looks like "Just Mayo" is where all the msft stock board interest is at the moment.
may be msft can step in and buy it up before it gets wiped out by a lawsuit. it might cost less than what they are currently losing on phones. X-D
yuppers! here is an analysis of the "study":
"Is Office 365 really cheaper than going open source?"
not only are the figures chosen by the company commissioned to do the study misleading, they would not apply to other organizations [either]. (-;
i typed cr00k, only with 'o's instead of nulls. (-;
!y's filtering gives that word the same status as the euro symbol or many otherude or obscene terms. (-;
could be, eh? (-;
what would it take to make bb attractive to [m]any other companies? bcuz no one is lining up to buy them so far. what would have to change to _make_ them an attractive buy?
i distinctly notice that there is no flood of carefully-worded-yet-still-vague innuendo about how consumers can't buy dells with linux installed on them (all the time totally ignoring that it is done every day and that dell doesn't have ~any~ kind of process that would screen consumers out of the buy-queue for those products.)
what could have happened? X-D
and since you have no idea ~what~ he actually does, then doesn't that make you a liar too? by your own definition!!!?!?!?!?!?
turns out that, according to the c.e.o., losing this case was no big deal bcuz msft isn't selling any phones anyway:
"Today’s decision is disappointing but is expected to have a limited impact on our going-forward business, given the decline of the Nokia mobile device business under Microsoft’s control and its limited market position,” said William J. Merritt, President and Chief Executive Officer of InterDigital.
they were only supposed to pay because of a previous ruling. that ruling has been overturned now. (-;
2 reasons (and a follow-up comment):
1.) (with the notable exception of barnes +noble, who sued msft and got over $600 mio. from them when msft told them to pay up for patents) the android vendors ~chose~ to pay msft for patents and, as part of the deal, not reveal which patents they licensed. typically this is done as a cross-licensing deal where msft also pays the vendor a "partner payment" which in some cases may exceed the royalties the vendor pays. for example, vendors like benq or viewsonic who don't need any of the msft patents since they don't make devices that have features the patents cover. the patent deals are good for them and are also good p.r. for msft. (-;
2.) vendors aren't paying msft for essential patents, products will work just fine without virtually ~any~ of the functionality that msft has a [currently valid] patent on.
and, my comment: msft no longer makes $2 billion/yr on android patents anymore. they describe the decline in revenue as being due to consumers choosing other options when they buy phones. this makes it sound like their patents are being dodged by consumers but may simply reflect the fact that vendors aren't offering phones with those features or that the price of phones has gone down and the patent price, being a percentage of the phone price, has also.
they have been losing money on phones even with the android blackmail money. this was also true before they bought the handset business from nokia. it is likely to get even worse now unless they can find a way to control costs and still generate enough revenue to make a profit. selling phones doesn't seem to be a way forward for them; they have failed at it repeatedly; perhaps they will find another way to do it.
so, the i.t.c. lets msft off the hook and now they have a claim against idcc for failure to offer f.r.a.n.d. patent licenses at a reasonable rate!
"U.S. Int'l Trade Commission clears Microsoft of patent infringement"
"NEW YORK, Aug 28 (Reuters) - Microsoft Corp avoided a potentially costly setback to its financially-troubled mobile phone business on Friday as the U.S. International Trade Commission declined to block the import of its devices in a longstanding patent dispute.
The decision rejected a ruling in April by a U.S. trade judge who found that Microsoft had infringed two InterDigital Inc wireless patents, and recommended an import ban."
so it looks like they did the right thing, whether that was by appealing the previous judges ruling, filing the new suit or just moving forward.
and, awwwwww! it's too late to sell short now:
"InterDigital, Inc. (IDCC) -NasdaqGS
49.46 Down 0.05(0.10%) Aug 28, 3:59PM EDT
After Hours : 48.25 Down 1.21 (2.45%) Aug 28, 7:35PM EDT"
the pre-install lock-in is working against them now that users can easily buy a variety of devices with other o.s.es on them.
looks like this may not be a very high priority. they still haven't started the evaluation process that will determine IF they are going to change those few machines.
maybe the $euro 11 mio. savings is making them wonder if backtracking is even worth considering. (-;
last time instead of citing the articles you just threw out random names of publications (which didn't have articles on the topic under discussion.)
now you don't even have random pub. names, but claim dozens of articles.
or you could run the android version in the android emulator. (-;
from what i saw it looked like the underlying issue was that the users didn't have privileges to install software on their laptops. (so much for installing adb and the android emulator then!) so they couldn't just install whatever they wanted. seems like all one would need to do is have the i.t. department install a word processor, or video conferencing software -- if it is an approved program.
it may also be that the install image/manifest doesn't include those programs for some reason, or possibly it was a dreadful, long-running oversight and this is a backdoor way to force the city i.t. department to fix it by dragging it out in the press.