What's wrong with a Zune 'iPhone killer'?

Your Name wrote:

> Vision?!?! Microsloth doesn't even have the ability to make anything. They
> simply copy someone else, and do so very badly.

While it's true that Microsoft doesn't have a great record on their
hardware forays, they do invent a lot of stuff that is copied and made
successful by other companies, including Apple. For example, it was
Microsoft that invented the hierarchical menu system of navigating on a
music player. Apple used it first, but Microsoft has the patent on it.

Apple is a great marketing company. They are able to take technology and
ideas that others have invented, and combine them into amazing and
profitable hardware products, something that Microsoft is not good at,
despite inventing much of the core technology.

"We have a long-standing practice of licensing things to Apple and
licensing Apple's patents to use in our products," Kaefer said. "Our
approach is to recognize that, frankly, we're both mutually dependent on
the good ideas of one another."

On 2008-12-13, SMS <scharf.steven.TakeThisOut@geemail.com> wrote:
> While it's true that Microsoft doesn't have a great record on their
> hardware forays, they do invent a lot of stuff that is copied and made
> successful by other companies, including Apple.

Name 3 successful, useful and innovative things that Microsoft has
invented.

> For example, it was Microsoft that invented the hierarchical menu
> system of navigating on a music player.

No, it wasn't. They just managed to get an illegitimate patent on that
already long-established idea from the completely broken USPTO.

iPhone 3Gold <vic.healey.DeleteThis@gmail.com> amazed us all with the following in
news:b822bdad-cd50-420b-826e-940213a46f25@b1g2000yqg.googlegroups.com:

> What's wrong with a Zune 'iPhone killer'?
>
> Elgan: Why you'll never see a real 'Zune phone'
>
> December 12, 2008 (Computerworld) A rumor circulating this week says
> Microsoft will unveil a Zune phone at CES. Most columnists and
> bloggers who mentioned it said Microsoft should not build a Zune
> phone, but probably will.
>
> My view is that Microsoft should sell a Zune phone, but probably
> won't.
>
> Why? Because the company simply doesn't have the vision to build
> something really great in the consumer electronics space.
>
> http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic
> &articleId=9123341&intsrc=news_ts_head
>

And with that, you sound like the scared little boy we all knew you to be.

Am 13.12.2008 3:52 Uhr, schrieb iPhone 3Gold:

> What's wrong with a Zune 'iPhone killer'?

Nobody need the stuff..

"Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.co.uk> wrote in message
news:slrngk7oi6.ju4.jon+usenet@snowy.squish.net...
> On 2008-12-13, SMS <scharf.steven.DeleteThis@geemail.com> wrote:
> > While it's true that Microsoft doesn't have a great record on their
> > hardware forays, they do invent a lot of stuff that is copied and made
> > successful by other companies, including Apple.
>
> Name 3 successful, useful and innovative things that Microsoft has
> invented.

Invented?! Absolutely nothing. They've bought out or stolen everything they
sell, including the original DOS that started the useless company.

But there is appareantly three things they are "good" at:

- corrupting the Justice Departments (almost) worldwide, including buying
their way out of troubles,

- conning customers into believing they "must" use Microsloth garbage,

- taking someone else's ideas and making a complete mess of them.



> > For example, it was Microsoft that invented the hierarchical menu
> > system of navigating on a music player.
>
> No, it wasn't. They just managed to get an illegitimate patent on that
> already long-established idea from the completely broken USPTO.

Yep. There was news not long ago about some company sueing Apple for the
iPod interface, and it wasn't Microsloth.

Your Name wrote:
> "Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:slrngk7oi6.ju4.jon+usenet@snowy.squish.net...
>> On 2008-12-13, SMS <scharf.steven.DeleteThis@geemail.com> wrote:
>>> While it's true that Microsoft doesn't have a great record on their
>>> hardware forays, they do invent a lot of stuff that is copied and made
>>> successful by other companies, including Apple.
>> Name 3 successful, useful and innovative things that Microsoft has
>> invented.
>
> Invented?! Absolutely nothing. They've bought out or stolen everything they
> sell, including the original DOS that started the useless company.
>
> But there is appareantly three things they are "good" at:
>
> - corrupting the Justice Departments (almost) worldwide, including buying
> their way out of troubles,
>
> - conning customers into believing they "must" use Microsloth garbage,
>
> - taking someone else's ideas and making a complete mess of them.
>
>
>
>>> For example, it was Microsoft that invented the hierarchical menu
>>> system of navigating on a music player.
>> No, it wasn't. They just managed to get an illegitimate patent on that
>> already long-established idea from the completely broken USPTO.
>
> Yep. There was news not long ago about some company sueing Apple for the
> iPod interface, and it wasn't Microsloth.
>
>

I'm no great fan of Microsoft (he says posting on an XP PC) however what
they did do is make PC's accessible to almost everyone.

If you can cross a suburban road safely you can use a windows PC. Sure
you may need to call a brighter neighbour to sort it out when you've got
your PC poxxed up on some file sharing site.

I'm sure many linux/mac snobs out there don't like the idea of the great
unwashed and technologically illiterate masses using computers however
without lots of consumers there would not be quite so much internet and
hardware for us all to play with.

Linux lovers are train spotters but with paler skin.

Mike

On 2008-12-13, Mike <mikeloveschampagneandrugby.DeleteThis@googlemail.com> wrote:
> I'm no great fan of Microsoft (he says posting on an XP PC) however what
> they did do is make PC's accessible to almost everyone.

No, they didn't. IBM did that. Microsoft set PC usability, and the
entire software industry, back at least a decade, maybe two - and they
haven't stopped yet. They are destroyers, not innovators.

If you want to claim Microsoft "made PC's accessible", I'll refer you
to my earlier challenge - name 3 successful, useful and innovative
things that Microsoft invented that enhanced PC accessibility.

> Linux lovers are train spotters but with paler skin.

Nobody has mentioned Linux in this thread, except you.
Linux has nothing to do with it; it didn't even exist until 1991.

"Mike" <mikeloveschampagneandrugby DeleteThis @googlemail.com> wrote in message
news:gi1h04$l7u$1@news.motzarella.org...
> Your Name wrote:
> > "Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:slrngk7oi6.ju4.jon+usenet@snowy.squish.net...
> >> On 2008-12-13, SMS <scharf.steven DeleteThis @geemail.com> wrote:
> >>> While it's true that Microsoft doesn't have a great record on their
> >>> hardware forays, they do invent a lot of stuff that is copied and made
> >>> successful by other companies, including Apple.
> >> Name 3 successful, useful and innovative things that Microsoft has
> >> invented.
> >
> > Invented?! Absolutely nothing. They've bought out or stolen everything
they
> > sell, including the original DOS that started the useless company.
> >
> > But there is appareantly three things they are "good" at:
> >
> > - corrupting the Justice Departments (almost) worldwide, including
buying
> > their way out of troubles,
> >
> > - conning customers into believing they "must" use Microsloth
garbage,
> >
> > - taking someone else's ideas and making a complete mess of them.
> >
> >
> >
> >>> For example, it was Microsoft that invented the hierarchical menu
> >>> system of navigating on a music player.
> >> No, it wasn't. They just managed to get an illegitimate patent on that
> >> already long-established idea from the completely broken USPTO.
> >
> > Yep. There was news not long ago about some company sueing Apple for the
> > iPod interface, and it wasn't Microsloth.
> >
> >
>
> I'm no great fan of Microsoft (he says posting on an XP PC) however what
> they did do is make PC's accessible to almost everyone.
>
> If you can cross a suburban road safely you can use a windows PC. Sure
> you may need to call a brighter neighbour to sort it out when you've got
> your PC poxxed up on some file sharing site.
>
> I'm sure many linux/mac snobs out there don't like the idea of the great
> unwashed and technologically illiterate masses using computers however
> without lots of consumers there would not be quite so much internet and
> hardware for us all to play with.
>
> Linux lovers are train spotters but with paler skin.

Apple, Commodore and Atari made computers "accessible to almost everyone"
.... Microsoft simply sold cheap garbage that we're still paying the price
for decades later because too many people won't dump them.

Your Name wrote:
> "Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:slrngk7oi6.ju4.jon+usenet@snowy.squish.net...
>> On 2008-12-13, SMS <scharf.steven.DeleteThis@geemail.com> wrote:
>>> While it's true that Microsoft doesn't have a great record on their
>>> hardware forays, they do invent a lot of stuff that is copied and made
>>> successful by other companies, including Apple.
>> Name 3 successful, useful and innovative things that Microsoft has
>> invented.
>
> Invented?! Absolutely nothing.

Top 10 patent performers of 2007:

* IBM--3,148
* Samsung Electronics--2,725
* Canon--1,987
* Matsushita Electric Industrial--1,941
* Intel--1,865
* Microsoft--1,637
* Toshiba--1,549
* Sony--1,481
* Micron Technology--1,476
* Hewlett-Packard--1,470

What you have to realize is that many patents are for inventions that
the end user won't recognize as consumer items. Some patents are for
products or parts of products that you might never even think of as
being patentable. At one semiconductor company I worked at, my colleague
scoffed at the opportunity to earn $100 for something he worked on
stating that such a simple idea wasn't patentable. Others on the team
presented it to the IP department for patenting so he did get his $100,
and the company made tens of millions in licensing fees, plus kept some
low-cost competitors from using the technology, effectively locking them
out of a lucrative market. What was ironic about this patent was than
when we found some other companies violating it, and told the IP
department to go after them, they declined. They explained that if they
sued the violator and lost, then everyone paying royalties would stop
paying, and it wasn't worth the risk.

A "Zune Phone" definitely wouldn't be an "iPhone killer", but it might just
be a "Microsoft killer" ... at least we can hope so.

On 2008-12-14, SMS <scharf.steven.DeleteThis@geemail.com> wrote:
>>> Name 3 successful, useful and innovative things that Microsoft has
>>> invented.
>>
>> Invented?! Absolutely nothing.
>
> Top 10 patent performers of 2007:

So can we assume that you haven't managed to think of *anything* that
Microsoft has invented?

> At one semiconductor company I worked at, my colleague scoffed at
> the opportunity to earn $100 for something he worked on stating that
> such a simple idea wasn't patentable.

That's a useful anecdote, nicely illustrating that patents are
no proof that an invention has even been made, let alone that
an invention has been made by the person named on the patent.

Jon Ribbens wrote:
> On 2008-12-14, SMS <scharf.steven DeleteThis @geemail.com> wrote:
>>>> Name 3 successful, useful and innovative things that Microsoft has
>>>> invented.
>>> Invented?! Absolutely nothing.
>> Top 10 patent performers of 2007:
>
> So can we assume that you haven't managed to think of *anything* that
> Microsoft has invented?

Nothing you would understand. You're looking for a consumer product, not
core technology used in products. You've bought into the anti-Microsoft,
"Microsoft stole everything" schtick.

On 2008-12-15, SMS <scharf.steven DeleteThis @geemail.com> wrote:
> Jon Ribbens wrote:
>> So can we assume that you haven't managed to think of *anything* that
>> Microsoft has invented?
>
> Nothing you would understand. You're looking for a consumer product, not
> core technology used in products.

Wrong again. That makes you zero for three.

Ah well, never mind! Thanks for playing, better luck next time!