Active Topics
-
Camera phone competition March 2023 "Endless" (35)
to General by Maemish - 23 hrs, 26 mins ago -
TLS 1.2 for N9 is ready (28)
to MeeGo / Harmattan by smartblu9 - 1 day ago -
Maemo repository (3)
to Community by torsen - 1 day, 16 hrs ago -
Error after installing Leste on sdcard (11)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by Maemish - 2 days, 13 hrs ago -
Introducing ubiboot N9 (multiboot OS loader) (1,393)
to Alternatives by smatkovi - 3 days, 20 hrs ago - more...
 |
|
2009-03-01
, 19:24
|
|
Posts: 2,869 |
Thanked: 1,784 times |
Joined on Feb 2007
@ Po' Bo'. PA
|
#22
|
Originally Posted by SD69
Well, this is exactly what you said (bold added to show the way...)
So maybe you misspoke or maybe you've reconsidered your pronouncement...
I appreciate that it's now a "maybe".
Still, if Microsoft wanted to do a broadside against Linux, this patent lawsuit against TomTom is very unlikely how they would do it.
Or maybe you are just seeing what you want to see regarding what I meant by my posts.
No where did I say it was a "broadside" against Linux. I believe you may have missed the point and yet I still won't presume that "You obviously don't have the needed knowledge" to understand.
(bold added to show the way to a quote about me taken from your 2nd post in this thread...)
Whatever dude.
BTW, the word might is considered the past tense of the word may... Savvy?
Last edited by YoDude; 2009-03-01 at 19:44. Reason: add a link
|
|
2009-03-01
, 20:01
|
|
Posts: 87 |
Thanked: 33 times |
Joined on Aug 2007
|
#23
|
An interesting blogpost to this topic by Harald Welte.
 |
|
2009-03-02
, 13:59
|
|
Posts: 1,562 |
Thanked: 349 times |
Joined on Jun 2008
|
#24
|
BTW, FYI. I ran across two articles this morning as I was collecting news for posting that told that 1) Microsoft's fat patent has been proven invalid (in some districts) and thus is unlikely to stand proper scrutiny here in the US, and 2) apparently this lawsuit has A) nothing to do with Linux, and B) everything to do with a previously failed attempt to buy Tom Tom. So since Tom Tom wouldn't capitulate the first time and sell themselves to Microsoft, they're now being sued in an effort by Microsoft to both 1) punish Tom Tom for this "unfortunate oversight" and 2) force them to either sell, or suffer immeasurably and possibly go out of business.
So if this is true, as the Microsoft exec said, this has nothing to do with Linux. But rather, it's a well crafted legal strong arm to take over a company Microsoft apparently wants to get it's hands on pretty badly. Why Tom Tom and not Garmin? 1) Garmin's too big and expensive, and 2) Tom Tom runs Linux. If Microsoft got Tom Tom, they could get rid of an Open Source competitor, and have a company by which to take on Garmin, since they were unable to acquire the larger company.
And this really isn't all that unfamiliar a strategy. Microsoft saw money in online map solutions, so they bought mapblast and directly competed with mapquest and now google. They also bought other companies and started into industries such as gaming, online search, and more. So essentially this is just Microsoft's attempt, more or less from what I can best tell, to break into, and hopefully dominate, yet another market as their flagship products (Windows/Office) slowly die.
So if this is true, as the Microsoft exec said, this has nothing to do with Linux. But rather, it's a well crafted legal strong arm to take over a company Microsoft apparently wants to get it's hands on pretty badly. Why Tom Tom and not Garmin? 1) Garmin's too big and expensive, and 2) Tom Tom runs Linux. If Microsoft got Tom Tom, they could get rid of an Open Source competitor, and have a company by which to take on Garmin, since they were unable to acquire the larger company.
And this really isn't all that unfamiliar a strategy. Microsoft saw money in online map solutions, so they bought mapblast and directly competed with mapquest and now google. They also bought other companies and started into industries such as gaming, online search, and more. So essentially this is just Microsoft's attempt, more or less from what I can best tell, to break into, and hopefully dominate, yet another market as their flagship products (Windows/Office) slowly die.
__________________
Popular Sci-Fi author and creator of the Earthfleet Series.
www.realmsofimagination.net
Popular Sci-Fi author and creator of the Earthfleet Series.
www.realmsofimagination.net
|
|
2009-03-02
, 15:30
|
|
Posts: 874 |
Thanked: 316 times |
Joined on Jun 2007
@ London UK
|
#25
|
The more I look at this the more puzzling it becomes, it is hard to believe that Microsoft is motivated purely by jilted feelings which is not say that they don't play a part.
This analysis makes sense too
"In dropping this first patent bomb, Microsoft has clearly signaled that it is willing to use the FAT patents to prevent competition," Dean told LinuxInsider. "Now it's a real threat to Apple and Sandisk and TomTom, Nokia (NYSE: NOK) , Motorola (NYSE: MOT) and every other company that uses most flash formatted devices."
by Kevin Dean taken from the piece on http://www.linuxinsider.com/story/Mi...War-66338.html
From what I can see it is Microsoft's intention to a) enforce its FAT patent and/or b) to break TomTom
Bruce Perens attempt at analysis doesn't seem to come to a definitive conclusion either except that the industry should move to open and non-patented file systems.
http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/osr...om-Lawsuit.htm
Perhaps a good consequence of the TomTom suit may be to force this to happen.
This analysis makes sense too
"In dropping this first patent bomb, Microsoft has clearly signaled that it is willing to use the FAT patents to prevent competition," Dean told LinuxInsider. "Now it's a real threat to Apple and Sandisk and TomTom, Nokia (NYSE: NOK) , Motorola (NYSE: MOT) and every other company that uses most flash formatted devices."
by Kevin Dean taken from the piece on http://www.linuxinsider.com/story/Mi...War-66338.html
From what I can see it is Microsoft's intention to a) enforce its FAT patent and/or b) to break TomTom
Bruce Perens attempt at analysis doesn't seem to come to a definitive conclusion either except that the industry should move to open and non-patented file systems.
http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/osr...om-Lawsuit.htm
Perhaps a good consequence of the TomTom suit may be to force this to happen.
|
|
2009-03-02
, 19:22
|
|
Posts: 2,869 |
Thanked: 1,784 times |
Joined on Feb 2007
@ Po' Bo'. PA
|
#26
|
Originally Posted by Rebski
... and as a bonus, influence selection of an OS by future embedded device manufacturers.
The more I look at this the more puzzling it becomes, it is hard to believe that Microsoft is motivated purely by jilted feelings which is not say that they don't play a part...
This analysis makes sense too
"In dropping this first patent bomb, Microsoft has clearly signaled that it is willing to use the FAT patents to prevent competition," Dean told LinuxInsider. "Now it's a real threat to Apple and Sandisk and TomTom, Nokia (NYSE: NOK) , Motorola (NYSE: MOT) and every other company that uses most flash formatted devices."
...
As Harald Welte said in a blogpost that Nikem linked to a few posts back;
The underlying strategy is very obvious: Make those patent licenses high enough to reduce the cost advantage of a Linux based OS over Windows CE and thereby demotivate companies from using Linux in the embedded world.
In any event I posted here because in our world, I felt that this particular case was worth watching.
Last edited by YoDude; 2009-03-02 at 19:25. Reason: Spelling
 |
|
2009-03-02
, 19:27
|
|
Posts: 4,930 |
Thanked: 2,272 times |
Joined on Oct 2007
|
#27
|
Originally Posted by Rebski
I wouldn't say jilted feelings -- this is just how business works when you're the big dog. You make sure it's known that if you offer to buy them, and they decline, there'll be hell to pay. That way, when you want to buy someone out, they sell.
The more I look at this the more puzzling it becomes, it is hard to believe that Microsoft is motivated purely by jilted feelings which is not say that they don't play a part.
I'm sure even Microsoft thinks it's unfortunate that this lawsuit has to go down, but that's how you keep a reputation. (In other words, your legal team and deep pockets are most effective as a deterrent, not when actually suing someone, but they lose their effectiveness as a deterrent if you don't use them once in a while when pushed.) There's no need for them even to actually win; costing TomTom way too much is good enough, because it's enough to stop the other companies they may wish to buy out. (Obviously different rules, with far more subtlety, apply for big businesses (like IBM, for example), where MS can't afford to buy them out and/or bankrupt them in court.)
Of course, nobody does anything for only one reason, least of all corporations, so giving the FAT patent some teeth is probably a goal as well. Again, winning (though desirable, especially to handle big competitors) is not strictly necessary; it's enough to know that MS can drag you to death in the courts to scare the smaller companies into licensing FAT and/or switching filesystems. Of course, there's always the risk of this backfiring and losing the patent entirely
.Am I being paranoid if I think MS is probably going to offer better licensing deals on ExFAT than on FAT if they don't get a clear-cut win or loss on FAT, to push a critical fraction into a more solid (i.e. safer for future litigation) filesystem, and thereby drag everyone else into it for compatibility's sake?
__________________
World's first inductively-charged N900!
World's first inductively-charged N900!
 |
|
2009-03-02
, 19:54
|
|
Moderator |
Posts: 7,109 |
Thanked: 8,820 times |
Joined on Oct 2007
@ Vancouver, BC, Canada
|
#28
|
Thankfully, Nokia could run their tablets FAT-free if they wanted to
I have a friend who had to basically shut his company down while being sued frivolously by a big-dog corporation who was hoping to destroy them this way. After they won the lawsuit, they were able to start back up again, but my friend's company is a rare exception. Most of the time, big companies launch these lawsuits to grind small companies into submission.
I have a friend who had to basically shut his company down while being sued frivolously by a big-dog corporation who was hoping to destroy them this way. After they won the lawsuit, they were able to start back up again, but my friend's company is a rare exception. Most of the time, big companies launch these lawsuits to grind small companies into submission.
__________________
qole.org --- twitter --- Easy Debian wiki page
Please don't send me a private message, post to the appropriate thread.
Thank you all for your donations!
qole.org --- twitter --- Easy Debian wiki page
Please don't send me a private message, post to the appropriate thread.
Thank you all for your donations!
 |
|
2009-03-02
, 20:12
|
|
Posts: 4,783 |
Thanked: 1,253 times |
Joined on Aug 2007
@ norway
|
#29
|
i would say its a misuse of the legal system if thats the case...
|
|
2009-03-02
, 20:18
|
|
Posts: 1,513 |
Thanked: 2,248 times |
Joined on Mar 2006
@ US
|
#30
|
Originally Posted by Lord Raiden
Yes, some decent logic here. You may get better insight if you research what has happened in that general market (online map solutions is decent start but may not be the most accurate market definition) starting more or less with the Nokia acquisition...
BTW, FYI. I ran across two articles this morning as I was collecting news for posting that told that 1) Microsoft's fat patent has been proven invalid (in some districts) and thus is unlikely to stand proper scrutiny here in the US, and 2) apparently this lawsuit has A) nothing to do with Linux, and B) everything to do with a previously failed attempt to buy Tom Tom. So since Tom Tom wouldn't capitulate the first time and sell themselves to Microsoft, they're now being sued in an effort by Microsoft to both 1) punish Tom Tom for this "unfortunate oversight" and 2) force them to either sell, or suffer immeasurably and possibly go out of business.
So if this is true, as the Microsoft exec said, this has nothing to do with Linux. But rather, it's a well crafted legal strong arm to take over a company Microsoft apparently wants to get it's hands on pretty badly. Why Tom Tom and not Garmin? 1) Garmin's too big and expensive, and 2) Tom Tom runs Linux. If Microsoft got Tom Tom, they could get rid of an Open Source competitor, and have a company by which to take on Garmin, since they were unable to acquire the larger company.
And this really isn't all that unfamiliar a strategy. Microsoft saw money in online map solutions, so they bought mapblast and directly competed with mapquest and now google. They also bought other companies and started into industries such as gaming, online search, and more. So essentially this is just Microsoft's attempt, more or less from what I can best tell, to break into, and hopefully dominate, yet another market as their flagship products (Windows/Office) slowly die.
Still, if Microsoft wanted to do a broadside against Linux, this patent lawsuit against TomTom is very unlikely how they would do it.