Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 8th Sep 2012 02:09 UTC, submitted by MOS6510
Mozilla & Gecko clones "The smartphones going into the world's next two billion pairs of hands may not belong to either Google or Apple, but to Mozilla. The Mozilla Foundation, which oversees open source software projects like the Firefox Web browser, expects to release a mobile operating system for smartphones early next year. Its target market is Latin America, then the rest of the developing world, where smartphones from Apple and Google are still too expensive for most people." Let's hope so, because at the rate things are currently going, we'll end up with like 90% Android, 9% iOS, and 1% other stuff. Who wants that?
Thread beginning with comment 534396
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Who wants that?
by feydun on Sat 8th Sep 2012 23:27 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Who wants that?"
feydun
Member since:
2012-02-27

CyrilleBerger: I'm aware of those points, but my hypothetical argument still stands. I mean that hard core patent infringement covering all platforms would be harder for microsoft, and if it went insanely general (which is perfectly possible) it would bring it into conflict with apple.

I know that the alternative platforms are off the radar, including even bada, but they can't accuse android of infringing something and then ignore another platform doing the same thing.
On the other hand...
http://www.osnews.com/story/26322/Apple_vs_DRI_the_i_other_i_look-a...

The apple-microsoft agreement relates to design patents, ie soft not hard technology, and even then with a non-copying proviso which basically means that they have an agreement not to troll each other but can sue for genuine infringement.

The VFAT stuff is not such a big deal, for a start because the last of the android-relevant patents on that will have expired a year from now, and because these are just "tasters" that microsoft opens its negotiations (threats) with. They also threaten a very large number of relevant patents which may not be relevant but expensive to prove that. I can only remember microsoft using VFAT to sue TomTom, because they knew they would cave in, and more recently motorola, because they needed something that they stood a chance of succeeding with and they were prepared to use one of their expiring trumps.

Edited 2012-09-08 23:38 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1