[PCWorld]

Post your comments for Microsoft Reportedly Nets Nearly $800M from Android Royalties here

[QUADICON]

At least Microosft was willing to allow for licensing the technology instead of just suing them first.

If Microsoft didn't have anything, the OEM's could have banded together and fault them off. It si obvious Microsoft had some very legit patents the device makers are stepping on. If they wasn't they wouldn't have agreed to any deals.

Microsoft could have just bullied them by taking them to court like Apple. Instead they chose to sit down with the phone makes and talk acceptible terms. $10.00 in royalties for each device sold is cheap. Most of these devices only cost about $200 - $300 to make and they are sold for 2 or 3 times that. That $10 fee hasn't caused a raise in the price of Android devices. If Apple had to pay such royalties, you can believe they'd fine a way to make you apy for them, even tho they charge you up to 4 times what it cost them to make a device.


Apple isn't even willing to negotiate licensing anything. Why? Bcause they know if others use their concepts even paying for them, they will design better stuff and run them out the market.

[TechConc]

QUADICON, on 07 August 2012 - 07:59 AM, said:

At least Microosft was willing to allow for licensing the technology instead of just suing them first.

If Microsoft didn't have anything, the OEM's could have banded together and fault them off. It si obvious Microsoft had some very legit patents the device makers are stepping on. If they wasn't they wouldn't have agreed to any deals.

Microsoft could have just bullied them by taking them to court like Apple. Instead they chose to sit down with the phone makes and talk acceptible terms. $10.00 in royalties for each device sold is cheap. Most of these devices only cost about $200 - $300 to make and they are sold for 2 or 3 times that. That $10 fee hasn't caused a raise in the price of Android devices. If Apple had to pay such royalties, you can believe they'd fine a way to make you apy for them, even tho they charge you up to 4 times what it cost them to make a device.


Apple isn't even willing to negotiate licensing anything. Why? Bcause they know if others use their concepts even paying for them, they will design better stuff and run them out the market.

Seriously, why is it necessary to bring Apple into a discussion about Microsoft and Android OEMs? It's actually quite obvious to most that Microsoft's situation is very different from Apple's. Microsoft looks at companies like Samsung and HTC as potential customers. Apple does not. Microsoft is trying to get future business from these companies. Apple couldn't care less about them.

That said, Microsoft has taken the path of least resistance. Instead of trying to block their products or have them remove features, they simply negotiated a licensing deal. It's actually thanks to companies like Apple that will exercise their IP in a legal way that allows companies like Microsoft cut such deals. Microsoft is simply telling these companies to either license Windows Mobile or pay about the same amount to license their IP and go with Android. Unfortunately for Microsoft, OEMs are choosing Android. Depending on how these court cases turn out, Apple will likely collect from these companies as well, on Apple would be paid in one lump sum.

[Bob1lsc]

QUADICON, on 07 August 2012 - 07:59 AM, said:

At least Microosft was willing to allow for licensing the technology instead of just suing them first.

Apple isn't even willing to negotiate licensing anything. Why? Bcause they know if others use their concepts even paying for them, they will design better stuff and run them out the market.

Now, don't you look silly? Apple did offer to license the patents to Samsung. Samsung just refused to pay Apple, whereas Samsung did agree to pay MS. Wonder why that was?

[HankRearden]

Bob1lsc, on 23 August 2012 - 04:23 PM, said:

QUADICON, on 07 August 2012 - 07:59 AM, said:

At least Microosft was willing to allow for licensing the technology instead of just suing them first.

Apple isn't even willing to negotiate licensing anything. Why? Bcause they know if others use their concepts even paying for them, they will design better stuff and run them out the market.

Now, don't you look silly? Apple did offer to license the patents to Samsung. Samsung just refused to pay Apple, whereas Samsung did agree to pay MS. Wonder why that was?

No, Apple offered to license some of their so called IP. And what they asked for was simply ridiculous. Know what you're talking about before you open your mouth.

[HankRearden]

QUADICON, on 07 August 2012 - 07:59 AM, said:

At least Microosft was willing to allow for licensing the technology instead of just suing them first.

If Microsoft didn't have anything, the OEM's could have banded together and fault them off. It si obvious Microsoft had some very legit patents the device makers are stepping on. If they wasn't they wouldn't have agreed to any deals.

Microsoft could have just bullied them by taking them to court like Apple. Instead they chose to sit down with the phone makes and talk acceptible terms. $10.00 in royalties for each device sold is cheap. Most of these devices only cost about $200 - $300 to make and they are sold for 2 or 3 times that. That $10 fee hasn't caused a raise in the price of Android devices. If Apple had to pay such royalties, you can believe they'd fine a way to make you apy for them, even tho they charge you up to 4 times what it cost them to make a device.


Apple isn't even willing to negotiate licensing anything. Why? Bcause they know if others use their concepts even paying for them, they will design better stuff and run them out the market.

Microsoft is collecting on old DOS patents related to the FAT file system. They've been milking it for years. And they have some IP for calendars too, which is another ongoing battle. More reason to drop these stupid software patents. Needlessly costing consumers $800m for 15 year old processes that should have never been granted a patent in the first place.