Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 28th Apr 2011 22:33 UTC
Legal This is interesting. I've been saying for a while now that both Apple and Microsoft are hard at work making Android as undesirable as possible. Sadly, they're not doing this by making their own products better, but by trying to make it seem as if Android isn't free due to patent costs and such. It looks like Barnes & Noble is the first company to openly say the same.
Order by: Score:
Comment by shmerl
by shmerl on Thu 28th Apr 2011 22:52 UTC
shmerl
Member since:
2010-06-08

> It would seem the company is falling back into old
> habits, using dirty legal tricks to try to maffia
> companies

Falling back? M$ never stopped using dirty anti-competitive practices. It's their bread and butter. Such as coercing manufacturers to bundle Windows with computers and many other examples.

Reply Score: 14

RE: Comment by shmerl
by lemur2 on Thu 28th Apr 2011 23:11 UTC in reply to "Comment by shmerl"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

> It would seem the company is falling back into old > habits, using dirty legal tricks to try to maffia > companies Falling back? MS never stopped using dirty anti-competitive practices. It's their bread and butter. Such as coercing manufacturers to bundle Windows with computers and many other examples.


I'd say "steaming ahead" rather than falling back. According to B&N:
"Microsoft has a scheme, Barnes & Noble asserts, to dominate Android and make it undesirable to device manufacturers and customers by demanding "exorbitant license fees and absurd licensing restrictions" -- a license fee that it says is more than Microsoft charges for its entire operating system for mobile devices, Windows 7. Others have, it believes, signed it. Barnes & Noble says the deal with Nokia is in furtherance of this scheme.

The patents asserted are "trivial, not infringed and invalid", Barnes & Noble says"


This is a new low even for Microsoft, I believe ... to try to make Android devices pay more for a few "trivial, not infringed and invalid" patents than it charges for its entire WP7 OS.

This is so outrageous on the face of it that it makes Microsoft look utterly desperate IMO.

Edited 2011-04-28 23:14 UTC

Reply Score: 11

RE: Comment by shmerl
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Fri 29th Apr 2011 14:04 UTC in reply to "Comment by shmerl"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

I thought that they were prohibited from doing that as part of the anit-trust settlement with the government. They no longer can enter in deals with manufacturers that force them to pay for a windows license on computers that do not have windows on them.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by shmerl
by shmerl on Fri 29th Apr 2011 17:55 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by shmerl"
shmerl Member since:
2010-06-08

> I thought that they were prohibited from doing that as
> part of the anit-trust settlement with the government.

That's the catch. They were not! That was a major flaw in that anti-trust case, which mostly touched browsers and other things, but didn't fix the bundling problem at all!

See details of this issue here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_refund

Edited 2011-04-29 17:56 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comment by shmerl
by ecruz on Fri 29th Apr 2011 18:32 UTC in reply to "Comment by shmerl"
ecruz Member since:
2007-06-16

For all of you screaming to save Android and B&N, nobody is trying to put them out of business.
I am pasting a comment by blogger Florian Mueller, an intellectual property activist, and he reviews B&N comments, and to me they sound empty and just trying to get a better deal from Microsoft.
Just look at how many players are paying royalties on many fronts and doing extremely well in their business. Why should B&N be any different or exempted from the same.
Read below:
"A substantial part of Barnes & Noble's filing focuses on allegations that Microsoft leverages its patents "to render the Android™ Operating System and other open source operating systems uncompetitive and unpalatable vis-à-vis Microsoft’s own operating systems" (quote from paragraph 43 of the answer to the complaint). Two paragraphs later, Barnes & Noble mentions Microsoft's patent agreement with HTC as an example. However, the HTC example clearly contradicts Barnes & Noble's theory of Android becoming "uncompetitive and unpalatable": earlier this month, HTC's market capitalization surpassed that of Nokia (and previously that of RIM). If a patent license deal with Microsoft rendered Android uncompetitively expensive like Barnes & Noble claims, how come HTC is so very profitable?".

You can read the whole blog here and make up your own mind. But to make up your own mind, some of you are disqualified already (MSFT fans, Android Fans, Apple Fans, Google fans,etc). This is only for the people that are interested in finding the truth in all arguments, not just trying to prove their point! You know who you are!

http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011/04/barnes-nobles-answer-to-mic...

Reply Score: 0

RE[2]: Comment by shmerl
by shotsman on Fri 29th Apr 2011 21:45 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by shmerl"
shotsman Member since:
2005-07-22

FM is hardly the best person in the world to quote here.
His track record is IMHO pretty abysmal. He is not an Open Source Activist. He seems more like a Shill for the guys from Redmond.
If I were you I'd look at some of the other blogs/news sites for a more balanced opinion of Mr Meuller.

Reply Score: 6

RE[2]: Comment by shmerl
by shmerl on Fri 29th Apr 2011 22:40 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by shmerl"
shmerl Member since:
2010-06-08

> Just look at how many players are paying royalties on
> many fronts and doing extremely well in their
> business. Why should B&N be any different or exempted
> from the same.

Hehe. It's like saying, look how many are paying royalties to mafia bosses. Why X should be different? Isn't it stupid not to pay to dark empire?

Don't be ridiculous. No one is obligated to pay anything to those robbers. They will try to rob, and are happy when someone gives in. B & N had guts to show them their place.

Reply Score: 5

RE[3]: Comment by shmerl
by redbeard on Sat 30th Apr 2011 16:16 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by shmerl"
redbeard Member since:
2006-03-11

Nice summary of the whole thing. +1

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by shmerl
by redbeard on Sat 30th Apr 2011 16:13 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by shmerl"
redbeard Member since:
2006-03-11

"Florian Mueller, an intellectual property activist . . ."

Let me fix that for you: Florian Mueller, a likely paid lobbyist for MS . . .

If you look at the things this guy post it appears as he is pushing an agenda for someone.

FROM: http://techrights.org/2010/04/11/florian-mueller-and-erika-mann/

"For those who are not aware, Florian Müller became a lobbyist, but whose lobbyist? More recently he became known for his attempts to derail the Munich migration to GNU/Linux."

My advise don't bother sending anyone his way you will likely get FUD.

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Comment by shmerl
by bugeyedcreepy on Sat 30th Apr 2011 22:02 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by shmerl"
bugeyedcreepy Member since:
2010-04-18

Dude, are you serious? Florian has a crap record at predictions and accurate commentary. Go back to his blog page and stay there please.

Reply Score: 2

Dirty tactics
by Finchwizard on Thu 28th Apr 2011 23:04 UTC
Finchwizard
Member since:
2006-02-01

I think Android are doing a pretty good job on their own.

Reply Score: 3

other vendors
by jimmystewpot on Thu 28th Apr 2011 23:45 UTC
jimmystewpot
Member since:
2006-01-19

It is my understanding from talking with a person close to the MS vs Android patent discussion with another vendor (not b&N) that the patents in question related to Exchange interoperability (ActiveSync), FAT/vFAT file systems. I have not used the B&N devices so I don't really know if they would infringe those areas? Maybe there are some more patents that MS is trying to push down their throat? At least with Apple's cases there are infringing patent numbers released to the public so people can make up their own minds.. to date I've not seen these from MS... can anyone show me them if they exist? I would love to know.

Reply Score: 4

RE: other vendors
by TemporalBeing on Fri 29th Apr 2011 20:21 UTC in reply to "other vendors"
TemporalBeing Member since:
2007-08-22

It is my understanding from talking with a person close to the MS vs Android patent discussion with another vendor (not b&N) that the patents in question related to Exchange interoperability (ActiveSync), FAT/vFAT file systems. I have not used the B&N devices so I don't really know if they would infringe those areas? Maybe there are some more patents that MS is trying to push down their throat? At least with Apple's cases there are infringing patent numbers released to the public so people can make up their own minds.. to date I've not seen these from MS... can anyone show me them if they exist? I would love to know.


Well, the FAT/vFAT thing can be mitigated - so support does not necessarily mean infringement, but as it is still the primary file system of many flash chips (SD, CF, etc.) by default it certainly can be problematic.

That said, isn't it about time the world adopted a new primary file system for these things? One that isn't encumbered by patents (ala FAT/vFAT, and even exFAT)?

The primary issue is the fact that Windows doesn't support any file systems that don't originate in Redmond by default. And there's not really any good (e.g. high quality) ext2/3/4 drivers for Windows either. So options are limited unless companies want to invest a lot of money. But then, wouldn't that investment pay off in the long run? (Sadly they're likely too short-sighted to see it.)

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: other vendors
by vodoomoth on Mon 2nd May 2011 11:19 UTC in reply to "RE: other vendors"
vodoomoth Member since:
2010-03-30

You are 100% (and beyond) right. The sad fact is that "in the long run" *is* preposterous when it comes to companies... their horizon, especially for the ones quoted on a stock market, is basically a trimester (or more accurately, "quarter", as they say).

Edited 2011-05-02 11:22 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: other vendors
by TemporalBeing on Mon 2nd May 2011 13:58 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: other vendors"
TemporalBeing Member since:
2007-08-22

You are 100% (and beyond) right. The sad fact is that "in the long run" *is* preposterous when it comes to companies... their horizon, especially for the ones quoted on a stock market, is basically a trimester (or more accurately, "quarter", as they say).


Sad but true. They look at 3 things - quarter to quarter, quarter to same time last year, and projection of quarter to same time next year.

Sad too, most CEOs stay in the position <5 years. So there is no long term vision for the companies either. Without long term vision, companies can't make long term goals, or do things that are best for the health of the company in the long term. Instead, they squander lots of money changing the corporate vision and goals every few years as the CEOs turn over.

So, expect Elop to be at Nokia <5 years; and expect the next CEO will dramatically shift the nature of Nokia again - likely away from Microsoft (unless another Softie replaces Elop), not necessarily in a better direction just in a different direction (e.g. reintroducing Symbian). That's just the kind of thing where the money gets squandered.

Reply Score: 2

v Android is *Unattractive* already
by mrhasbean on Thu 28th Apr 2011 23:49 UTC
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

Then Apple produced the App Store, which many here hate with a passion, but it answers these problems for developers, and we've already seen a massive number of developers make money from their creations for he first time. Arguably some maybe shouldn't have, but that's another argument. The reality is that Android, with it's "Windows like" free-for-all mentality, is very unattractive from a development perspective to anyone other than those who have other means to pay the bills.

So while I don't think Microsoft - or anyone for that matter - should be trying to enforce patents that are invalid, as a business proposition Android is already very unattractive to anyone other than Google, the phone manufacturers and a handful of big software / content companies - just like Windows...


Ok... Want some hard reality check?
AppStore is great for users, Apple and a handful of developers. Otherwise selling mobile apps is a dead end these days.

Oh how many mobile app startup companies I've seen go down during 1.5years. Literally every single one closed shop. The only ones that stayed in business are the ones that offer services to companies in building apps for them(as part of marketing campaigns or added value to other services). And quite a few of them had "best selling" and "featured" apps.

That leads to the "fun fact" - AppStore and Apple's $1 app ecosystem results in income that can't sustain mobile app development. And it's not limited to AppStore, it's Android Market also. Though it might put some food on a table of a single programmer, nothing more.

But hey, you have to actually live and breathe startup companies to know that. And those "We've made a million selling our app" stories are the exceptions that prove the rule.

By the way a million earned on AppStore results in 700'000 in cash. And with 5 people team it's a good income. But look at who rakes in a million a month?(I doubt that they make a million in AppStore btw) AngryBirds! Can you beat them? No way in hell! Then calculate how much you need to make, as a legal entity, each month to get to a million. The incomes are very low...

Reply Score: 4

jimmystewpot Member since:
2006-01-19

While I agree with some of the points of your discussion I see (as an android user) that the number of quality pay for applications on android has been dramatically improving over the last 6 months. If the momentum continues there will be a great deal of money to be made through the market for even small developers. The key issue with any app store is how to distinguish yourself from the other apps, that is where the challenge lies for new entries into any market place on either apple, android, blackberry etc.. being a featured app may provide some inroads to profits however it is hard to keep that momentum when the application is not featured...

The good news is that many of the traditional big software companies have very little in the mobile space so it's allowing the small guys to grow, where traditionally the cost to enter the market is too high for small developers.

Reply Score: 3

n950
by Cody Evans on Fri 29th Apr 2011 00:12 UTC
Cody Evans
Member since:
2009-08-14

Am I being naive in waiting and hoping for the n950 Meego phone?

Reply Score: 3

RE: n950
by leech on Fri 29th Apr 2011 01:01 UTC in reply to "n950"
leech Member since:
2006-01-10

I'm waiting patiently for it too. It's either that, or I'm buying a second N900, but then if the AT&T / T-Mobile deal goes down, I'm basically screwed and think I'm just going to get a dumb phone.

Reply Score: 2

RE: n950
by vivainio on Fri 29th Apr 2011 07:10 UTC in reply to "n950"
vivainio Member since:
2008-12-26

Am I being naive in waiting and hoping for the n950 Meego phone?


Why would that be naive?

Harmattan phone is definitely coming out, as repeatedly affirmed by Nokia management. I use one daily.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: n950 - existing app portability?
by jabbotts on Sun 1st May 2011 13:55 UTC in reply to "RE: n950"
jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

I've been happy to see ongoing additions and updates in the Maemo repositories. Is there any backward compatibility from Harmatten or will it mean developers having to re-code and package existing software?

(Sadly, lacking updates in Ruby seem to have taken away my Metasploit functionality; a key selling feature in the Maemo line for me.)

Reply Score: 2

vivainio Member since:
2008-12-26

Is there any backward compatibility from Harmatten or will it mean developers having to re-code and package existing software?


If you write your code in QML, you have compatibility from harmattan to "real meego" and symbian. You can also install any odd linux libs to both Harmattan and MeeGo.

Repackaging and recompilation, well, that is required but tolerable.

Reply Score: 2

jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

cheers,

Here's hoping though some of my regular packages are now easier found in my own archive having been left by the developers. I seem to have a growing list of apps that have simply stopped working on the N900 too (eSpeakCaller announces phone calls but the interface doesn't load anymore, stale ruby has broken Metasploit, Wifeye doesn't load anymore... odd, I don't seem to be missing a firmware update but anyhow..) Guess it'll depend on how many of the developers migrate forward with the new OS release.

Could also due with the OS getting bogged down a little less often but still loving the N900. If the new hardware is anything like the Nokia N0 spoof from the start of April it could be very compelling (especially with alternatives being more limited OS like Android and Ios).

Reply Score: 2

v Android unfinished
by traustitj on Fri 29th Apr 2011 00:29 UTC
Microsoft sure... But Apple?
by JAlexoid on Fri 29th Apr 2011 00:42 UTC
JAlexoid
Member since:
2009-05-19

Microsoft are with their usual tactics, no news there. But Apple? Apple may be "scared"(well they shouldn't, but they are), in a marketing war, but it's not their intention of making Android less valuable proposition. Their intention, as it seems, is to have their "jewels" to themselves. And in some cases is blocks progress...

I can't say I'm pro Apple, because I'm not, but they are the neutral company out there to use(abuse sometimes) a capitalistic system to make money and stay on top as much as possible.

Reply Score: 3

v Yannow -
by kaelodest on Fri 29th Apr 2011 01:41 UTC
RE: Yannow -
by stabbyjones on Fri 29th Apr 2011 02:39 UTC in reply to "Yannow -"
stabbyjones Member since:
2008-04-15

It is not the OS that Matters it is the experience

So why harp on about Java if you're about experience? Being Platform/Processor independant is probably the best reason to use Java on phones. RIM is probably going to benifit most from that and it's not going to hurt android either.

http://www.linuxtoday.com/infrastructure/2011042300139NWBZMO

And Having a lot of UN-Passionate developers is what killed Windows

Yeah i'll make sure to tell Microsoft that the last couple of decades was for nothing because windows is dead.

their users\consumers are passionate about their products. So it stands to reason that developers for this platform will be much more passionate about it.

No it doesn't, it means they have passionate users.

A kid can write a full on backup program for their Nana in an afternoon

appinventor.googlelabs.com/about/

We use it in the classroom. You don't need to know a single thing about Java and the tutorials are great.

http://www.appbrain.com/app/pet-the-kitty/appinventor.ai_all4him.He...

I am little more than a revenue stream to the board in Cupertino.

Yup

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Yannow -
by leos on Fri 29th Apr 2011 03:37 UTC in reply to "RE: Yannow -"
leos Member since:
2005-09-21

"I am little more than a revenue stream to the board in Cupertino.

Yup
"

What's really funny is that you seem to think you're more than a revenue stream to any company you do business with.

Reply Score: 5

RE[3]: Yannow -
by stabbyjones on Sun 1st May 2011 12:03 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Yannow -"
stabbyjones Member since:
2008-04-15

and when did i say that?

we're all in the same boat here.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Yannow -
by -pekr- on Fri 29th Apr 2011 07:27 UTC in reply to "Yannow -"
-pekr- Member since:
2006-03-28

I am anti Apple, or just - anti mainstream, because what I like most is the "simplicity". But - your post is very accurate. Some time ago I told to the Amiga community, that Apple (iPhone, iPad) is the new Amiga. Amiga was so cool, because of its design AND the ecosystem. Users were passionate, it had cross app scripting, which allowed users to rather simply do cool stuff. If Apple has any such cool things, kudos to them :-)

Reply Score: 0

v Thanks for the chuckle
by tyrione on Fri 29th Apr 2011 02:19 UTC
RE: Thanks for the chuckle
by JAlexoid on Fri 29th Apr 2011 14:19 UTC in reply to "Thanks for the chuckle"
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

Although you've been downranked, I agree with you. Apple is the one that is making Android the valuable proposition.

Reply Score: 2

It's the law...
by malxau on Fri 29th Apr 2011 03:34 UTC
malxau
Member since:
2005-12-04

So we all know software patents are controversial, and many people believe they shouldn't exist.

In the current world they do exist, and they do grant patent holders monopoly rights - including the right to set license fees at any level or deny licensing completely (at least in the US.)

Reading B&N's filing was a little surreal. It said so many things that were just smokescreens to the real issue - does B&N market a device that infringes on a specific patent? That, ultimately, is what the court will have to decide. Whether or not this meets B&N's concept of fair or ethical is not relevant.

MS is not doing anything except that which patent holders do as a matter of course. The issue is not whether MS are behaving badly. The issue is whether the patent system should, as a matter of policy, be changed to accommodate B&N's objections - like, limitations on license fees, licensing determined having regard to the scope of the patent on the product as a whole, etc. B&N are trying to have a reform discussion in a courtroom. My hunch is this will not end well for them.

Reply Score: 5

RE: It's the law...
by TemporalBeing on Fri 29th Apr 2011 20:23 UTC in reply to "It's the law..."
TemporalBeing Member since:
2007-08-22

Reading B&N's filing was a little surreal. It said so many things that were just smokescreens to the real issue - does B&N market a device that infringes on a specific patent? That, ultimately, is what the court will have to decide. Whether or not this meets B&N's concept of fair or ethical is not relevant.


If you notice, B&N's filings are full of statements to the effect of "the patent is not applicable or the devices do not infringe it". So, they are saying that there is no infringement and this is just a tactic Microsoft is using to extort money from everyone in the industry, using the courts as a means of threat.

Reply Score: 3

Google
by tuma324 on Fri 29th Apr 2011 03:57 UTC
tuma324
Member since:
2010-04-09

Can't Google do anything to defend Android against these dirty tactics from Apple/Microsoft?

Edited 2011-04-29 03:57 UTC

Reply Score: 0

RE: Google
by lemur2 on Fri 29th Apr 2011 04:29 UTC in reply to "Google"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

Can't Google do anything to defend Android against these dirty tactics from Apple/Microsoft?


Is this case the start of Microsoft anti-trust 2.0?

http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/open-enterprise/2011/04/microsoft-...

It sure seems like as good a place to start as any.

Reply Score: 1

Hat off
by Gone fishing on Fri 29th Apr 2011 05:00 UTC
Gone fishing
Member since:
2006-02-22

Hats off to Barnes & Noble for telling it like it is. I was going to quote B&N but so much of what it has said is true and pertinent, I’d have to quote the lot.

When are the politicians going to wake up and prevent these software monopolies and cartels using the patent law to stifle innovation, bully, intimidate and prevent competition so that they can foist their own rubbish products on us at exorbitant cost.

Reply Score: 8

RE: Hat off - politicians wake up?
by jabbotts on Sun 1st May 2011 14:03 UTC in reply to "Hat off "
jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

I'd say the politicians are wide awake and well aware of the lobby money flowing in from the monopoly craving deep pockets.

The question may be "when are the politicians going to do the right thing for the citizenry they claim to represent instead of for the non-human incorporated legal entities who've bought them outright?"

Reply Score: 2

Pot calling the kettle black
by kaiwai on Fri 29th Apr 2011 09:49 UTC
kaiwai
Member since:
2005-07-06

I find it funny when Android device vendors spew hate at Microsoft and Apple especially when it comes from the likes of B&N and their 'Nook' device. I find it funny they whine when given these two things they've sabotaged thenselves rather than anything to do with Microsoft's so-called 'handy work':

1) B&N US only policy - do they really believe that the only people interested in their product reside in the US?

2) They finally update their firmware to Froyo almost one year after its availability - excuse me but how about shipping it back in November 2010 with it instead.

I swear some device vendors in the US deliberately set themselves up to fail with f-cking stupid policies such as 'no shipping outside the US' and 'lets not upgrade out firmware in a timely manner'. Really, is there some sort of inside joke that I don't know of where American businesses have an on going bet on who can declare bankruptcy the fastest by being ignorant of customers outside the US?

Sorry B&N, it has nothing to do with Microsoft and everything to do with you, your pathetic management and complete lack of realisation that the internet makes commerce international. Either ship the damn thing world wide on one day or do us all a favour, shut up shop, sell off all your assets and give the funds back to the shareholders because it is abundantly clear you don't know what the hell you're doing.

Edited 2011-04-29 09:51 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE: Pot calling the kettle black
by Thom_Holwerda on Fri 29th Apr 2011 10:47 UTC in reply to "Pot calling the kettle black"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

B&N US only policy - do they really believe that the only people interested in their product reside in the US?


Not this crock of shit again. Why should they ship outside of the US? Is that a law? You are not entitled to their equipment, you know. You seem to be under the impression that shipping worldwide is an easy thing to do - it isn't. Every country has its own regulations, testing requirements, and other legal issues to work out. The legal implications alone are massive - not even Apple can ship worldwide from the get go, and with new products (like the Nook), it's even harder - let alone wireless products, which have to abide by even more laws and regulations.

It often doesn't even make sense to ship worldwide. Import taxes and shipping costs are insanely high for many countries (I can know, I regularly get bills into the hundreds of euros for simple equipment shipped from the US). This means that shipping worldwide makes your products a hell of a lot expensive than products sold from a local branch - which, of course, takes EVEN MORE time to set up.

For B&N it's even worse, since they'd have to set up the B&N store as well. This opens up a whole new can of worms. For instance, here in The Netherlands we have our own inter-banking online payment system, which also needs to be supported and understood, both technically and legally. You don't figure all that out without setting up a local branch, with local lawyers and experts.

You rally seem to lack a grasp of basic economic principles when it comes to these matters, as you bring it up time and time again. Sure, it sucks some products do not make their way to New Zealand (or The Netherlands), but that's just the way things are.

hey finally update their firmware to Froyo almost one year after its availability - excuse me but how about shipping it back in November 2010 with it instead.


The Nook was an e-reader. Not a tablet.

Edited 2011-04-29 10:48 UTC

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Pot calling the kettle black
by kaiwai on Fri 29th Apr 2011 11:32 UTC in reply to "RE: Pot calling the kettle black"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

There is nothing stopping the said company selling directly to the public and telling the customer that they're responsible for any taxes, tariffs required when importing said product. I import things all the time, they go through customs, I receive a letter stating that customs requires me to pay $X for a product being imported (GST and/or duty), I ring up the courier company and provide my credit card details and voila what I have imported is released and delivered to me.

Heard of this thing called international shipping - yeah, well, you can actually ship your product internationally on day one. Heard of this thing called custom clearance? well that is handled between the receiving party and courier company. As for regulatory requirements then don't sell to those countries, if those countries want thousands of oxygen thieving bureaucrats wasting time then so be it, just don't export to *THOSE* countries.

As for software updates, if it connected to the internet then it needs to be updated - if you can't work out why then you should give up whilst you're ahead.

Edited 2011-04-29 11:35 UTC

Reply Score: 1

shotsman Member since:
2005-07-22

Thom,
The cost of shipping kit from the US to Europe is IMHO a totally invalid argument.
Sure it costs to an arm and a leg for ONE item.

If B&N were to sell the Nook in Europe it would not be shipped as individual items from the US. IT would come on a ship in a container direct from the makers in Asia. Just like every iPad or HTC Android Phone.
The cost of shipping those items in bulk is (on a per item basis) pretty small.

As a citizen of the EU/EEA Thom, does it not get frustrating that US Tech companies ignore a market that is quite a bit larger than the uS domestic one? Naturally there are some items I'd rather they kept inside the 50 states (monstrous pickup's for one).
When I worked for a US company (in Boston) it was a realy struggle to get them to even think about selling outside the lower 48 states let alone Alaska & Hawaii... Europe? Oh No thay said even though Boston to London is about the same flying time as Boston to LA.

Reply Score: 2

Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

he cost of shipping kit from the US to Europe is IMHO a totally invalid argument.
Sure it costs to an arm and a leg for ONE item.

If B&N were to sell the Nook in Europe it would not be shipped as individual items from the US. IT would come on a ship in a container direct from the makers in Asia. Just like every iPad or HTC Android Phone.
The cost of shipping those items in bulk is (on a per item basis) pretty small.


*facepalm*

This would require setting up a local branch. This costs lots of money and lawyers. Then the devices need to be tested in each and every country. Then the software needs to be localised. Then the B&N store has to be set up in Europe, and localised for each country. Support networks need to be built in each country, and localised.

You, too, seem to have little grasp on the economic principles behind selling products in new markets.

As a citizen of the EU/EEA Thom, does it not get frustrating that US Tech companies ignore a market that is quite a bit larger than the uS domestic one?


Not really, no.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Pot calling the kettle black
by JAlexoid on Fri 29th Apr 2011 14:27 UTC in reply to "Pot calling the kettle black"
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

1) B&N US only policy - do they really believe that the only people interested in their product reside in the US?


They are an exclusively American bookstore, what else would they do? It's not logical for them to release it worldwide! Amazon on the other hand is a different story...

2) They finally update their firmware to Froyo almost one year after its availability - excuse me but how about shipping it back in November 2010 with it instead.

How having an old OS version compromise a book reader? Really? When people say that about phones that were touted as devices to run apps, I agree that latest version is important. But when the intended functionality of the device is not compromised by old version of software, who cares?.. So there is advertised functionality vs failure to deliver that functionality. Nook is for reading books and it does it well...

Reply Score: 3

If patents really mattered
by judgen on Fri 29th Apr 2011 10:41 UTC
judgen
Member since:
2006-07-12

If patents really mattered: Ericsson (not sony-ericsson, wich is a later spin off) could crush ALL cellphone manufacturers with their portfolio of patents... I do not see this happening at all, but if patents were real and truly honored we would not have a single cellphone network today that did not use ericsson stations exclusivly or how ever that is spelled.

just a note, is osnews turning into mobilephone/laws about mobile phones news?

Reply Score: 8

RE: If patents really mattered
by JAlexoid on Fri 29th Apr 2011 14:29 UTC in reply to "If patents really mattered"
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

just a note, is osnews turning into mobilephone/laws about mobile phones news?


Mobile is the new wave and the future of most computing. Just like a lot of people no longer have desktop computers, very soon a lot of people will stick to something even more portable than a laptop. It's called progress.

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: If patents really mattered
by Neolander on Fri 29th Apr 2011 15:03 UTC in reply to "RE: If patents really mattered"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

Mobile is the new wave and the future of most computing. Just like a lot of people no longer have desktop computers, very soon a lot of people will stick to something even more portable than a laptop. It's called progress.

Not sure of that... 13" laptops and small netbooks have been here for some time already, yet not everyone has switched to them. Although fine for web browsing or as an easily transportable powerpoint display engine, they still feel a bit small for a wide range of work.

Now, current tablets have the same size as a netbook, but with significantly lower input resolution, and phones have even smaller screens... At some point, the question must be asked : won't we reach the frontier of screen-based devices which a human being can work on ?

Edited 2011-04-29 15:05 UTC

Reply Score: 2

JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

Not sure of that... 13" laptops and small netbooks have been here for some time already, yet not everyone has switched to them. Although fine for web browsing or as an easily transportable powerpoint display engine, they still feel a bit small for a wide range of work.

Now, current tablets have the same size as a netbook, but with significantly lower input resolution, and phones have even smaller screens... At some point, the question must be asked : won't we reach the frontier of screen-based devices which a human being can work on ?

I think it'll be more like the core device - the processing and data storage unit - is mobile and the interface input and output are interchangeable.
Something like what Moto Atrix, but starting with a smaller package and having a Token(reflective LCD with with phone keyboard) -> Smartphone(large touchscreen) -> Tablet/Slate/Whatever you call it -> Laptop -> Desktop. All powered by the processor contained in the Token.

Reply Score: 3

Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

Yup, I've already seen this perspective mentioned by someone else on this site (maybe you ?), and indeed it'd be very nice. Finally, an acknowledgement that at the core, personal computing devices have a lot in common !

That being said, there are some challenges before this happens.
-The technical one : Achieving cross-device OS compatibility as wide as from phone to desktop is an impressive challenge. To sell well, we'd have to do more than just port the kernel and core services, and have software scale all the way too. Which in turn requires scalable UIs and functionality. I think it's doable (at least between PCs and larger tablets), but it would require quite a bit of work. Fascinating problem.
-The commercial one : Why would a company sell you one computer when they can sell you three and have you buy your software three times ? Stopping the little holy war and finally marketting all the various spawns of personal computing as a single computer would probably lead to a reduction of profit.
-The ethical one : There are some practices which are seen as relatively okay in the small device world, but not yet in the desktop world (software distribution vendor lock-in, no root access and no way to install other OSs, remote kill switches for software or whole devices, handing private data to multiple third parties...). If we were to switch to a unified device, would we ditch this mess, or extend it to the whole computer market ?
-The mentality one : In order to sell as much hardware and software as possible, several manufacturers have done their best to have their users believe that computing devices are different at a fundamental level (read : desktop is intrinsically complicated, touchscreen is the best interface for smaller hardware, a tablet is more than a gigantic smartphone, etc.). Part of this brainwashing comes around claiming that software that's not specifically tailored for one form factor is a piece of crap. If this went deeply in the mind of users, wouldn't they stay away away from a flexible computing device ?

Reply Score: 3

vodoomoth Member since:
2010-03-30

I can only say "Hallelujah!"

Reply Score: 2

JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

Yup, I've already seen this perspective mentioned by someone else on this site (maybe you ?), and indeed it'd be very nice. Finally, an acknowledgement that at the core, personal computing devices have a lot in common !


It's not my idea. I "saw"* it in a Google TechTalk about butch and femme mindset years ago. It was a drawing by a 10 y/o girl shown in comparison to a boy's drawing on the same matter.

* - Well most butch people in tech actually neglected to notice and creatively extrapolate ;)

Reply Score: 2

jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

For me, progress is:
- my hand-top now including a cell radio and delivering horsepower equivalent to my last notebook
- my notebook now running the same OS install as my desktop and delivering horsepower equivalent to my last desktop
- my desktop now delivering horsepower not available in a current notebook computer

I'm sure not going to be stopping the time and hardware intensive tasks running on my machine mid-way through just because I'm changing locations.

I'd say progress is the increasing functionality and power of all chassis shapes and sizes over time. Though, real progress may result from fixing the abused, consumer hostile and antiquated legal frameworks now used regularly to stifle real progress.

Reply Score: 3

mrstep
Member since:
2009-07-18

"Microsoft did not invent, research, develop, or make available to the public mobile devices employing the Android Operating System and other open source operating systems, but nevertheless seeks to dominate something it did not invent," it further states.

Actually, I don't think Microsoft's claim is that it did any of the above for Android or other open source operating systems, but rather that those same open source operating systems are violating patents that Microsoft holds and therefore did not themselves 'invent, research' part of what they're providing.

The software patent stuff is totally screwed up, but depending on what Microsoft is claiming, they could be totally correct, and B&N saying that Microsoft didn't write Android and therefore has no standing may be both incorrect and irrelevant in the legal sense.

As for the entire system, well... you lost me at '1-click' shopping. Really? Geez.

Reply Score: 2

jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

If the issue is with Android then B&N seems like the wrong defendant since they simply adopted Android as a commodity component of there product; it was Google who implemented the allegedly infringing functionality. But.. Microsoft wants to extort the easier targets not confront the legally responsible target who could actually push back. No different than any other school yard bully really.

Reply Score: 4

Want Android?
by coreyography on Sat 30th Apr 2011 01:26 UTC
coreyography
Member since:
2009-03-06

"These dirty tactics from Redmond are a massive blemish on the WP7's team's efforts, and more than ever, want me to get my hands on a decent Android phone and leave my HTC HD7 in the dust."

You might not even have to get a new phone ;)

http://www.mobilecrunch.com/2011/04/06/video-hackers-kick-windows-p...

Reply Score: 1

Android IS Unattractive?
by JoeNerd on Sat 30th Apr 2011 11:17 UTC
JoeNerd
Member since:
2011-04-30

Google, as the creator of this operating system called Android, always seems to get good press by not being linked to this operating system, released an operating system that included a zero day vulnerability, and if anyone tries to improve a product made by Google, they do not say anything, because everyone is scared witless to suggest anything that might be viewed as negative because they are one of the largest search engine? You want to talk about anti-trust issues and strong arming tactics by reading in between the lines?

This press release comes on the heels of a large negative drop in the stock of Google?

Interesting. Android is not upgradeable on many devices? Interesting. Patents are not worth fighting for? Interesting. If you work for Microsoft, you want a wishy washy, weak armed legal department trying to keep you employed? Interesting.

This looks like a press release among countless other attacks because Microsoft does things that makes it hard or impossible for Congress to regulate while benefiting the consumer? Interesting, this free enterprise stuff? Microsoft released a political cloud operating system and application? Interesting.

Ever notice how free Linux applications and systems look a lot like Microsoft Systems and their web site? Interesting...

No operating system will dominate the market, and professionals in the IT industry see this as nothing more than professionals feeling sorry for themselves, instead of making cool stuff, or are bored people that write press releases, trying to stir up the pot, because their job is to make juicy gossip pieces that make adults loose their minds?

Interesting questions, for the public to ask themselves....the truth, is out there.

In my humble opinion, this article is nothing more than a political smoke screen, meant to manipulate public opinion by leaving out the questions I have just asked?

Have a nice day. Lots of Linux fans, like Microsoft Products, and they do not understand the grand standing and manipulation of the press? Follow the money, and the questions not answered?

Edited 2011-04-30 11:22 UTC

Reply Score: 1