty.
  21. Patents...heh by slimjim8094 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So, a patent. Wonderful. Has it occured to anyone that they might not use it? That they might not have any intention of using it? Perhaps it's just so, that if anybody tries to do it, they will have to pay royalties? Did anyone think of this before they said "stupid...never work..."?

    --
    I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
    1. Re:Patents...heh by MooUK · · Score: 1

      That's called being a patent troll, and patent trolling is one thing I've never seen even the slightest hint of a valid supporting reason for.

  22. This is not MS's plan by jeffsenter · · Score: 4, Insightful

    My guess is Microsoft is just patenting vague advertising-revenue stuff to block others from patenting it. This does not mean Microsoft actually plans to move to advertising instead of paying for software.

    1. Re:This is not MS's plan by lannocc · · Score: 1

      You may be right, fortunately. Or, unfortunatley: whatever happened to the original intention of patents that, you know, you would actually follow through and build the "invention"?

    2. Re:This is not MS's plan by asuffield · · Score: 1

      Whether or not it's currently a part of their long-term plans is obviously unknown, but in the past Gates has talked about how he would like the hardware to be free, and the user to pay a monthly rental charge for the software.

  23. Only microsoft can give away computers? by aersixb9 · · Score: 1

    Does this patent mean that only microsoft can give away computers and computer software that is paid for with advertising? As much as I would love free PCs for everybody (and microsoft could probably afford to give away free PCs) it seems to me that any company should be able to manufacture computers and computer software and give them away, then make money from advertising...giving away computers, perhaps with a second screen built into the first one to show ads, could allow 100% of humans to have access to the two-way information networks. (as opposed to the one-way information of traditional medias, such as the television, movie, and print medias) Including software with these free PCs could even bring about a new, error-free computer, since installation and testing could be done on a much more standard platform, although disk space could be a limiting factor, since not every kind of software could fit on a stardard size modern hard disk! In addition, if 100% of the people in the large manufacturing countries, such as mexico and china, had computers with internet, we could and perhaps should see a new way of large scale coordination beyond the current way called capitalism. Although it does appear capitalism has mostly died...money still has value to people, although the idea that a person can trade money for goods is still strong, it appears as though people no longer trade goods for money. Perhaps this free PC will bring about a new way of trade, through some kind of teaching/coordinating/manufacturing/shipping/distr ibuting/mining software that everybody could access?

    1. Re:Only microsoft can give away computers? by mvokla · · Score: 1

      What in the hell have you been smoking. Capitalism is far from dead. I trade money for goods and goods for money every day and so does every one else in the free world who is still breathing.

  24. SPAM IS good for you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    and that spam is good for me.

    I is good for you: See

  25. Pre-emptive strike by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They have no plan to do it. They just want to make sure nobody ELSE can.

  26. double-take by bersl2 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Anybody else read that as Microsoft Envisions Patent Free Computing?

    1. Re:double-take by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd prefer "Patent Envisions Microsoft-Free Computing."

    2. Re:double-take by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1
      I'd prefer "Patent Envisions Microsoft-Free Computing."

      Not if Microsoft holds that patent. I'd hate having to pay them for not using their software!

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  27. hrm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Like most of the comments so far this patent is very redundant.

  28. This has already been done by tacokill · · Score: 0, Redundant

    This has been done before, hasn't it? I distinctly remember a company who offered a free computer and dial-up ISP in exchange for "targeted advertising". I can't recall the company name but it failed miserably.

    I remember seeing screen shots of the system and a good 1/3 of the screen was ads -- all the time.

    So, yea...ok, let them apply for this patent. I don't care if they apply for it. But I will raise bloody hell if it's granted because there is CLEARLY prior-art for this. And not just in the computer world either.

    1. Re:This has already been done by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 1

      I remember seeing screen shots of the system and a good 1/3 of the screen was ads -- all the time.

      Way back when, I tried the Altavista 'free' dialup service a few times. On a P133 laptop (average at the time), the service was totally unuseable. The modem and the CPU could not keep up with the constant downloading and refreshing of ads.

    2. Re:This has already been done by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      Well, after RTFA, I see it's all about the software and methods. Not the hardware.

      But you were thinking of i-Openers, weren't ya?

      That worked out well. I had two. My GF and her daughter *lived* on those things until they both found online dating the same week.

      I killed the machines shortly thereafter. Her mom bought a Thinkpad asap. Her daughter got a scolding (first), then I gave her something more useful than the i-Opener.

      For revenge. And it was sweet, even cold.

      -rick

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
  29. 23 worst by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Pcworld reported in May this year on the 25 worst tech products of all time. Giving away free PCs is 23 on the list. Dan Tynan notes that at least these 'innovative' products earned their place in the H-T Hall of Shame. You must have seen the pcworld report but for those of us that havent seen it, here is what he had to say...

    "In the late 90s, companies competed to dangle free PCs in front of you: All you had to do was sign up, and a PC would eventually show up at your door. But one way or another. there was always a catch: You had to sign up for a long-term ISP agreement, or tolerate an endless procession of Web ads, or surrender reams of personal information. Free-PC.com may have been the creepiest of them all. First you filled out an extensive questionnaire on your income, interests, racial and marital status, and more. Then you had to spend at least 10 hours a week on the PC and at least 1 hour surfing the Web using Free-PC's ISP"

    1. Re:23 worst by suggsjc · · Score: 1

      Don't get me wrong, but even though *my* personal information is more valuable than a "free" computer, could it not be beneficial for others? I'm not advocating this style of business, but we tend to look at these types of businesses as being targeted at us (us being fellow /.ers)
      If I was just scraping by, and could not afford a new computer and internet access...would my personal information be a worthwhile trade then? I'm not in that situation, so I can't really answer that (and probably most of us can't either), but to some people this does probably look like a tempting offer.
      Granted, the people behind these businesses aren't looking out for their customers, but in some senses, there could be mutual benefit.

      --
      When I have a kid, I want to put him in one of those strollers for twins and then run around the mall looking frantic.
    2. Re:23 worst by One+Louder · · Score: 1

      The biggest flaw in the FreePC plan was that the people that would go for a free computer typically did so because they either didn't have money, or did but were were major tightwads - which wasn't a very interesting demographic group for advertising.

  30. Free? by tktk · · Score: 1
    Microsoft has a patent on "free computing."

    So, am I going to have to pay royalties to give my little sister a computer?

    What if I just give her parts and then later put it together for her? Am I in the clear?

    Microsoft will make a killing during Xmas and the start of the school year.

  31. No, this is unique and novel... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This isn't yet another foolish "...on the internet" magically making everything new patent. No, it is an "...on the internet ... inside video games" patent. Completely different :-)

  32. Freedom through patents by zo1dberg · · Score: 1

    We're obviously talking "free as in beer" here, but still... imagine Richard Stallman reading that headline.

  33. Telus.. by mottie · · Score: 1

    In BC (and maybe other provinces) Telus (ADSL ISP/Telco) is giving away a free Dell computer if you sign up for 3 years of High speed internet.. sure the internet is $40 a month, and you have to have a phone line on top of that.. but it's a FREE COMPUTER!

    http://promo.telus.com/tm/06/q3/highspeed/?BAC-cs0 6q3HSpeed&link=flames

  34. Breaking the Chain by ackthpt · · Score: 2, Funny

    Seriously, if the offer is that someone can data-mine everything on my PC and send me lots of pop-ups, spam, and flash banners, then no thanks.

    On a positive note, it may break some people of their Internet Addiction.

    omg noes!!1 every reload brings more suffering!

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  35. HeadOn, Apply Directly to Forehead by snarlydwarf · · Score: 1

    For $5/month this advertisement can play without sound.

    For $10/month we won't run this ad.

    1. Re:HeadOn, Apply Directly to Forehead by tuxd00d · · Score: 1

      Here is the commercial. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XAFCRT9L7A

      Pretty annoying. Guess they were hoping the repetition would stick with you. Seems like snarlydwarf remembered it.

    2. Re:HeadOn, Apply Directly to Forehead by snarlydwarf · · Score: 1

      Actually I saw it on NBC news last night: it's apparently effective, or at least the ad is.

      Annoying as hell, but effective.

      Just imagine that (or the annoying Flash ads with flies buzzing around, or any other ads for that matter) showing as your screensaver or while writing documents... yep, so many people would really love that experience.

      Not only is this patent bogus for prior art: it is one of the most useless concepts ever, which is why the companies that tried it almost 10 years ago now gave it up. Pissing off y our customers is usually considered a bad practice.

  36. um. yeah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I would prefer to "target" that "advertising" right up Bill's ass.

  37. Free, new, good-quality hardware by Ant+P. · · Score: 1

    Pick two.

  38. Patent Claims Start Out General by jmcharry · · Score: 1

    You can't read just the first claim or two in a patent application. Those always include life, the universe, and everything. They start out with the general area, then focus down to what is really being claimed as new. Nobody really expects the first several claims to be valid, although the hope of the filer is that the edge of validity is nearer the top than the bottom of the list. That is what makes reading the beginning of a patent or a filing for one often so outrageous.

  39. Wait just a minute... I see whats happening here by Gat0r30y · · Score: 0, Redundant

    They just want this patent so that if anyone else gives it away for free M$ can claim patent infringment and put an end to it. Come on, its M$.

    --
    Prediction: The real iPhone killer is going to be sex robots from Japan. Think about it.
  40. uh huh. by Chabil+Ha' · · Score: 1

    Yeah they want to be a "a service provider such as a telephone company". Every company wants to be like that. And get regulated into oblivion. No real growth potential. Stagnate. Stale.

    I believe them, don't you?

    --
    We're all hypocrites. We all have hidden parts, it's the contrast between them that make us more a hypocrite than others
    1. Re:uh huh. by kfg · · Score: 1

      Yeah they want to be a "a service provider . . .

      Go read it again. That's not what they said.

      What Microsoft wants is to own intellectual property in services, so that anytime anyone does anything, they get a check.

      They wish to be a direct deposit bank account.

      KFG

  41. The pr0n Adds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
    Seriously, if the offer is that someone can data-mine everything on my PC and send me lots of pop-ups, spam, and flash banners, then no thanks.

    Yeah, but, think of all those porn ads that will be streeming in! I can't wait!!!!

  42. Say No To Leasing by wls · · Score: 1

    I can see it now... you get the free computer, and it's burdened with EULAs that say hackers can't repurpose the device (remember CueCAT barcode readers), followed by software that monitors what you do, floods you with ads, and collects marketing information about you.

    No thanks.

    When I slap down money for a hardware and software, I want to be beholden to no one. Ever.

  43. Re:Patents...DUH by Roadkills-R-Us · · Score: 1

    No, because what immediately occurred to me was that this is anoter one of those patents that should never have been issues because it's old hat. Prior art. Whatever.

  44. A trifecta from hell by hellfire · · Score: 1

    Advertising evils, Microsoft evils, and Patent evils, all rolled into a business plan that has already proven to fail. I can't decide which to flame first!

    --

    "All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"

  45. Finally by iminplaya · · Score: 2, Funny

    We'll have a patent on "FREE". Is that a paradox, or an oxymoron?

    --
    What?
    1. Re:Finally by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If implemented, it'll be an injustice.

  46. They should patent open source computing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Then perhaps they have almost figured out where we are headed.

    Or perhaps if their patent envisioned patent free computing. Wow, genius.

  47. Microsoft envisions patent-free computing by chmilar · · Score: 1

    I would be happier to see the headline:

    "Microsoft envisions patent-free computing"

    --
    Reading Slashdot is ruining my spelling and grammar.
    1. Re:Microsoft envisions patent-free computing by donaldrobertson · · Score: 1

      I also found that title somewhat lacking. In my mind, envisioning free computing is not the same as patenting a business model. I guess they meant "free" as in ad-ware.

  48. I'm confused by epp_b · · Score: 1

    'Microsoft', 'Free' and 'Patent' in the same sentence? In the same title??

    1. Re:I'm confused by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I read it as "Microsoft Patents Free Computing."

  49. Trusted computing by Valdrax · · Score: 1

    It depends on whether or not some version of trusted computing is involved to ensure that the underlying OS isn't tampered with. Otherwise, it's only your favorite distro's Live CD away from being a completely ad-free system.

    If I were evil and designing it, I'd apply some of the Xbox 360's security provisions into the machine to ensure that no OS other than a trusted MS OS with TCPA protections was running on the system. I'd then make much of the functioning of the OS contingent on being able to contact certain ad-servers over the same channels used to fetch ads & report back private profiling info -- say a simple SSL connection so that stateful firewalls can't risk blocking it.

    It's really possible to lock down such a system, and MS holds enough related patents to make it happen.

    --
    If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
    1. Re:Trusted computing by aardvarkjoe · · Score: 1
      If I were evil and designing it, I'd apply some of the Xbox 360's security provisions into the machine to ensure that no OS other than a trusted MS OS with TCPA protections was running on the system.
      Why would it be evil to lock down a system that you're giving away? Richard, is that you?
      --

      How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
  50. Cellphone market by sacbhale · · Score: 1

    You can buy them. Just like you can buy cellphones in the US.
    But even then they could make it so that ur non trusted computing OS and apps dont work with the network.
    I say this in light of the fact that with the merging of the Telcos soon there will be a monopoly or at least an oligopoly like the cellphone companies. Where u can only run their apps(with spyware on them) on your PC or u dont get on the(non neutral) net. Sounds far fetched? I know but thats what RIAAT&TMicrosoft wants. And they have lots of money and lawyers.

    1. Re:Cellphone market by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      "...from my cold, dead hands."

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

  51. Not so fast... by rackhamh · · Score: 3, Informative
    Every time a patent is mentioned on Slashdot, the same misunderstandings crop up over and over and over...
    1. This is not a PATENT. It's a patent application PUBLICATION... which means the application has filed, but hasn't been examined yet (and probably won't be for about 2 more years).
    2. Just because a patent is filed doesn't mean it will be granted.
    3. The substance of the patent is in the claims. This is what Microsoft thinks (or wants the USPTO to think) is patentably novel. Specifically, what they're claiming is:

    A computer-readable medium having computer-executable modules for execution on a client computer in association with advertising delivery comprising:
    an opt-in module, comprising support for selecting an advertising delivery mode;
    a user profiling module for collecting user profile data;
    and an advertising delivery module for presenting a targeted advertisement corresponding to information in the user profile data according to the selected advertising delivery mode.

    This is what the USPTO will be looking at when they do their prior art search.

    1. Re:Not so fast... by intrico · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Rather than misunderstanding like you say, I think most people on here are smart enough see through the smoke of the grossly-obfuscated language used in most of these patents. With the recent patent news, I think most people by now are aware of items #1 and #2 that you mention. But then we get to item #3, which is where the problem lies. If you understand technology and/or are highly literate, as is the case for most Slashdot readers, you can read the claims for many of these patents, see through the obfuscatory smoke, and realize that what they describe is either something that is blatantly obvious and/or something that has been done before.

      For example, the portion of Microsoft's claims that you included above can be summarized as follows:
      A program that runs on a customer's PC, letting the customer opt-in and select how they want their ads delivered, stores information about the customer, and then delivers the ads according to what information has been collected from the customer.

      Just the fact that these companies would even dare to apply for things like that should naturally be enough to set off alarms. So I believe most people do in fact understand quite well what is going on.

    2. Re:Not so fast... by rackhamh · · Score: 1

      That's the broadest independent claim. I think if you look at the dependent claims, you'll start seeing more points of novelty. The independent claims are usually overly agressive to begin with...

  52. Doesn't anyone read the newspaper? by swordgeek · · Score: 4, Informative

    How much did your Sunday paper cost you? Maybe a buck, these days. It probably cost the publisher about $3 to print it, factoring in all of the news gathering and publishing costs. However, they also sold about $5/paper in ads, so they're making a net profit.

    Advertising is the primary revenue generator for information content providers. TVs, websites, newspapers, radio, and now computers. The only real difference is that once you get the computer, you have the computer and can theoretically do what you want. Of course, you could do that with a newspaper as well, by ripping the ads out.

    --

    "People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
    1. Re:Doesn't anyone read the newspaper? by nicolas.b · · Score: 0

      Free PC with advertising would be the death of free (as in freedom) software. Fuck it.

    2. Re:Doesn't anyone read the newspaper? by canuck57 · · Score: 1

      Advertising is the primary revenue generator for information content providers. TVs, websites, newspapers, radio, and now computers.

      Yep, papers and radio are cheap. Ever look at your cable bill? 120 channels loaded with advertising and they charge you for it. They get away with it because in most places it is a monopoly and the consumer has no choice.

      So as long as advertisers give us an option I don't care. The day they try to legislate required advertising I will take my internet connection underground. If advertisers had their way they would embed a A/V chip in your cornea so you would have to watch the crap 7x24 and make us all advert junkies.

      Lets look at the RIAA, it isn't good enough to embed adverts and release movies to the public download for free. They want the cable model of advertising where they get paid by both sides. They are resisting what the consumer wants. Guess what, they are loosing. More an more we see what we want, when we want and how we want (mp3/4).

      Fortunately, the internet was born free and in my life time advertisers will not see this power.

    3. Re:Doesn't anyone read the newspaper? by soccrates · · Score: 1

      Newspapers don't watch you open your mail, or read other newspapers or magazines you might want to read also, the articles you read longest, etc etc... they know next to nothing about you except perhaps where someone bought the paper. ... At least... none of the papers I've read do this. Maybe I haven't kept up with dead tree technology.

  53. I think they know that already... by Browzer · · Score: 1, Informative

    [0004] Other prior art service providers, such as Internet service providers and e-mail providers, have offered free or reduced charge services when users are willing to accept advertising in a portion of the window space allocated to the process supporting that service. Advertising delivery was restricted to the time when a user was connected to the particular service and only on display elements, such as a browser window, associated with that service.

  54. CueCat by Above · · Score: 1

    Give away hardware supported by ad revenue. Never seen that model before.

  55. Been there, done that, crashed, burned, gave up. by Terri416 · · Score: 1

    Here in Limeyland, Alan Sugar put his personal reputation on this with the em@iler.
    After 6 years, he finally gave up early this year. http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/news/article.html?in_ article_id=407184&in_page_id=2

  56. Everybody is already watching ads... by Browzer · · Score: 0

    why not get get paid for watching them?

    The ads might not come from a local database, but think of how many unwanted ads you get to see regardless if you want to or not (billboards, train-ads, TV, magazines, web (yes I know about Fedora's abilities)). What is a few more ads, and you actually get something in return.

  57. Wasn't that Opera's business model? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I remember installing Opera and getting banner adds, which they would kindly remove if you paid the license fee. That was almost a decade ago.

  58. Too Expensive by soft_guy · · Score: 1

    There is NOTHING more expensive than something that is "free".

    --
    Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
  59. Very old business model by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I though for sure this has been done before. Just off the top off my head, isnt this how Television and Radio do business?

  60. Prior art? by mabhatter654 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    isn't there already prior art for this? I thought there were 2 or 3 companies already doing this, many were in South america, so that may not be "prior" art. Also, wouldn't netzero qualify... they didn't give away a whole PC, but they had a model of ads-for-service 5 years ago.

  61. One Windows Laptop Per Child by Locutus · · Score: 1

    I tell you, Bill is "retiring" from Microsoft but not from growing them larger. While is wife is off saving the worlds children, Bill will be brainwashing them with Windows and other Microsoft Software crack.

    There was that deal with AMD the brought about that little anti-Linux box( forget the name ).

    But then, then there was Flexgo ( http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/flexgo/default.mspx ) at WinHec and THAT should have been obvious to the press what was going on there.

    He may not call it One Windows Laptop Per Child, it might not be called One Flexgo Per Child either but rest assured, Bill Gates is NOT RETIRING. Windows is being threatend by Linux and OSS and there's not way he or Balmer will rest until their job is done and there nothing but Windows. IMO.

    LoB

    --
    "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
  62. It's a new Feature of Windows Update by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I read the application, and now I get it:

    7. The computer-readable medium of claim 6, wherein the database of advertisements is delivered with an update of the operating system.

  63. computing, m$ definition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    computing

    n 1: The branch of marketing and advertising that studies (with the aid of computers) viral processes disseminating advertising babel to a target audience. v 2: To be visualy captivated by computer running viral processes, spewing gibberish against blue backgrounds, distractions, paperclip sideshows, fear based popup messages and spurious questionaires etc.

    definition from the m$ dictionary.

  64. Newspapers != Free PCs - not by a long shot by WidescreenFreak · · Score: 1

    Newspapers are not the same by a long shot. When you buy a newspaper, it's yours. The newspaper company has absolutely no way of know if you even read any of the advertisements. Once the sale is done, it's done.

    The way that it would most likely work is similar to what others have tried in the past. Yes, you get the PC; but in order to grant you the PC in a "free status, it has to signal back to the mother ship that it's still there and still receiving advertisements. If it does not signal back or it determines that it is not displaying the advertising, you will be considered to be in violation of the terms of the agreement and will be charged the full price of the PC. Chances are that it will also require you to allow the sofwtare to upgrade itself as necessary. A failure to upgrade means a potential breach of contract.

    I remember clearly reading this in the Ts&Cs of one of the failed "free PC" companies a few years ago. You were forbidden from installing another OS; you were forbidden to upgrade the hard drive because they're not about to give you the software to report back; all repairs had to be done through them to verify that you're still in compliance; you had to allow the software to report back. This is exactly why I threw the ad away. Sort of smells of the recent WGA fiasco.

    So, no, you can't do with the PC what you want -- unless you want to be billed the full cost of it for violating your terms and conditions for the purchase.

    --
    The Overrated mod is for reversing inappropriate, positive mods, not for voicing disagreement with a post.
  65. Free? by rs79 · · Score: 1

    How much can I pay not to have to use free Miscrosoft hardware and software?

    --
    Need Mercedes parts ?
  66. Re:Wait just a minute... I see whats happening her by Alaria+Phrozen · · Score: 0

    I thought MS largely dealt in defensive patents? If I were a small company I would try to patent the hell out of whatever Microsoft went after in hopes of getting at least one good score. ---- Chewbacca's on a scooter man, holy crap!

  67. I like targeted ads by patiodragon · · Score: 1

    I don't feel one bit like I buy more stuff because there are advertisements surrounding my mail. Sometimes I know I have a need for something but haven't found a source. An advertisement is useful to me at this point.

    Besides, you should see my collection of recipes for spam!

  68. Perhaps its a ruse by FlyingGuy · · Score: 0

    Now I dont trust M$ any farther then I could pitch a Cray but...

    Interesting thing about this after a gloss over the terms is that this could very well be a method of owning SPAM generation system(s) or technology(ies) and therefor denying it as a method to others. This seems to cover most of the methods of delivering advertising.

    Pondering life as I know it...

    --
    Hey KID! Yeah you, get the fuck off my lawn!
  69. Isn't Google already doing just that? by Opportunist · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Giving away software and services and making money through ads?

    At any rate, I'd view this as a "defensive patent". One they don't want to implement, but to keep someone from implementing it instead. Exactly what patents were NOT intended for.

    My only hope is that with the abuse of patents, some people will start reconsidering the patenting process. Or maybe the whole system altogether.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  70. OS Lock-in not a problem? by joshetc · · Score: 1

    I think these days locking people into an OS would be fairly simple.

    A basic OS installed on minimal flash memory or even ROM that has NIC drivers.. as well as no way to attach external media. With the amount of bandwidth people have these days compared to the past it would be trivial to stream the main operating system and applications over the internet. Basically what Windows Live is meant to be..

    Not exactly hack proof but stronger than simply formatting a large drive and installing a new OS.

  71. Re:They tried this already Hand over more control? by callingalloldhippies · · Score: 1

    "Anyone else here old enough to remember when the PC was about decentralizing computing, taking control of your own data, and empowering yourself? This was Micro$oft's big selling point against IBM."

    Oh Yes! I remember! and the concept held such promise I actually thought it would be a turning point in 'saving the world'! So.....

    NO! NO! NO!

    The users have got to TAKE BACK more control! Wake up people!

    If we don't start 'getting it' pretty soon, we might as well just give up all expectation of privacy, personal rights and let all of our fearless leaders and big money label us all. disposible fodder.

    --
    "Never try to teach a pig to sing. It simply wastes your time and truely annoys the pig"
  72. "Patent" and "free" in the same sentence???? by 3seas · · Score: 1

    Microsoft is first and formost a marketing company selling software. Second is their legal department to determine what they can get away with or can afford to pay penality for doing wrong, and third is acusition of the works of others or the suppression of others.

    Only an idiot would at this time see this article as a favorable towards MS fact.

    It is at best an admittance that MS may not be able to compete with either OSS or Google ad revenue. Via their marketing practices to make it sound like it was their original idea. Just as they have done many times in the past.

    There was the boy who cried wolf and now there is the software company who yelled "piracy" that people need to stop believing.

  73. Free?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "free in exchange for targeted advertising delivery"
    Free apparently dosen't mean what I thought it did.
    It appears to mean the opposite of what it did.
    Kind of like "bad" meaning good.

    The idea of computer for target advertising is a dead horse.

    The fact that companies use "FREE" for "costs" it more interesting.
    I used to use the word "lying" to describe this, but I suppose the current word is "truth"

    newspeak is so confusing

  74. Free something... with targeted ads... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I seem to remember having seen this somewhere... where was it?

    Ah, yes, let me _google_ it with my _Opera_ browser...

    You know what? After all, all this innovating by copying is a kind of piracy -- only in the case of big companies, they smartly require the USPTO sanctioning for the whole thing... pretty sad kind of acting on everyone's part, if I may say so.

  75. the wheel [was:hello?] by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was thinking that they are trying to reinvent the wheel, then I recalled that the spoked wheel was recently patented (see edition.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/asiapcf/auspac/07/02/au stralia.wheel/). But that will not stop others from still trying (www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/200 5/11/24/AR2005112401003.html). I am sure they will even come up for some inventive uses (www.totallyabsurd.com/paddlewheelplane.htm)!

    So I wonder, when will they ever learn, and what will they do for the patent if awarded? -- kill the laptop/per/child effort and make them install windows? Hmmm... got to wonder what were they thinking...

  76. free computers! free software! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and a pay by the second scheme!

  77. IT'S READY. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    U CAUSE U. ROFL.

  78. And a patent I just filed on Thursday... by pandrijeczko · · Score: 1

    ...requests that Microsoft just "STFU", stop poking their big, fat Microsoft nose in areas that doesn't concern them and concentrate more on fixing the bugs in their software - otherwise we're all allowed to put our big, hob-nailed, non-Microsoft boots on and give them a damned good kicking.

    --
    Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
  79. not yet awake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I somehow read the article headline as something like "Microsoft Envisions Pants-Free Computing"

  80. In other words... by Wolfier · · Score: 1

    Microsoft patents bartering?

  81. Mandatory comment by ferd_farkle · · Score: 1

    "All your personal informations are belong to us."

    Yay! Free advertisements!

  82. Cheap, New, Medium-Quality hardware. by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 1

    I'll take Cheap, New, Medium-Quality every time, presuming it doesn't have the ad services mentioned in the topic post. (Read: Spend 2 hours unhooking the OEM ads.)

    Every time my company spends $11,000 at Dell for four (!) PC's, I wilt.

    --
    My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
  83. Can you say Prior Art? by jrobinson5 · · Score: 1

    Remember seeing "Free PCs" in PC Magazine's "Worst tech products of all time"? I can't see this having much more success?

    Also, what measures are there to stop someone from just reformatting and installing Linux? Trusted computing? License agreements and armies of lawyers? I can't imagine someone not finding a hack. Come to think of it, I hope M$ does this. I mean, they're sure to screw up the security somehow, and when they do, I just got myself a free linux box!

    1. Re:Can you say Prior Art? by jrobinson5 · · Score: 1

      Oh, sorry to reply to myself, but I just saw this jem in the article. Another embodiment of the proposed technology specifically envisions an ad-supported operating system, without free hardware. "For example, an operating system may be provided by an operating system developer for free," the patent application says. "Users may then receive advertisements for use of the free operating system. User who do not wish to view advertisements may purchase a full license. Users willing to receive ads but desire less obtrusive advertising delivery, may opt to purchase a limited license or subscription for the operating system." What is Microsoft thinking? This will completely kill their desktop monopoly, because if a user is gonna spend that much money, they're probably gonna do some comparison shopping. On the plus side (for us), this will put an end to the M$ tax.