Microsoft Continues Android patent attacks

[simplezz]

While recent reports would have us believe that Microsoft has stopped its patent attacks on Android, reality begs to differ.

  Quote

Reports and patent applications serve to show that Microsoft not only tries to infiltrate (“embrace”) Android to put its apps there (“extend”) but ultimately to delete (“extinguish”) Android

MICROSOFT LOVES LINUX…

Like rabbits love snakes.

Microsoft is open…

Like a bear trap.

Microsoft is still trying to delete Android from Android phones, based on speculations such as this new one, citing a patent application from Microsoft, a company with financial troubles whose last remaining chance may be playing dirty, even blackmailing companies (using patents) into pre-installing Microsoft software.

 http://techrights.org/2015/10/06/eee-deleting-android/

Could it be that the Google-Microsoft patent war armistice is merely Microsoft's stratagem to strong-arm yet another company into supporting its flailing mobile OS. It can't be sheer coincidence that rumours of Google apps on Windows Phone came shortly after a cessation of patent hostilities.

[Mr. Gibs]

Yup that article isn't flamebait at all.

 

  Quote

Microsoft is still trying to delete Android from Android phones, based on speculations such as this new one, citing a patent application from Microsoft, a company with financial troubles whose last remaining chance may be playing dirty, evenblackmailing companies (using patents) into pre-installing Microsoft software.

 

 

Yeahhhh let's break it down.

1. "Delete android" yes because giving OEMs the ability to quickly choose which OS to install on a phone is deleting android. Yup. Just like how Apple releasing bootcamp is a sign of how Apple wants to delete OS X. Good god the author of this article is a ######## clueless moron. Why shouldn't I, as a consumer, in 2015 not be given the ability to use whatever OS I want on my phone? They're essentially computers nowadays and this is a step in the right direction. Want Android on your smartphone? Go ahead. Want W10? Sure go ahead too. 

2. "A company with financial trouble whos last remaining chance" lololololol. Guess its time of the year again when people claim a company with $100 billion in revenue, and $20+ billion in profits is dying and has 1 last remaining chance. I'm pretty sure I could get better financial advice from a homeless man on the corner of the street than this author. 

3. "Blackmailing companies to preinstall Microsoft software" And? Google does the exact same thing. Want Google Play on your android phone? You need to install the full Google play suite. How exactly is that killing Android? Nobody knows.

And that's not even the end of it. This website is full of other trash articles like:

  Quote

that Microsoft “has finally succumbed to the free OS Linux” because Microsoft copies Linux code, raising all sorts of GPL-related questions and potential issues

 

And then if you follow the links they lead to great articles like "Microsoft uses linux internally"  Yup because some computers at Microsoft use Linux, and even wait for it...OS X it means that their code is secretly copied and pasted in Windows. By that logic, Google who uses Linux, Windows and OS X copies that code too! And Apple who wait for it...uses those OSes too, DOES THE SAME THING. Oh god the conspiracy theories...

Good god, this site makes infowars seem like a legit and sane website for adults looking for sensible news and not batshit insane conspiracy theorists. 

[Stoffel]

This article is as dumb as the Right Wing arguments about guns! Both complete trash and no real facts

[simplezz]

  On 06/10/2015 at 23:10, -Razorfold said:

 

1. "Delete android" yes because giving OEMs the ability to quickly choose which OS to install on a phone is deleting android. Yup. Just like how Apple releasing bootcamp is a sign of how Apple wants to delete OS X. Good god the author of this article is a ######## clueless moron. Why shouldn't I, as a consumer, in 2015 not be given the ability to use whatever OS I want on my phone? They're essentially computers nowadays and this is a step in the right direction. Want Android on your smartphone? Go ahead. Want W10? Sure go ahead too.

You failed to grasp what the article was saying. Specifically that OEM's aren't being given a choice. Microsoft threatens them with patent lawsuits unless they offer Windows Phone as a boot option. Not only is this patent abuse, but a reminder that Microsoft never changes its spots. They'll use every dirty trick in the book to take over markets and enforce their monopolies.

Choice is good right? Well, not on the desktop it seems. Between SecureBoot and secret OEM NDA's which deter the adoption of GNU/Linux, Microsoft doesn't seem keen on choice for the desktop. It's an entirely different story when it comes to mobile though, where it employs proxies (FAIRSEARCH) to lobby for antitrust sanctions against its primary competitor (Google). The irony that it does the very same thing it accuses Google of doing (bundling) seems lost on it. This is despite having a 90% monopoly on the desktop; a figure that dwarfs Google's share of mobile.

[adrynalyne]

  On 07/10/2015 at 00:22, simplezz said:

You failed to grasp what the article was saying. Specifically that OEM's aren't being given a choice. Microsoft threatens them with patent lawsuits unless they offer Windows Phone as a boot option. Not only is this patent abuse, but a reminder that Microsoft never changes its spots. They'll use every dirty trick in the book to take over markets and enforce their monopolies.

Choice is good right? Well, not on the desktop it seems. Between SecureBoot and secret OEM NDA's which deter the adoption of GNU/Linux, Microsoft doesn't seem keen on choice for the desktop. It's an entirely different story when it comes to mobile though, where it employs proxies (FAIRSEARCH) to lobby for antitrust sanctions against its primary competitor (Google). The irony that it does the very same thing it accuses Google of doing (bundling) seems lost on it. This is despite having a 90% monopoly on the desktop; a figure that dwarfs Google's share of mobile.

OMG, SecureBoot is not an MS construct! Unbelievable. Typical GNU/Linux whining about blaming everyone else for poor adoption.

If people don't want it, they won't use it. See Windows 8.

[Ian W]

  On 07/10/2015 at 00:22, simplezz said:

Choice is good right? Well, not on the desktop it seems. Between SecureBoot and secret OEM NDA's which deter the adoption of GNU/Linux, Microsoft doesn't seem keen on choice for the desktop. It's an entirely different story when it comes to mobile though, where it employs proxies (FAIRSEARCH) to lobby for antitrust sanctions against its primary competitor (Google). The irony that it does the very same thing it accuses Google of doing (bundling) seems lost on it. This is despite having a 90% monopoly on the desktop; a figure that dwarfs Google's share of mobile.

Eh? If SecureBoot deters the adoption of Linux then that is not Microsoft's fault.

[adrynalyne]

  On 07/10/2015 at 00:32, Ian W said:

Eh? If SecureBoot deters the adoption of Linux then that is not Microsoft's fault.

There is a portion of the GNU/Linux community that finds it easier to explain lack of adoption on the action of others. It couldn't be anything else, right?

[Ad Man Gamer]

Ok. I think you need to find your tin foil hat.

But seriously, Microsoft is not "deleting" android in any way. it goes like this. Hay, This software that you are using is violating some of are patents. You can either start paying royalties, make windows phone a boot option or just ignore us, witch will mean it will go to court and they can decide if the patent is valid and how much you owe us.

Not saying it is ideal, but It is the result of the legal landscape right now, not a 90's Microsoft maneuver. It's standard business practice.

But if a company does not wish to be bothered by software patents, they could always set up shop in France. France does not recognize software as patentable, and there for all legal threats like this can go straight into the wash room to be used as toilet paper. It's what VLC has been doing for years, and not even the MPEG, MPAA or the RIAA have managed to get France to change its mind.

Edited October 7, 2015 by Ad Man Gamer

[Ian W]

  On 07/10/2015 at 00:35, adrynalyne said:

There is a portion of the GNU/Linux community that finds it easier to explain lack of adoption on the action of others. It couldn't be anything else, right?

You know what's unfortunate? Many of the claims about Secure Boot and similar technologies come from those who ought to know better.

[simplezz]

  On 07/10/2015 at 00:32, Ian W said:

Eh? If SecureBoot deters the adoption of Linux then that is not Microsoft's fault.

Really, and who is the one dictating that OEM's include SecureBoot? Microsoft ofc. This wasn't a decision OEM's took of their own volition.

[Ian W]

  On 07/10/2015 at 00:54, simplezz said:

Really, and who is the one dictating that OEM's include SecureBoot? Microsoft ofc. This wasn't a decision OEM's took of their own volition.

I don't think the same can be said about Linux, can it? Who is to blame if a distro does not support the feature?

[adrynalyne]

  On 07/10/2015 at 00:54, simplezz said:

Really, and who is the one dictating that OEM's include SecureBoot? Microsoft ofc. This wasn't a decision OEM's took of their own volition.

Its an initiative to secure the OS. MS did not create it but they support it. All I am hearing is waaaah, we have to update our OS as technology changes!

[123456789A]

We really need to stop moving the troll posts all the time for this kind of nonsense.

[adrynalyne]

If secure boot is holding back GNU/Linux, then how come Dell's Linux offerings are not outselling Windows counterparts?

Hmmmmm.....

[simplezz]

  On 07/10/2015 at 01:11, adrynalyne said:

Its an initiative to secure the OS. MS did not create it but they support it. All I am hearing is waaaah, we have to update our OS as technology changes!

Ha. Keep telling yourself that. It has nothing to do with security and everything to do with keeping out competition. MS mandates that OEM's distributing Windows machines include SecureBoot by default. I've seen it first hand. It's yet another attempt to squeeze the desktop market and secure its hegemony.

[simplezz]

  On 07/10/2015 at 01:13, adrynalyne said:

If secure boot is holding back GNU/Linux, then how come Dell's Linux offerings are not outselling Windows counterparts?

Hmmmmm.....

Good luck finding an affordable mainstream desktop or laptop from Dell that runs anything but Windows. And even if you do, anyone who buys it still has to pay the Microsoft tax.

[adrynalyne]

  On 07/10/2015 at 01:27, simplezz said:

Ha. Keep telling yourself that. It has nothing to do with security and everything to do with keeping out competition. MS mandates that OEM's that distribute Windows machines include SecureBoot by default. I've seen it first hand. It's yet another attempt to squeeze the desktop market and secure its hegemony.

I get a vision of you adjusting a tin foil hat while saying that.

Pretty funny

  On 07/10/2015 at 01:30, simplezz said:

Good luck finding an affordable mainstream desktop or laptop from Dell that runs anything but Windows. And even if you do, anyone who buys it still has to pay the Microsoft tax.

Dell XPS 13 is cheaper in the Ubuntu version.

What say you now?

[Mr. Gibs]

  On 07/10/2015 at 00:22, simplezz said:

You failed to grasp what the article was saying. Specifically that OEM's aren't being given a choice. Microsoft threatens them with patent lawsuits unless they offer Windows Phone as a boot option. Not only is this patent abuse, but a reminder that Microsoft never changes its spots. They'll use every dirty trick in the book to take over markets and enforce their monopolies.

Choice is good right? Well, not on the desktop it seems. Between SecureBoot and secret OEM NDA's which deter the adoption of GNU/Linux, Microsoft doesn't seem keen on choice for the desktop. It's an entirely different story when it comes to mobile though, where it employs proxies (FAIRSEARCH) to lobby for antitrust sanctions against its primary competitor (Google). The irony that it does the very same thing it accuses Google of doing (bundling) seems lost on it. This is despite having a 90% monopoly on the desktop; a figure that dwarfs Google's share of mobile.

Oh shut up. 

Secureboot has nothing to do it. And I love how people still keep claiming that OEMs are banned from including Linux. Plenty of tried, know what happens?

1. THEY DON'T SELL WELL. 
2. When people actually bought those machines a lot of people returned them because they couldn't get their regular software to work. Now sure that's not linux's fault but most people aren't as technologically inclined as you think they are. 

  Quote

Ha. Keep telling yourself that. It has nothing to do with security and everything to do with keeping out competition. MS mandates that OEM's distributing Windows machines include SecureBoot by default. I've seen it first hand. It's yet another attempt to squeeze the desktop market and secure its hegemony.

 

And more FUD as usual. Give it up dude seriously. There are plenty of linux distributions that work with secureboot. AND GUESS WHAT? SECUREBOOT ISN'T AN MS CREATION. It's a ######## UEFI specification that Microsoft doesn't control or own. http://www.uefi.org/members see that? That's how many people / companies are part of UEFI.

Everything is a conspiracy to you linux fanboys when your "year of the linux" fails to happen, again. I'm pretty sure eventually you'll start claiming its Jesus' fault because Microsoft paid off the catholic church and embedded Windows into the bible.

  Quote

Good luck finding an affordable mainstream desktop or laptop from Dell that runs anything but Windows. And even if you do, anyone who buys it still has to pay the Microsoft tax.

 

Shocking how I've bought plenty of desktops / laptops through Dell without paying that tax right? All I do is call them up and explain I already have a license for Windows and I'm not interested in paying for another. They remove windows from the order and reduce my cost. Takes all of like 5 mins.

[Ian W]

  On 07/10/2015 at 01:11, adrynalyne said:

Its an initiative to secure the OS. MS did not create it but they support it. All I am hearing is waaaah, we have to update our OS as technology changes!

I recall similar nonsense from GNU/Linux proponents when Microsoft announced its efforts to support Trusted Computing technologies during the last decade. None of their utterly nonsensical doomsday prophecies come to pass, so they really ought to put their little crusades and tirades to rest.

[123456789A]

  On 07/10/2015 at 01:30, simplezz said:

Good luck finding an affordable mainstream desktop or laptop from Dell that runs anything but Windows. And even if you do, anyone who buys it still has to pay the Microsoft tax.

lol, an affordable thing without Windows?  So you're saying the Windows machines are affordable, then complain about some "Microsoft tax"?

Maybe you mean Microsoft discount?

[Ad Man Gamer]

  On 07/10/2015 at 01:27, simplezz said:

Ha. Keep telling yourself that. It has nothing to do with security and everything to do with keeping out competition. MS mandates that OEM's distributing Windows machines include SecureBoot by default. I've seen it first hand. It's yet another attempt to squeeze the desktop market and secure its hegemony.

But it was to do with security. it is a feature that stops rootkits getting themselves into the OS on boot. Also, I thought distros can request for their boot signature to be included within Microsoft's signature for free.

[Skiver Veteran]

Moved to "It's a conspiracy"