Iconfactory's Hockenberry: Patents Destroying Small Developers
Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 14th Jul 2011 21:16 UTC
Legal I've been sitting on this item all day. Technically, it's about patents and the like, and even I understand I've been beating this dead horse so often it almost looks like it's alive. However, this is an interesting opinion piece by Craig Hockenberry, long-time employee at The Iconfactory, one of my favourite software development houses - these guys breath software and beautiful design, and employ one of my favourite artists, David Lanham. The gist of his story? Software patents are killing the independent developer scene.
E-mail Print r 15   · Read More · 80 Comment(s) http://osne.ws/j92
Thread beginning with comment 481011
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: Counterproductive advocacy
by rhavyn on Fri 15th Jul 2011 05:04 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Counterproductive advocacy"
rhavyn
Member since:
2005-07-06

Its pretty well known that Microsoft has a 90%+ share of the desktop market. Second, their WP7 OS is a flop. According to Gartner, Microsoft occupies less than 5% of the mobile market. So I would say that they are NOT competing by making a decent product.


It's pretty well known they have a 90%+ share huh? http://itsalltech.com/2011/07/12/windows-loses-market-share-as-micr...

And they occupy less than 5% of the market? http://m.thenextweb.com/thenextweb/#!/entry/microsofts-mobile-marke...

The one thing we can say for sure, there isn't a statistic you aren't willing to make up.


I am not saying we have less choice. I am saying there was no explosion of innovation all of a sudden when software patents were suddenly allowed. We are still basing our OS's off of designs from the 60's and 70's when most of them weren't even copyrighted. So all this intellectual property protection obviously hasn't done anything good.


Would you like to double check your assertion about the copyright status of operating systems from the 70s or are cool with being wrong regarding absolutely every "fact" in your post? I mean you are a case study in emotional factually incorrect statements.

Edited 2011-07-15 05:06 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

TechGeek Member since:
2006-01-14

Rhavyn,

Are you some kind of idiot? Seriously! You linked to articles that pretty much have the exact same info that I was looking at. Apple has been eating at Microsoft in the last couple years, Microsoft is at 86% roughly.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_systems

As for Mobile OS market share, all you had to do was look at wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_operating_system#Market_share_b...

The page you linked to only specified smartphone subscribers. I don't know if that makes a difference to the data but even if it does its less that 1%.

As for copyright, you obviously aren't old enough to know that before the Copyright Act of 1976, you had to register to receive copyright on something. Part of the reason for the settlement of the AT&T vs BSD case was because AT&T hadn't copyrighted most of the Unix source code. After 1976, copyright was automatic upon creation of the work.

Reply Parent Score: 3

rhavyn Member since:
2005-07-06

Rhavyn,

Are you some kind of idiot? Seriously! You linked to articles that pretty much have the exact same info that I was looking at. Apple has been eating at Microsoft in the last couple years, Microsoft is at 86% roughly.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_systems


Just so we're clear, 86% is less than 90%+, right?

As for Mobile OS market share, all you had to do was look at wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_operating_system#Market_share_b...

The page you linked to only specified smartphone subscribers. I don't know if that makes a difference to the data but even if it does its less that 1%.


And, just so we're clear again, they do in fact have more than 5% market share?

As for copyright, you obviously aren't old enough to know that before the Copyright Act of 1976, you had to register to receive copyright on something. Part of the reason for the settlement of the AT&T vs BSD case was because AT&T hadn't copyrighted most of the Unix source code. After 1976, copyright was automatic upon creation of the work.


So the base operating system that many of today's systems ared derived from today was at least partially copyrighted?

You admit that every single piece of data in your post was factually wrong but call me an idiot? You realize my entire thread is about how being correct and avoiding emotional hyperbole is absolutely a prerequisite for people taking you seriously if you're seriously trying to change an entrenched system, right?

Reply Parent Score: 2

Read more of this thread... >
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

It's pretty well known they have a 90%+ share huh? http://itsalltech.com/2011/07/12/windows-loses-market-share-as-micr...

And they occupy less than 5% of the market? http://m.thenextweb.com/thenextweb/#!/entry/microsofts-mobile-marke...

The one thing we can say for sure, there isn't a statistic you aren't willing to make up.


Sooo... Since when are iOS, Java ME and Android desktop OS'es?

On the second statistic, that 7% still includes all of the WinMo devices. So yes, their WP7 has that smallish sub 1/20th of the market.

Reply Parent Score: 2

rhavyn Member since:
2005-07-06

"It's pretty well known they have a 90%+ share huh? http://itsalltech.com/2011/07/12/windows-loses-market-share-as-micr...

And they occupy less than 5% of the market? http://m.thenextweb.com/thenextweb/#!/entry/microsofts-mobile-marke...

The one thing we can say for sure, there isn't a statistic you aren't willing to make up.


Sooo... Since when are iOS, Java ME and Android desktop OS'es? "

If you'd like to find a statistic that shows pure desktop marketshare I'd be happy to look at it. But the only thing close to a "desktop" share I can find is based on browser usage and includes mobile devices. I imagine that, given how many window installs are for things like kiosks, it's difficult to use a different methodology.

On the second statistic, that 7% still includes all of the WinMo devices. So yes, their WP7 has that smallish sub 1/20th of the market.


I'll concede that the statistic includes WinMo. So? They are transitioning to the next version of their mobile OS, are you going to claim that only Windows 7 counts towards their desktop share?

And are you going to actually address the important piece of my claim, that the amount of factually incorrect, emotional hyperbole regarding patents on OSNews is getting way over the top?

Reply Parent Score: 2

Read more of this thread... >
macinnisrr Member since:
2009-11-12

Are you honestly contesting that 88% market share on the desktop is not the same as 90%? Way to nitpick.

Reply Parent Score: 1

rhavyn Member since:
2005-07-06

Are you honestly contesting that 88% market share on the desktop is not the same as 90%? Way to nitpick.


The original person said more than 90%. To quote myself:

No, I claim that people are making factually incorrect, hyperbolic, emotionally charged statements. The fact is, with a "basis in fact" or otherwise, your comments are wrong. The numbers are exaggerated to look as bad as possible. You are saying Microsoft patented sudo, which is factually wrong. This is exactly what I'm saying you can't do if you want to be taken seriously. Once it becomes clear that an advocate for or against something consistently has their facts wrong people simply aren't going to lend any credence to their comments.

You need to take count of the totality of TechGeek's comments, not just 1 number. When everything you are saying in a thread is exaggerated or wrong there is a problem.

Reply Parent Score: 2