They are spending less of course, because they're only doing the OS part. But because of that their profits are smaller too, so the actual percentage going for licensing costs surely could be somewhat same, if not even more.
And I'm sure Microsoft has tons of lawyers specialized on patents examining what goes into Windows and other products, so they surely would have the power to fight it if Nokia's claims would really be false.
While I also think Nokia's phones haven't been up to quality in recent years (I switched to HTC and love it), they have a long history in developing phones and the technology behind it. They have spend millions on R&D. They fairly cross license patents with other manufacturers, like every one else does (theres not so many manufacturers anyways), but Apple refuses to do this.
Even if their phones aren't as good as some competitors currently, Nokia is one of the companies that actually deserve to be paid their patent royalties.
While patent laws are on Nokia's side too, they aren't even lowering to patent trolling - they're just asking Apple to behave good and like everyone else on the small industry and cross license their patents and pay the small share like everyone else does (3-4% per phone sale if I remember correctly, and Apple gets the same back if Nokia uses their patents). Is this too much to ask?
In addition to vending machines and such (those have been around from the time sms was introduced, from what, 1996 or so?), you can also pay your meals in Subway and some other fast food places and like you said train and bus tickets can be paid with sms too.
Not that it would be in lot use (maybe more with teens, as in our time too), but they are available.
Exactly, and with voicemail the recipient still has to turn it on. And I don't always want to talk to everyone even if I'm basically free (playing a game, watching a movie or whatever). Sending a sms on a non-urgent and not-so-important issue is a lot less intrusive and a lot more polite.
There are many companies and plans now that allow you 2000 sms per month included in the plans price, and those aren't all that expensive (starts at 10e/month i think).
Yeah, just like the summary says on the second line...
The thing is, Nokia has all the rights to do that since Apple keeps infringing their patents and doesn't even agree to cross license patents like every phone manufacturer does. This is just Apple being childish and trying to kick back in tears.
They need to just fucking cross license the patents like they always end up doing. Stop feeding the animals (Lawyers).
That is exactly what Nokia has been trying to do, but Apple doesn't agree to the terms (which are same for every other manufacturer too). And since Apple is infringing patents and doesn't agree to the standard cross licensing, they can't do other than sue.
Not the same one of course. But if you're using Adobe PDF Reader on Linux, and it has the same vulnerability, then yes, same kind of attack would succeed under Linux too (SELinux does protect some against this kind of things, but its pain in the ass otherwise too).
But of course the Linux desktop market share is only really minor, it consists mostly of advanced users, and isn't generally using Adobe's PDF reader, so theres no point targeting it.
No. You know how it will be circumvented? By about 60 million people just not caring.
That doesn't really help. No, they won't be enforcing and punishing everyone. But they will target specific persons with it to silent and shut them down.
This doesn't make sense. The percents aren't relative, they're absolute percents shared between all search engines. Having small share doesn't have any advantage on that.
Well in this case it was quite clear what was going on. C'mon, if you looked at the site and the torrent listing, one would had been a complete, unbelievably retard not knowing people we're using all those torrents for sole copyright infringement.
The cost of the hardware is hardly worth mentioning... this little enterprise is about bandwidth. A few grand a month can easily be spent on just a T1.
You do understand that bittorrent tracker itself doesn't burn bandwidth almost at all, but its extremely heavy on the server because so many hits are coming in all the time?
Didn't the site have donation bar that said running costs were like $2000/month, that was always "filling up" towards end of the month? If the running costs were that, it left a quite nice sum of rest of that $35 000 to him.
I must note that I'm living in Europe and Bing's maps services are using local providers to populate their data. Bird-eye view, local businesses and restaurants and their more detailed street view. It's definitely better here than what Google provides.
Perhaps you know how to change the default search engine... but I can garantee you that 75% (AT LEAST) of all computer users DOESN'T KNOW HOW... Even if the buttons/options are correctly labeled...
And your point is exactly what? What makes you think it's the more right thing to do to have Google as the default engine? Or should they remove search boxes all together from IE? Should Google set Chrome have Bing as the default search engine instead of themself? Should firefox change to Bing instead of Google too? Should they all set to altavista? Should they just ditch the whole thing and have no searching at all?
And even more so, who actually types in www.bing.com or www.google.com to do a search, now that every browser has a search box you just tab to? or just write the search query to address box.
This is also true for me. Google Maps can't even show satellite images closely, while Bing's maps tool has close-up bird-eye views and a lot more info about businesses and places.
Slashdot Mirror
They are spending less of course, because they're only doing the OS part. But because of that their profits are smaller too, so the actual percentage going for licensing costs surely could be somewhat same, if not even more.
And I'm sure Microsoft has tons of lawyers specialized on patents examining what goes into Windows and other products, so they surely would have the power to fight it if Nokia's claims would really be false.
Microsoft big enough for you?
While I also think Nokia's phones haven't been up to quality in recent years (I switched to HTC and love it), they have a long history in developing phones and the technology behind it. They have spend millions on R&D. They fairly cross license patents with other manufacturers, like every one else does (theres not so many manufacturers anyways), but Apple refuses to do this.
Even if their phones aren't as good as some competitors currently, Nokia is one of the companies that actually deserve to be paid their patent royalties.
While patent laws are on Nokia's side too, they aren't even lowering to patent trolling - they're just asking Apple to behave good and like everyone else on the small industry and cross license their patents and pay the small share like everyone else does (3-4% per phone sale if I remember correctly, and Apple gets the same back if Nokia uses their patents). Is this too much to ask?
In addition to vending machines and such (those have been around from the time sms was introduced, from what, 1996 or so?), you can also pay your meals in Subway and some other fast food places and like you said train and bus tickets can be paid with sms too.
Not that it would be in lot use (maybe more with teens, as in our time too), but they are available.
Exactly, and with voicemail the recipient still has to turn it on. And I don't always want to talk to everyone even if I'm basically free (playing a game, watching a movie or whatever). Sending a sms on a non-urgent and not-so-important issue is a lot less intrusive and a lot more polite.
There are many companies and plans now that allow you 2000 sms per month included in the plans price, and those aren't all that expensive (starts at 10e/month i think).
The issue is about a lot more than just about GSM standards. Among others, theres patents about usability and interfaces, not just about GSM.
Yeah, just like the summary says on the second line...
The thing is, Nokia has all the rights to do that since Apple keeps infringing their patents and doesn't even agree to cross license patents like every phone manufacturer does. This is just Apple being childish and trying to kick back in tears.
They need to just fucking cross license the patents like they always end up doing. Stop feeding the animals (Lawyers).
That is exactly what Nokia has been trying to do, but Apple doesn't agree to the terms (which are same for every other manufacturer too). And since Apple is infringing patents and doesn't agree to the standard cross licensing, they can't do other than sue.
Not the same one of course. But if you're using Adobe PDF Reader on Linux, and it has the same vulnerability, then yes, same kind of attack would succeed under Linux too (SELinux does protect some against this kind of things, but its pain in the ass otherwise too).
But of course the Linux desktop market share is only really minor, it consists mostly of advanced users, and isn't generally using Adobe's PDF reader, so theres no point targeting it.
No. You know how it will be circumvented?
By about 60 million people just not caring.
That doesn't really help. No, they won't be enforcing and punishing everyone. But they will target specific persons with it to silent and shut them down.
There is always a good side to things too. It's a quick way to get off the ugly fat girl you took home from bar last night.
In other news, Himalayas have seen a surge of new visitors and people moving in.
Which is why I don't understand parents point. The exploit was against Adobe PDF Reader, not against IE. It would have worked in other browsers.
And because Firefox crashed too, it was definitely getting past what it should had been. No browser should even crash on some code on website.
doing so faster because it has such a small share
This doesn't make sense. The percents aren't relative, they're absolute percents shared between all search engines. Having small share doesn't have any advantage on that.
Well in this case it was quite clear what was going on. C'mon, if you looked at the site and the torrent listing, one would had been a complete, unbelievably retard not knowing people we're using all those torrents for sole copyright infringement.
The cost of the hardware is hardly worth mentioning... this little enterprise is about bandwidth. A few grand a month can easily be spent on just a T1.
You do understand that bittorrent tracker itself doesn't burn bandwidth almost at all, but its extremely heavy on the server because so many hits are coming in all the time?
And what a successful one it was indeed. Good profit, no jail time, happy times.
Didn't the site have donation bar that said running costs were like $2000/month, that was always "filling up" towards end of the month? If the running costs were that, it left a quite nice sum of rest of that $35 000 to him.
I must note that I'm living in Europe and Bing's maps services are using local providers to populate their data. Bird-eye view, local businesses and restaurants and their more detailed street view. It's definitely better here than what Google provides.
Perhaps you know how to change the default search engine... but I can garantee you that 75% (AT LEAST) of all computer users DOESN'T KNOW HOW... Even if the buttons/options are correctly labeled...
And your point is exactly what? What makes you think it's the more right thing to do to have Google as the default engine? Or should they remove search boxes all together from IE? Should Google set Chrome have Bing as the default search engine instead of themself? Should firefox change to Bing instead of Google too? Should they all set to altavista? Should they just ditch the whole thing and have no searching at all?
Think a little, please.
That is the same what Google does with their products. Just try to install Google Earth, Google Desktop or anything else they offer.
And even more so, who actually types in www.bing.com or www.google.com to do a search, now that every browser has a search box you just tab to? or just write the search query to address box.
This is also true for me. Google Maps can't even show satellite images closely, while Bing's maps tool has close-up bird-eye views and a lot more info about businesses and places.
Google is starting to lag behind.
Not alternatives, but Scroogle hides your searches among thousands of others (and removes Google's click-tracking javascripts and so on).