FYI, Android is not Java. if anything it supports much of the Java language syntax but it is not Java and does not run the Java virtual machine(JVM) which may be what you meant by "the native Java bytecode interpreter".
do you know there are other versions of pre-packaged Ubuntu which don't default to the Unity desktop? Kubuntu, Xubuntu and there is even LinuxMint which is based on Ubuntu but customized by the Mint community and they too have different flavors/configurations. Or you can spin your own from Debian if that is what you really want but there are other options instead of the default Ubuntu with Unity.
I knew it was about protecting the Windows PC OS. You know, where so much of their profits come from they can afford to lose billions annually on things like WP7, Windows Mobile, MSN, BING, etc.
"Microsoft demanded an exorbitant royalty (on a per device basis) for a license to its patent portfolio for the NookTM device and at the end of the meeting Microsoft stated that it would demand an even higher per device royalty for any device that acted "more like a computer" as opposed to an eReader."
If you've been around for even a short time, a license agreement does not mean a patent is valid. It only means one company justified the expense of the licensing over the cost of fighting it and what that might bring. HTC probably signed the deal because it ended up being paid to go back to shipping Windows phone OS based devices. We've seen Asus decide to take an old version of Windows( XP ) and replace Linux on their netbooks even though it meant putting more hardware on the devices and running the price up. Sure they paid Microsoft for the licenses but what you didn't see was how much Microsoft paid Asus for putting a Windows logo on the box and on their web sites. That is called a marketing kick back.
B&N does not need to license them because the patent system is built on the premise of the courts deciding if a patent is really valid instead of the USPTO. That is one reason why the system is so broken. It takes more and more money to fight off a patent thug when they throw more and more phony patents at you. This is why companies are joining groups to pool patents. It's like the old cold war mutual destruction threat. It sucks and I hope B&N is able to fight them off and show it can and should be done. I hope Google and other Android using vendors are talking with them behind the scenes on this too.
B&N had not been in the software no computer business EVER so this is all relatively new to them and when a company like Microsoft, using the tactics they've employed for 20+ years, B&N probably looked at them and said WTF are you kidding. Remember when the netbooks hit the market and after one hot year of Linux netbooks, we heard the head of the Taiwanese Manufacturing Association publicly state "they" are afraid of Microsoft on laptops, notebooks and devices like that and not so much on things like phones? Remember the CEO of Asus on stage with Microsoft apologizing for showing a ARM Snapdragon based netbook after it was pulled from their booth?
B&N got a taste of how Microsoft operates and as an outsider to the computer industry sounds pretty shocked at how they were bullied and is being open about it. I may go out and buy a Nook just to know I'm indirectly supporting their efforts. They will be getting a letter of encouragement from me because most, if not all, of those patent claim are pathetic. IMO
exactly, PDF file use eats into their MS Office sales. To this day I still get MS Office files which are one page and just a few lines of standard text( basically a note ) and people expect others to have MS Office just to read it. If Acrobat was not cross platform then you'd probably not see Microsoft too concerned about embedding their own PDF viewer. But with Adobe having Acrobat and Flash on nearly every Windows PC along with every Mac, Android, Linux system etc they get the target for elimination put on their back. So yes, it's about keeping people using and passing around Microsoft Office files instead of some other company's software product. IMO
Adobe is possibly the only company left which has product which gets preloaded on close to 100% of Windows systems shipped. By Microsoft building their own PDF reader into the OS they remove one of the two Adobe products( Acrobat Reader ) needed to eliminate that threat.
which brings up the question, I wonder how AT&T feels about Microsoft going around the Microsoft-AT&T U-verse packaging to pull this off? Considering the billions paid to them for all U-verse, now late it was and how it was locked into Microsoft's software. It has to sting some.
MS Office for the Mac...so what, it's a fringe product? They were once going to cancel MS Office for Mac until they needed to kill Netscape and signed a nice deal with Apple netting Apple a $100 million or so. For that money Microsoft did Internet Explorer for Mac and from noises we also heard they were required to keep MS Office for Mac going.
MS OneNote for iPhone is a new one on me and is _way_ out of character for Microsoft. Besides the bits and pieces of things on the Mac, Microsoft would not support products on other platforms no matter the device. They often used 3rd party deals for those times they needed to leverage something on another platform. Things like MS IE for HPUX and Solaris but these were always killed off later since they had no intention to keep these going. But the OneNote app for the iPhone is very interesting. I do see Microsoft hired a 3rd party to do a multi platform OneNote client though. I doubt there is much income and profit from that.
MS Web Office whatever. It is probably tied to MS IE some way(silverlight probably) or another. Not sure what they plan on or do charge for using it and it's probably tied in with MS Office licensing. In 5 years maybe it'll be something and have a financial impact on the company.
But MS OneNote for the iPhone, that is pretty amazing. I wonder how that got pass3d Ballmer.
they only shelve the product if it has no use or purpose protecting their Windows OS position. MS Money lost but somehow they have Intuit stuck only supporting Windows so they're happy to let MS Money go. MS Flight Sim doesn't have any use protecting or advancing Windows market. shelve it. Anything else that could be considered leverage to keep a competitor to Windows at bay is kept up and they'll spend billions doing it. MSN, BING, etc are examples. Silverlight is a give-away and they'll dump millions into that even to the extent of paying large vendors to go to Silverlight as opposed to Adobe Flash. Windows CE has cost them something like $20 billion in losses over the years but it kept Palm OS from growing into a threat( Palm helped too ). There's lots of examples of this protectionism because the Windows OS and their products tied to that directly (MS Office, MS Server, MS SQL, etc ) bring in the profits investors see. Look at their quarterly and annual reports and you'll see billions in losses.
Xbox does show up as pulling in profits now but I still see billions needed to break even since they have lost billions developing it and for the first many years. What was it, $1.3 billion they had to write off just to deal with hardware issues after the 360 was released. If they could operate on the current version for another 5-10 years they might get out of the hole but Nintendo and Sony are not standing still and new consoles are due in a few years. Billions more will have to be spent with probably a billion just on marketing so more comes out of the hole.
BTW, look at MSN/BING since it lost $2.6 billion in 2010 and a few billion in 2009 and another billion before that. The Windows OS still brings in enough bacon shareholders are holding pat for now.
All but the Entertainment and Devices div are based on the Windows OS or tied at the hip to it.
Windows and Windows Live - Windows OS Server and Tools - Windows OS Microsoft Business Division (aka MS Office, etc ) - Windows OS
Entertainment and Devices(aka Xbox, Windows CE ) - Xbox is Windows 2K based but a fork so this applies. But, considering they spent over $20 billion or so to get here, they'll need another decade to get in the black there IMO. Just look at BING, it bleed $2.3 billion in 2010 and $1.6 billion in 2009. The Xbox product line looks like it might be the only product outside of stuff directly PC OS related but then again, XBox v3 is supposedly in the works and due out in a couple of years. That'll be another billion or two expense in marketing and product development and who knows if they'll have another multi billion dollar write off over hardware issues.
You take away the PC OS and they've got nothing they could live off of and that is how it's been for 20 years. The did make profits off their Microsoft mouse and Microsoft keyboard products. I'll give them that.
not if it gets patented and that gets into the hands of the oil industry or maybe the tire industry. I can see it now, an auditorium full of lawyers working on the patent and another one full of lawyers documenting ways to prevent its use.
revenue is 2nd fiddle at Microsoft so don't think revenue is all that important. They have Windows and MS Office supplying billions in profits so things like the XBox, Windows for devices, Zune, etc are all products with the primary purpose to protect the profit machine and limit or restrict growth of a potential competitor to that profit stream. That's how and why they can lose 10s of billions on Xbox and keep doing it or lose around 20 billion on the Windows CE base. For 20 years their PC OS has been their one and only profit generator and protecting that has been their number one job and it shows. The ultimate one hit wonder. So don't bet too much on revenue or profits directing how Microsoft operates its fringe products.
I was talking more about iTunes on the device and not the iTunes software for Windows and Mac PC's. Just as Google is able to package ways to get device users to search via their search engine and bring in profits, so too does Apple bundle iTunes for the iPhone/iPad/iPod to create and foster sales of music through their iTunes service. I don't see Apple releasing iTunes for Android or any other smartphone device now or in the future. This seemed to be missing.
they seemed to have forgotten how Apple makes money off of iTunes which is exclusive to the iPhone/iPad lines. Because Apple decided not to license their design they are the sole hardware vendor and how do you compare that to Android? A big fail there IMO. As for Microsoft, they forget that the PC Windows OS and MS Office fund pretty much every other aspect of the business to the tune of several billion annually in loses. Windows phone OS's are not any different and while Microsoft may charge a licensing fee for their OS, they often funnel move money back to the vendors with their marketing programs. So poor little Microsoft can not be made into the victim here IMO.
I think it was said pretty well in another thread that Apple is after Samsung because they are making their devices similar looking to Apple's.
you are so right, FOSS is a complete failure and isn't used anywhere. What was I thinking bringing up even the idea that if the source code is available, you have even a sliver of hope to do anything with it to make it continue to work for you? Thank you for shining some light on the sun it was was helpful.
it could but it will require a product from Microsoft so compelling that the ARM vendors would put the Windows based product above all others including Android which would already have a good running start. The other problem is that on ARM, native Windows( win32 based ) will not work so Microsoft has to establish a software base for the platform and prevent the confusion people would have trying to run their x86 based programs on Windows for ARM.
So they could but lots more ducks need to get lined up before Microsoft would have the power, influence, and support to pull it off. On x86 Microsoft already has everything they need to market what looks like a usable product so the Intel push helps Microsoft and is detrimental to the others. IMO
Talk about yet another way Microsoft has its head up its arse. They come out with this dumbass little program for you to remind you to wake up and move on but they require you have already moved on to one of their newer operating systems. Even one panned so completely they had to rush out yet another operating system release. Do they lock up those employees in the brain washing division for so long they no longer think straight? Sure seems like it and wouldn't doubt someone high up prays to some deity daily thanking her they still have a monopoly on the desktop. IMO
it's WAY better using proprietary software because companies abandoning proprietary software MIGHT notify you? That makes lots of sense. NOT! With open source, you at the very least have the opportunity to fix the bugs you find while using the software and have a chance of getting it to work on your systems for years and years later. With proprietary software, you are SOL once the owner stops support.
Microsoft saying they will do something does not mean it will happen or it will be desired. They would much rather the whole ARM platform went away just like they worked hard to limit the netbook segment by bloating the hardware requirements to run Windows and bloating the price if you wanted an OS which wasn't artificially limited. Look at all the past tablets based on Windows and you'll see they were big, heavy and expensive. It was not because of hardware limitations so Windows for ARM is currently a marketing placeholder and nothing more. x86 is where they would rather be and you can bet money they will pay OEMs to do x86 over ARM every time they run across it.
the cost also must include the whole electrical firing system which today means those large coils on top of every plug. There could be a slight weight savings too. I do see your point though since plugs today are good for 40,000 miles or so and cost so little. It will be interesting to follow though and if what is said is true, we should see some nice fuel economy increases. It would be nice if there was an easy way to retro fit if there really are those kinds of efficiency numbers.
Slashdot Mirror
FYI, Android is not Java. if anything it supports much of the Java language syntax but it is not Java and does not run the Java virtual machine(JVM) which may be what you meant by "the native Java bytecode interpreter".
LoB
I believe it's more brown than orange.
LoB
do you know there are other versions of pre-packaged Ubuntu which don't default to the Unity desktop? Kubuntu, Xubuntu and there is even LinuxMint which is based on Ubuntu but customized by the Mint community and they too have different flavors/configurations. Or you can spin your own from Debian if that is what you really want but there are other options instead of the default Ubuntu with Unity.
LoB
I knew it was about protecting the Windows PC OS. You know, where so much of their profits come from they can afford to lose billions annually on things like WP7, Windows Mobile, MSN, BING, etc.
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20110427052238659
"Microsoft demanded an exorbitant royalty (on a per device basis) for a license to its patent portfolio for the NookTM device and at the end of the meeting Microsoft stated that it would demand an even higher per device royalty for any device that acted "more like a computer" as opposed to an eReader."
If you've been around for even a short time, a license agreement does not mean a patent is valid. It only means one company justified the expense of the licensing over the cost of fighting it and what that might bring. HTC probably signed the deal because it ended up being paid to go back to shipping Windows phone OS based devices. We've seen Asus decide to take an old version of Windows( XP ) and replace Linux on their netbooks even though it meant putting more hardware on the devices and running the price up. Sure they paid Microsoft for the licenses but what you didn't see was how much Microsoft paid Asus for putting a Windows logo on the box and on their web sites. That is called a marketing kick back.
B&N does not need to license them because the patent system is built on the premise of the courts deciding if a patent is really valid instead of the USPTO. That is one reason why the system is so broken. It takes more and more money to fight off a patent thug when they throw more and more phony patents at you. This is why companies are joining groups to pool patents. It's like the old cold war mutual destruction threat. It sucks and I hope B&N is able to fight them off and show it can and should be done. I hope Google and other Android using vendors are talking with them behind the scenes on this too.
LoB
B&N had not been in the software no computer business EVER so this is all relatively new to them and when a company like Microsoft, using the tactics they've employed for 20+ years, B&N probably looked at them and said WTF are you kidding. Remember when the netbooks hit the market and after one hot year of Linux netbooks, we heard the head of the Taiwanese Manufacturing Association publicly state "they" are afraid of Microsoft on laptops, notebooks and devices like that and not so much on things like phones? Remember the CEO of Asus on stage with Microsoft apologizing for showing a ARM Snapdragon based netbook after it was pulled from their booth?
B&N got a taste of how Microsoft operates and as an outsider to the computer industry sounds pretty shocked at how they were bullied and is being open about it. I may go out and buy a Nook just to know I'm indirectly supporting their efforts. They will be getting a letter of encouragement from me because most, if not all, of those patent claim are pathetic. IMO
LoB
exactly, PDF file use eats into their MS Office sales. To this day I still get MS Office files which are one page and just a few lines of standard text( basically a note ) and people expect others to have MS Office just to read it. If Acrobat was not cross platform then you'd probably not see Microsoft too concerned about embedding their own PDF viewer. But with Adobe having Acrobat and Flash on nearly every Windows PC along with every Mac, Android, Linux system etc they get the target for elimination put on their back. So yes, it's about keeping people using and passing around Microsoft Office files instead of some other company's software product. IMO
LoB
Adobe is possibly the only company left which has product which gets preloaded on close to 100% of Windows systems shipped. By Microsoft building their own PDF reader into the OS they remove one of the two Adobe products( Acrobat Reader ) needed to eliminate that threat.
LoB
there are lots of people who are paid by the hour and love those kinds of "features" from Microsoft.
LoB
which brings up the question, I wonder how AT&T feels about Microsoft going around the Microsoft-AT&T U-verse packaging to pull this off? Considering the billions paid to them for all U-verse, now late it was and how it was locked into Microsoft's software. It has to sting some.
LoB
MS Office for the Mac...so what, it's a fringe product? They were once going to cancel MS Office for Mac until they needed to kill Netscape and signed a nice deal with Apple netting Apple a $100 million or so. For that money Microsoft did Internet Explorer for Mac and from noises we also heard they were required to keep MS Office for Mac going.
MS OneNote for iPhone is a new one on me and is _way_ out of character for Microsoft. Besides the bits and pieces of things on the Mac, Microsoft would not support products on other platforms no matter the device. They often used 3rd party deals for those times they needed to leverage something on another platform. Things like MS IE for HPUX and Solaris but these were always killed off later since they had no intention to keep these going. But the OneNote app for the iPhone is very interesting. I do see Microsoft hired a 3rd party to do a multi platform OneNote client though. I doubt there is much income and profit from that.
MS Web Office whatever. It is probably tied to MS IE some way(silverlight probably) or another. Not sure what they plan on or do charge for using it and it's probably tied in with MS Office licensing. In 5 years maybe it'll be something and have a financial impact on the company.
But MS OneNote for the iPhone, that is pretty amazing. I wonder how that got pass3d Ballmer.
LoB
they only shelve the product if it has no use or purpose protecting their Windows OS position. MS Money lost but somehow they have Intuit stuck only supporting Windows so they're happy to let MS Money go. MS Flight Sim doesn't have any use protecting or advancing Windows market. shelve it. Anything else that could be considered leverage to keep a competitor to Windows at bay is kept up and they'll spend billions doing it. MSN, BING, etc are examples. Silverlight is a give-away and they'll dump millions into that even to the extent of paying large vendors to go to Silverlight as opposed to Adobe Flash. Windows CE has cost them something like $20 billion in losses over the years but it kept Palm OS from growing into a threat( Palm helped too ). There's lots of examples of this protectionism because the Windows OS and their products tied to that directly (MS Office, MS Server, MS SQL, etc ) bring in the profits investors see. Look at their quarterly and annual reports and you'll see billions in losses.
Xbox does show up as pulling in profits now but I still see billions needed to break even since they have lost billions developing it and for the first many years. What was it, $1.3 billion they had to write off just to deal with hardware issues after the 360 was released. If they could operate on the current version for another 5-10 years they might get out of the hole but Nintendo and Sony are not standing still and new consoles are due in a few years. Billions more will have to be spent with probably a billion just on marketing so more comes out of the hole.
BTW, look at MSN/BING since it lost $2.6 billion in 2010 and a few billion in 2009 and another billion before that. The Windows OS still brings in enough bacon shareholders are holding pat for now.
LoB
All but the Entertainment and Devices div are based on the Windows OS or tied at the hip to it.
Windows and Windows Live - Windows OS
Server and Tools - Windows OS
Microsoft Business Division (aka MS Office, etc ) - Windows OS
Entertainment and Devices(aka Xbox, Windows CE ) - Xbox is Windows 2K based but a fork so this applies. But, considering they spent over $20 billion or so to get here, they'll need another decade to get in the black there IMO. Just look at BING, it bleed $2.3 billion in 2010 and $1.6 billion in 2009. The Xbox product line looks like it might be the only product outside of stuff directly PC OS related but then again, XBox v3 is supposedly in the works and due out in a couple of years. That'll be another billion or two expense in marketing and product development and who knows if they'll have another multi billion dollar write off over hardware issues.
You take away the PC OS and they've got nothing they could live off of and that is how it's been for 20 years. The did make profits off their Microsoft mouse and Microsoft keyboard products. I'll give them that.
LoB
not if it gets patented and that gets into the hands of the oil industry or maybe the tire industry. I can see it now, an auditorium full of lawyers working on the patent and another one full of lawyers documenting ways to prevent its use.
LoB
revenue is 2nd fiddle at Microsoft so don't think revenue is all that important. They have Windows and MS Office supplying billions in profits so things like the XBox, Windows for devices, Zune, etc are all products with the primary purpose to protect the profit machine and limit or restrict growth of a potential competitor to that profit stream. That's how and why they can lose 10s of billions on Xbox and keep doing it or lose around 20 billion on the Windows CE base. For 20 years their PC OS has been their one and only profit generator and protecting that has been their number one job and it shows. The ultimate one hit wonder. So don't bet too much on revenue or profits directing how Microsoft operates its fringe products.
LoB
I was talking more about iTunes on the device and not the iTunes software for Windows and Mac PC's. Just as Google is able to package ways to get device users to search via their search engine and bring in profits, so too does Apple bundle iTunes for the iPhone/iPad/iPod to create and foster sales of music through their iTunes service. I don't see Apple releasing iTunes for Android or any other smartphone device now or in the future. This seemed to be missing.
LoB
they seemed to have forgotten how Apple makes money off of iTunes which is exclusive to the iPhone/iPad lines. Because Apple decided not to license their design they are the sole hardware vendor and how do you compare that to Android? A big fail there IMO. As for Microsoft, they forget that the PC Windows OS and MS Office fund pretty much every other aspect of the business to the tune of several billion annually in loses. Windows phone OS's are not any different and while Microsoft may charge a licensing fee for their OS, they often funnel move money back to the vendors with their marketing programs. So poor little Microsoft can not be made into the victim here IMO.
I think it was said pretty well in another thread that Apple is after Samsung because they are making their devices similar looking to Apple's.
LoB
you are so right, FOSS is a complete failure and isn't used anywhere. What was I thinking bringing up even the idea that if the source code is available, you have even a sliver of hope to do anything with it to make it continue to work for you? Thank you for shining some light on the sun it was was helpful.
LoB
it could but it will require a product from Microsoft so compelling that the ARM vendors would put the Windows based product above all others including Android which would already have a good running start. The other problem is that on ARM, native Windows( win32 based ) will not work so Microsoft has to establish a software base for the platform and prevent the confusion people would have trying to run their x86 based programs on Windows for ARM.
So they could but lots more ducks need to get lined up before Microsoft would have the power, influence, and support to pull it off. On x86 Microsoft already has everything they need to market what looks like a usable product so the Intel push helps Microsoft and is detrimental to the others. IMO
LoB
Talk about yet another way Microsoft has its head up its arse. They come out with this dumbass little program for you to remind you to wake up and move on but they require you have already moved on to one of their newer operating systems. Even one panned so completely they had to rush out yet another operating system release. Do they lock up those employees in the brain washing division for so long they no longer think straight? Sure seems like it and wouldn't doubt someone high up prays to some deity daily thanking her they still have a monopoly on the desktop. IMO
LoB
it's WAY better using proprietary software because companies abandoning proprietary software MIGHT notify you? That makes lots of sense. NOT! With open source, you at the very least have the opportunity to fix the bugs you find while using the software and have a chance of getting it to work on your systems for years and years later. With proprietary software, you are SOL once the owner stops support.
LoB
Microsoft saying they will do something does not mean it will happen or it will be desired. They would much rather the whole ARM platform went away just like they worked hard to limit the netbook segment by bloating the hardware requirements to run Windows and bloating the price if you wanted an OS which wasn't artificially limited. Look at all the past tablets based on Windows and you'll see they were big, heavy and expensive. It was not because of hardware limitations so Windows for ARM is currently a marketing placeholder and nothing more. x86 is where they would rather be and you can bet money they will pay OEMs to do x86 over ARM every time they run across it.
LoB
ok, it mentioned the ability to set a combustion point and moving it to an optimal position. to me that said focal point.
LoB
the focal point will get you combustion at a point and TFA talks about this.
LoB
the cost also must include the whole electrical firing system which today means those large coils on top of every plug. There could be a slight weight savings too. I do see your point though since plugs today are good for 40,000 miles or so and cost so little. It will be interesting to follow though and if what is said is true, we should see some nice fuel economy increases. It would be nice if there was an easy way to retro fit if there really are those kinds of efficiency numbers.
LoB