Slashdot Mirror
Nikon Buckles To Microsoft, Will Pay "Android Tax" For Smart Cameras
walterbyrd writes with news that Nikon is the latest company to agree to pay Microsoft for the privilege of using Android on its devices — as you might expect from Nikon, the devices in this case are cameras. (Microsoft's press release.)
You settin' up shop on my street? Nobody, I sez *nobody*... sets up shop on my street without talkin' to me foyst. OK, listen pal. Here's what I'm gonna a do for you. You just pay me a little bidda money on everything you sellz, and I'z a gonna look dee otha way, capiche?
You callin' this "extortion"? That's a big word, my friend. 'Round here we just call it biz niss.
They are a leach on modern businesses, their operating systems are found lacking, their office products are crap, their hardware is of the scaliest, slimiest design. In other words, they are dinosaurs in modern society.
MPAA - On warning for extinction.
RIAA - On warning for extinction.
Microsoft - On warning for extinction.
Time to open up the hunting licenses, and finish them all off.
One less brand to ever appear on my shopping list.
I deny that I have not avoided attaining the opposite of that which I do not want.
They also license patents from Apple, IBM and god knows who else, but it's not a big story then.
Why try and spin it as some sort of evil "Microsoft tax", when we could actually have a discussion on the patent system, instead of some retarded online version of two minutes hate.
This site has become completely worthless as a place to discuss technology.
Here's some info on the patents that Microsoft claims android is in violation of:
http://www.networkworld.com/news/2011/070611-microsoft-android.html
The real target of all this bullshit from Microsoft is the use of firmware with software other than what comes from Redmond, period. Face it Microsoft has been squeezed out of the embedded market largely because of the flexibility of OSS and the Linux kernel.
The best and only solution is for manufactures to turn on the bastards and stop using fat and ntfs period or charge more for devices that do.
This could easily be accomplished by providing a software tool with the cheaper devices to read write to Windows without the use of fat or ntfs. If Samsung, Nikon, Sony, Toshiba, Canon and all the other manufacturers got together and created a formatting tool for storage that they shared this could easily be accomplished.
Having one company dictate the format in which all portable storage devices read and write is the problem and the bastards in Redmond need to be held to task and given a full financial enema for a change.
Right?
No wrong. I am tired of closed being the new open , and well closed being the new open [Thank you Ars]. Android is an a modular OS where various parts are under different licenses GPL2 (Linux the Kernel) most of the userland (Apache which is why Honeycomb never got released) and proprietary (most first party Applications) with various stuff happening in the cloud (maps; various storage; mail)...and nothing has changed.
Android does not protect you from patent trolls like Microsoft, but then it never did or claimed to...your choices have always been, work around the patents; pay them off; fight them in courts.
In short though this topic has nothing to do with being open...and unless your a Tizen fanboi your just trolling [lets face it iOS and Bada the only serious contenders are closed], with an off-topic comment, now if you has said "But Android is still free [beer]?" you would have least been on topic...still a troll...but on topic.
They also license patents from Apple, IBM and god knows who else, but it's not a big story then.
Except we do in the case of Apple *endlessly* Its not just been big news here, but in every damn newspaper worldwide. In fact very little is said of Evil Microsoft(sic) shady deals which are in the main back room affairs "While the contents of the agreement will not be disclosed" , with it being spin as a joyful agreement "Microsoft and Nikon have a long history of collaboration".
Perhaps if your not happy you could register and submit stories you feel more worthwhile, rather than attack a community.
You callin' this "extortion"? That's a big word, my friend. 'Round here we just call it biz niss.
Nikon is a big boy now and can take care of itself.
Founded in 1917 and a core component of the Japanese industrial cartel Mitsubishi.
You do know Mitsubishi? Employs 350,000 people? Rakes in about $350 Billion in revenues each year?
In a mature industry, all Android-related patents would be pooled, managed and cross-licensed to stabilize the business and the product.
No need to build your own customized portfolio. That hasn't happened yet and the geek won't like it when it does ---- any more than he likes the dominance of the MPEG LA pools in video compression.
One less brand to ever appear on my shopping list.
Help me understand - you are mad at the victim? Do you stop talking to friends because they paid for Windows? Don't buy anything with a Samsung-made component?
I'm sure Nikon looked at the cost of fighting and decided it made business sense to pay them. Consider the volume of Android devices Nikon sells vs. Samsung and other cell phone companies. If it doesn't make sense for the cell phone vendors, it is unlikely to make sense for Nikon to fight in court.
Frankly, your anger toward Microsoft might be better directed at Microsoft. And Google. Why hasn't Google challenged this?
Place nail here >+
even the original MS-DOS circa 1981 was at best a workalike knockoff of CP/M that they bought in from someone else
If Oracle beats Google on appeal, then DRDOS Inc. has a case against Microsoft. The maker of CP/M reworked CP/M-86 into DR-DOS.
I can't help but think this is just a bit of karma comeback for Nikon. A few years ago, they decided to change their RAW file format to NEF (Nikon Encrypted Format), which could be read by nothing but their own software. They graciously allowed MS, Adobe and all to purchase licenses, so that Photoshop and such could read and work with the new .nef files. To be fair, Pentax, Canon and everyone seems to be doing this now.
Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
I don't really know anything about (semi-)professional photography, but I always assumed objectives from different manufacturers were compatible. Can't you use your old glass with the new, different camera?
Camera manufacturers lock you in with proprietary hardware interfaces, so in general you can't mix and match between different companies. They also try and keep backwards compatibility within their own brand and Nikon supposedly has one of the best backward compatibility with its lenses of the major 35mm camera manufacturers.
I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
Pentax is hugely backwards compatible. I have glass sitting around that is over 30 years old that works flawlessly on my modern SLR. The only problem is some of the newer lenses, made for crop sensors, aren't really usable on film bodies without severe vignetting (though not always, some labeled for ASP-C are actually have a 35mm image circle). Also, all however many years of class all have stabilization, thanks to in body IS (why is also why I picked Olympus for my mirrorless).
Back in the film days there were several companies making class for other big brands. Also most screw mount lenses were pretty universal (m39 for pretty much all rangefinder/Leica type cameras, and m42 for pretty much everything else. Bayonet mounts is where things went downhill for compatibility. Now the only real "open" platform out there is Micro 4/3s, but even that isn't terribly open since its only Olympus and Panasonic.
I wouldn't call it lock in, though, since there are actual physical limitations, such as flange distance, and contacts (what features do you want to ship to the lens, or keep in body?). Some of it is obviously lock in, but thats putting it a bit strong.
A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
How does the age or size of Nikon change the fact that this is extortion?
It is not extortion if Nikon considers the Microsoft patents valid and a useful addition to their portfolio.
This is the argument the geek cannot accept.
It has to be extortion. He has no other way of explaining what happened.
No matter how wildly improbable it is that so junior and foreign a competitor as Microsoft could bully a core component of a Japanese industrial cartel as old (1870), culturally insular, rich, proud and powerful as Mitsubishi.
Yeah - I get all that. In principle, I agree with you.
But the practical is different. Nikon has it's hands full with its primary competitors, and a shrinking market. Smartphones are killing the compact camera market, and new "mirror-less" cameras are eating into the D-SLR market. Canon and Sony make lots of products outside the camera business, but 75% of Nikon's sales are dependent on cameras and lenses. They are being super aggressive in the D-SLR segment to make up for that revenue, and trying to find something to fit in the space between the smartphone and D-SLR. And they need the support of Microsoft, Apple and Adobe for processing those files. Right now, they need friends - not another enemy.
I suspect the Android camera is an experiment to see if consumers will accept a compact camera that does pretty much everything a smartphone does, except for phone calls. Do consumers want Android-based cameras? Nikon makes just a single model with Android. It could be a flop, and something Nikon might drop. Do the sales justify an expensive legal fight in the USA - Microsoft's home turf.
I'm sure they see two giants (MS and Google) about to face-off in a war, and they will pay the MS "tax" and sit this one out. This is a bit like someone fighting cancer who decides not to get involved in a conflict between nations.
Nikon is fighting for survival, so I think we should give them a pass on this one.
Place nail here >+
I think Google buying Motorola was clearly a defensive move. Google was attempting to protect itself from the most vicious patent trolls, and scam artists in the business, namely Apple, Oracle, and Microsoft.
Who has Google extorted, and how?