Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 18th Sep 2012 21:45 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless Microsoft and RIM have announced that RIM has licensed Redmond's exFAT patents. The press release contains a ridiculous amount of hyperbole nonsense, and if you translate it into regular people speak, it basically comes down to RIM paying Microsoft protection money for stupid nonsensical software patents. Ridiculous articles like like this make it seem as if we're talking about patents on major technological breakthroughs, but don't be fooled: this is because for some inexplicable reason, we're using crappy FAT for SD cards.
Thread beginning with comment 535673
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Comment by ilovebeer
by smashIt on Wed 19th Sep 2012 10:02 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by ilovebeer"
smashIt
Member since:
2005-07-06

FAT at least up to FAT32 is patentfree
long filenames are patented, but you don't need to support them
in fact i haven't seen a single camera that uses something different than 8.3 naming

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[4]: Comment by ilovebeer
by phoudoin on Wed 19th Sep 2012 13:19 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by ilovebeer"
phoudoin Member since:
2006-06-09

FAT at least up to FAT32 is patentfree
long filenames are patented, but you don't need to support them
in fact i haven't seen a single camera that uses something different than 8.3 naming


Today SD cards aren't anymore used to store photos.
I'm seeing a pattern where the SD card is becoming to mobile devices what the USB keys are to desktop/laptop computers: removable storage.

In that context, it matters more to have better file system features set on the new removable storage support than when it was used only for music and photos.

And the only reason why [ex]FAT[32] is still this file system is for out-of-box interoperability with Windows users, and because the main use case was to make a copy of your data stored on your main Windows computer to be able to access (read, mostly) them from a mobile device.

This use case is moving toward a less desktop centric storage, via cloud and/or versatile compact storage support like SD cards and where the content can be generated directly from the mobile device.

The once mandatory file system seamless integration with Windows thru FAT can now be replaced with a software manager tool, as one could do with tarballs for instance.

My point is that even if Microsoft can forbid Windows to support natively all file systems but theirs, it's perfectly possible to use the plain old FAT with 8.3 names as a backend to a far more open, free guest file system that would launch automatically the software manager on a Windows system.

A FATPatent-free solution.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by ilovebeer
by Neolander on Wed 19th Sep 2012 14:48 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by ilovebeer"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

FAT at least up to FAT32 is patentfree
long filenames are patented, but you don't need to support them
in fact i haven't seen a single camera that uses something different than 8.3 naming

IIRC, it's not even long filename support that is patented, but simultaneous support of long and short filenames.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Comment by ilovebeer
by kovacm on Wed 19th Sep 2012 17:18 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by ilovebeer"
kovacm Member since:
2010-12-16

FAT32? Patents worth MILLIONS of dollars??

yeah, right...

It was overturned partly on the basis of 20-year old Usenet posts Linus Tordvals and an anonymous Atari hacker made when someone asked how to implement long filenames. The ideas they sketched up off the top of their heads was what FAT32 did. i.e. It was obvious to someone skilled in the field.

journal articles on subject: http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2012/03/ms-patent/

and source from 1992.:

https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!topic/comp.os.minix/0r...
https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!topic/comp.sys.atari.s...

Reply Parent Score: 4