Microsoft buys Netscape Web patents from AOL to attack Google

The US patent system is such a joke...

It (among other things) makes me want to move out of the country and give up my citizenship sometimes. lol
I can think of a long list of things that make me want to do that..... It's a very long, long, long list. And no matter how hard I try not to find or add things to that list, it just keeps on growing.
 
Microsofts primary rival is Apple, not so much Google. Microsoft have tried for over a decade to get their foot into the search market with some credibility, only to fail at every turn. Google has the monopoly on web search, there are no rivals for that market. It is Apple that is causing Microsoft the most damage at present, not Google. Google did their turn over a decade ago, whooping all the competition in the search market with a superior product.

Apple have done it to Microsoft in the tech department at present.

Quite honestly, between Apple and Google they could tie Microsoft into legal proceedings for the next five years whilst a whole new open-source scripting language is written, or existing one is taken main stream to replace Javascript and such that Microsoft want to begin charging for. When developers band together for a common cause, things change on the www quickly. Nothing is permanent if you make the wrong decisions, as the next person is already waiting to take their product mainstream and replace an existing one... even an entire scripting language.
 
Facebook Paying Microsoft $550 Million To Get its Hands on Hundreds of Former AOL Patents

Microsoft and Facebook are about to announce a deal with the social networking giant paying Redmond $550 million for access to more than 600 patents, AllThingsD has learned.

The deal comes as the social network prepares for its initial stock offering and looks to protect itself in an increasingly litigious intellectual property environment. Yahoo sued Facebook last month alleging infringement of 10 patents.

The deal covers a portion of the patents that Microsoft paid $1 billion earlier this month to acquire from AOL.

In that auction, Microsoft got the ability to own or assign some 925 patents from AOL, plus a license to AOL’s remaining patents, including 300 patents not for sale. Facebook had also been interested in the AOL patents, according to Bloomberg.

Microsoft is hanging on to about 265 of the patents it bought from AOL.

Microsoft has issued a press release on the deal.


REDMOND, Wash. and MENLO PARK, Calif. — April 23, 2012 — Microsoft Corp. and Facebook announced today a definitive agreement under which Microsoft will assign to Facebook the right to purchase a portion of the patent portfolio it recently agreed to acquire from AOL Inc. Facebook has agreed to purchase this portion for $550 million in cash.

In the initial AOL auction, Microsoft secured the ability to own or assign approximately 925 U.S. patents and patent applications plus a license to AOL’s remaining patent portfolio, which contains approximately 300 additional patents that were not for sale.As a result of today’s agreement, Facebook will obtain ownership of approximately 650 AOL patents and patent applications, plus a license to the AOL patents and applications that Microsoft will purchase and own.

Upon closing of this transaction with Facebook, Microsoft will retain ownership of approximately 275 AOL patents and applications; a license to the approximately 650 AOL patents and applications that will now be owned by Facebook; and a license to approximately 300 patents that AOL did not sell in its auction.

“Today’s agreement with Facebook enables us to recoup over half of our costs while achieving our goals from the AOL auction,” said Brad Smith, executive vice president and general counsel, Microsoft. “As we said earlier this month, we had submitted the winning AOL bid in order to obtain a durable license to the full AOL portfolio and ownership of certain patents that complement our existing portfolio.”

“Today’s agreement with Microsoft represents an important acquisition for Facebook,” said Ted Ullyot, general counsel, Facebook. “This is another significant step in our ongoing process of building an intellectual property portfolio to protect Facebook’s interests over the long term.”The parties are evaluating the accounting treatment for these transactions. These transactions are also subject to customary closing conditions, including clearance under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976, as amended.
 
New Update:

A friend of mine who works for Microsoft claims they've been working on what they thought was more browser code for Internet Explorer, but completely redesigned. Keep in mind this code had no user interface or front end, just some core elements. And that is when it downed on him. He had seen something very similar to what he was working on.... Netscape.

Is a Microsoft Netscape in the works? How will this impact the market if this is their goal?
 
The question is... do Microsoft really want to do much more damage to their brand? I would think not in this economy and their massive decline in the browser market due to their own stupidity and ignorance to comply with web standards.
 
MS is pretty much dead. In this business, you either grow or you shrink. MS is currently going nowhere and these deals around the edges will not change anything in the long run.

They had the right business model for a non-networked world where bigger is better, but the wrong one for the future. It give me a chuckle to hear them even mentioned....

Not to say they won't be around or even succeed in a minor fashion. But their day is over and there is nothing on the horizon which could restore them to monopoly glory. When folks have a choice, they don't choose hairballs like Windoz and expensive word processors.
 
MS is pretty much dead. In this business, you either grow or you shrink. MS is currently going nowhere and these deals around the edges will not change anything in the long run.

They had the right business model for a non-networked world where bigger is better, but the wrong one for the future. It give me a chuckle to hear them even mentioned....

Not to say they won't be around or even succeed in a minor fashion. But their day is over and there is nothing on the horizon which could restore them to monopoly glory. When folks have a choice, they don't choose hairballs like Windoz and expensive word processors.
How are they pretty much dead?

When it comes to word processing, Microsoft Office is generally the go to product, and is pretty much expected in education and business for compatibility. You also can't deny that the recent office versions have been nice upgrades from older versions. They're also releasing Office for Android and iOS, which will be a big seller as most of the current office apps out there aren't all that great (I have nearly all of them for Android due to the Google sales, or sales on Amazon).

Windows 7 is their best operating system to date, and there are very few issues with it, most of which tend to be user error. Windows is still by far the most used operating system in corporate, consumer and education markets.

While I think WP7 is rather crap in its current iteration, and that they're playing catch-up to Android and iOS, Windows 8 on ARM devices will have a lot to offer, especially from a productivity standpoint. It is also too early to call Windows 8 a miss, especially when many OEM's are stating they'll start pushing for lower priced touch-enabled systems, which will completely change the way people interact with their computers. Touch is the future, the issue is they might have jumped ahead too far when pushing Windows 8 (Especially with ridding the OS of the current desktop interface).

Microsoft is falling behind on devices, but when it comes to software they are still one of the largest and most influential companies.
 
Also you must take into fact that Microsoft doesn't just do computers, they have a very big slice in the console market and software market (as Forsaken said above me). In no way is Microsoft dead, Windows 7 is awesome, I haven't had any errors with it other then on my on miss fortune of being stupid when not fully awake, otherwise I haven't ran into any issues that weren't caused by me or the crap hardware my old laptop was using.

I can't wait to get a windows phone, I really want a Lumia 900, but seeing as I barley have any credit as of right now and not really wanting to get a contract with AT&T and seeing as you can't change the carriers from AT&T yet, I will most likely go to my nearest pawn shop, get an iPhone, go to T-Mobile, get a $50 a month unlimited plan (no contract) and wait for when I have good credit, and most likely for Windows Phone 8 to come out.
 
How are they pretty much dead?

When it comes to word processing, Microsoft Office is generally the go to product, and is pretty much expected in education and business for compatibility.

Windows 7 is their best operating system to date, and there are very few issues with it, most of which tend to be user error. Windo.

I am a futurist.
I'm not saying they won't make many billions of dollars per year.

I'm saying their best days are past.

They may have perfected their OS, but it is too late to matter. Their video game systems have lost money since the beginning, and their world processor??? Well, the classrooms and many of the offices of the future will have ipads - without MS Word. Look at the stats regarding adoption of gmail and google docs in education, business and government. Do you think that chart is going to stop going up? Every one of those is a former MS customer...each and every one.

As far as home users, 80% of the people who have Windows (or mac, for that matter) computers don't need them - they need a ipad (maybe with a keyboard) or a nice android large screen phone or chromebook.

Obviously I'm making an educated guess - but it is based on watching PC's take over from Wang and Lanier computers (1978-84) and everything since. Also, much of it is based on actual statistics, not on guesses (look at ipad and phone sales!).....

Need I mention the cloud? That works against MS.

So, ALL these things are working against them, whereas before every single thing was aligned in their favor. That's my point. They may be able to reinvent themselves...but history shows it to be doubtful. Even the most successful historic company, IBM, pretty much died in comparison to what they were before. That is, today it would not hardly matter if they existed, whereas before they were the #1 and key player in computing.
 
Also you must take into fact that Microsoft doesn't just do computers, they have a very big slice in the console market and software market (as Forsaken said above me). In no way is Microsoft dead, Windows 7 is awesome, I haven't had any errors with it other then on my on miss fortune of being stupid when not fully awake, otherwise I haven't ran into any issues that weren't caused by me or the crap hardware my old laptop was using.

I can't wait to get a windows phone, I really want a Lumia 900, but seeing as I barley have any credit as of right now and not really wanting to get a contract with AT&T and seeing as you can't change the carriers from AT&T yet, I will most likely go to my nearest pawn shop, get an iPhone, go to T-Mobile, get a $50 a month unlimited plan (no contract) and wait for when I have good credit, and most likely for Windows Phone 8 to come out.

Consoles?
"
April 19: Microsoft Corp. says it shipped 1.4 million Xbox 360 consoles during the first three months of the year, about half of the 2.7 million shipped a year earlier."

1/2? That is unheard of. I have followed the Xbox since day one - the best system out there, but MS has lost money on it from the start. It cost them more to build them then they sell for.....now they are selling 1/2 as many!

Phones?
My web site stats show the percentage of MS phones being used is almost immeasurable. While I agree that is likely to go up, I would not bet on it hitting any particular point. That is, they may get 2% of the market, they may get 10%, but they are not going to hit the 30 or 40% or higher that Android or Apple is. IMHO, at least.

All of the above is best guess. MS is not going out of business. But their relevance has faded. Applying the test "would the world be pretty much the same today if NO MS products or OS was available", I'd say the chart heads downwards....less and less reliant on them each month. The trend is your friend.

Let's put it this way. Their stock, which represents the company, is not going to make any new millionaires.
 
The future is cloud + devices. Apple said it, did it, and that's why they are on such a roll. In the cloud + devices world, the OS is approaching irrelevance. That is a bad recipe for Microsoft. They've had some massive failures lately: Windows Vista, Bing, Windows Mobile, their stupid mobile device, amongst others. There is very little upside for Microsoft going forward. I'd be worried about their stock price in 5 years. Like I said for RIM: I think there is little chance their stock will go up 50% in 5 years - but I think there is a reasonable chance the stock could go down 50% in 5 years. In my books, that makes it a: SELL.
 
The future is cloud + devices. Apple said it, did it, and that's why they are on such a roll. In the cloud + devices world, the OS is approaching irrelevance.
No, that will not happen, at least not as the world is now. If my company use Apple cloud services, Apple has to abide by american rules, cause they are an american company. It is irrelevant if the physical data is stored outside of US, US government can still demand access to your documents through Apple. This also makes it impossible for many government departments to use cloud storage, for example here they are basically denied by law to use cloud services from Google, Apple or Microsoft.

The cloud is the new hype, but there are many things that have not been ironed out. At least in a business sense, it is far from ready to use, there are many legal traps you can fall in to and never get out of. I also doubt that on personal devices, the cloud will take completely over, for example ChromeOS is very limited in it's use, I can not see that taking over for a complete laptop.
 
More news from today....
"Apple‘s (AAPL) iOS operating system and Google‘s (GOOG) Android operating system, combined, made up 80% of the 152.3 million smartphones shipped in Q1 of this year"

"the combined share has risen from 54.4% a year earlier"

"Microsoft‘s (MSFT) “Windows Phone” was at 2.2%, down from 2.6% a year earlier."

The trend is your friend.

As far as the cloud not being for everyone, I agree! Ipads and smartphones are not for everyone either. The point here is that MS previously was able to sell OS's, Apps and other stuff to each and every computer user in the world (or a vast percentage of them). Now their "market share" in that same metric is declining quickly with nothing on the horizon to replace it.

MS is not going to go extinct - just become less and less relevant to most people. That is not what businesses aspire to.
 
I am a futurist.
I'm not saying they won't make many billions of dollars per year.

I'm saying their best days are past.

They may have perfected their OS, but it is too late to matter. Their video game systems have lost money since the beginning, and their world processor??? Well, the classrooms and many of the offices of the future will have ipads - without MS Word. Look at the stats regarding adoption of gmail and google docs in education, business and government. Do you think that chart is going to stop going up? Every one of those is a former MS customer...each and every one.

As far as home users, 80% of the people who have Windows (or mac, for that matter) computers don't need them - they need a ipad (maybe with a keyboard) or a nice android large screen phone or chromebook.

Obviously I'm making an educated guess - but it is based on watching PC's take over from Wang and Lanier computers (1978-84) and everything since. Also, much of it is based on actual statistics, not on guesses (look at ipad and phone sales!).....

Need I mention the cloud? That works against MS.

So, ALL these things are working against them, whereas before every single thing was aligned in their favor. That's my point. They may be able to reinvent themselves...but history shows it to be doubtful. Even the most successful historic company, IBM, pretty much died in comparison to what they were before. That is, today it would not hardly matter if they existed, whereas before they were the #1 and key player in computing.
Consoles are generally always lost money, however they make the money back on accessories, services and games, and XBOX has done well with all of the above. They've also come out on-top with consoles, beating Sony (Though I hope they make a comeback with Orbis), and Nintendo.

Adoption of gmail doesn't inversely effect Microsoft, as Outlook works with GMail. GDocs is generally adopted by small business, and not major corporations or government entities. Education uses Google Apps, though they still suggest using Office for compatibility. Microsoft mostly targets corporate and government as that is where money is, and that probably will not change due to bugs between GDoc and Office.

Where do you get this 80% from? iPads, smartphones and even Chromebooks cannot replace a desktop or a laptop. There are just to many things that are impossible to do, especially when it requires productivity. You cannot game (Diablo III, Guild Wars 2 etc) on any of the above mentioned devices, and you cannot design with them. Typing on them is also fairly horrible, even with a keyboard due to how cramped they are (I have a Transformer Prime with the doc, and I still typing on a regular keyboard).

Microsoft has had cloud services for several years: Micorosft Azure, Microsoft Mesh (Defunct iirc and now Skyline), Microsoft Skyline (Cloud storage), and even Microsoft Office which is online and free. They have other services as well and they are widely used, just in certain niches.

IBM now focuses on super computing, and has shown off incredible technology throughout the last 5 years. While they're not as 'big' as they were before, their focus has changed and they remain successful.

Consoles?
"
April 19: Microsoft Corp. says it shipped 1.4 million Xbox 360 consoles during the first three months of the year, about half of the 2.7 million shipped a year earlier."

1/2? That is unheard of. I have followed the Xbox since day one - the best system out there, but MS has lost money on it from the start. It cost them more to build them then they sell for.....now they are selling 1/2 as many!

Phones?
My web site stats show the percentage of MS phones being used is almost immeasurable. While I agree that is likely to go up, I would not bet on it hitting any particular point. That is, they may get 2% of the market, they may get 10%, but they are not going to hit the 30 or 40% or higher that Android or Apple is. IMHO, at least.

All of the above is best guess. MS is not going out of business. But their relevance has faded. Applying the test "would the world be pretty much the same today if NO MS products or OS was available", I'd say the chart heads downwards....less and less reliant on them each month. The trend is your friend.

Let's put it this way. Their stock, which represents the company, is not going to make any new millionaires.

Read the response for the previous quote, I explain how console vendors do things.

WP7 is pretty much a joke, as they've got very little support from OEM (And the ones that they do have support from were forced into it, so they do not put much effort into it), carriers (Who will not back a sinking boat), developers (Due to low adoption), however they have quite a bit of hype with consumers, who want to see new things. They've made so bad choices, such as the low-end hardware, and now with the next version not having an upgrade path, but when Windows 8 comes out, chances are they'll take a significant part of the market.

You're right, it's unlikely that anyone will become a millionaire from investing in their stock (Most people do not become millionaires from investing in existing companies stock anyways, especially when they're as established as Microsoft unless they pull an Apple).

More news from today....
"Apple‘s (AAPL) iOS operating system and Google‘s (GOOG) Android operating system, combined, made up 80% of the 152.3 million smartphones shipped in Q1 of this year"

"the combined share has risen from 54.4% a year earlier"

"Microsoft‘s (MSFT) “Windows Phone” was at 2.2%, down from 2.6% a year earlier."

The trend is your friend.

As far as the cloud not being for everyone, I agree! Ipads and smartphones are not for everyone either. The point here is that MS previously was able to sell OS's, Apps and other stuff to each and every computer user in the world (or a vast percentage of them). Now their "market share" in that same metric is declining quickly with nothing on the horizon to replace it.

MS is not going to go extinct - just become less and less relevant to most people. That is not what businesses aspire to.

WP7 is unlikely to ever beat Android or iOS, and can only really compete when Windows 8 comes out. Then they'll have to compete on features, specs (They're very lacking currently), and get more app developers to release apps before they can be successful.

They're still a relevant company. Pretty much every home computer is still Microsoft, most houses own a XBOX, most houses use Mirosoft accessories (Mice/keyboards) as they're the most ergonomic and most computers have Microsoft Office, even Macs.

The only things tablets and smartphones can replace are the day to day tasks, and only to a minor degree. If I have to write up a large email, I'm going on my desktop. If I'm going to search the internet, and it requires a lot of detailed searches, I'm using my desktop. If I need to take notes and it is more than a few lines, I'll go on my desktop. They can only replace minor tasks, and are unlikely to replace anything big anytime soon.

While the trend is that Microsoft isn't doing well in mobile, the hype is surrounding Windows 8, and even diehard iOS and Android fanboys are interested in what Microsoft can do with it. Microsoft is still one of the most innovative companies, they just do not release most of the technology to consumers and keep it privately for testing.
 
. Microsoft is still one of the most innovative companies, they just do not release most of the technology to consumers and keep it privately for testing.

I think you said it all with your summary......

If a company cannot profit from and empower customers with their technology, then they do not succeed.

I don't keep up with Silicon Valley much these days - but to give an off-the-cuff example, no one I know has told me they want to work at Microsoft....for MANY years. MS has some great technology which they have developed by the same brute force ($$, buyouts, etc.) as usual.

I remember reading a book about Silicon Valley which described the business model at MS as compared to others. Bill Gate created a software factory, where they felt that you would obtain the same or better result from more people working on a project.

Example - a vast project requiring 1,000,000 man-hours of programming would be spread all over the world with 1000 people each spending 1000 hours working on it. This resulted in much of what has been called "the hairball" which Windows has been.

However, they still "won" by brute force and monopolistic practices...and the "right time, right place" blessing they obtained by being the OS for the original PC era. This alone can easily keep the company going for the next decade or two....

BUT, these items you mentioned - such as Mobile, Pads, etc. are going to be - by FAR - the largest segments of the market in the years to come. You may need an MS desktop, but I have run many businesses since 1986 and don't have a single piece of their hardware or software. I have never needed it.....just imagine how much more true this is today than 10-20 years ago.

There is continual and BIG growth in internet servers. Intel is getting this business, but not MS...to any real degree, since Unix flavors run most of the net.

The stock has gone nowhere for 12 years.....that is more than a little burp. In fact, it looks to be at 1/2 it's high from 12-13 years ago.

I would use their products if they fit - and I am not denying they may fit many applications. However, it ends up being a tiny portion of the total tech spending of the world today....whereas it was not that way in 1990-2000.
 
I think you said it all with your summary......



If a company cannot profit from and empower customers with their technology, then they do not succeed.



I don't keep up with Silicon Valley much these days - but to give an off-the-cuff example, no one I know has told me they want to work at Microsoft....for MANY years. MS has some great technology which they have developed by the same brute force ($$, buyouts, etc.) as usual.



I remember reading a book about Silicon Valley which described the business model at MS as compared to others. Bill Gate created a software factory, where they felt that you would obtain the same or better result from more people working on a project.



Example - a vast project requiring 1,000,000 man-hours of programming would be spread all over the world with 1000 people each spending 1000 hours working on it. This resulted in much of what has been called "the hairball" which Windows has been.



However, they still "won" by brute force and monopolistic practices...and the "right time, right place" blessing they obtained by being the OS for the original PC era. This alone can easily keep the company going for the next decade or two....



BUT, these items you mentioned - such as Mobile, Pads, etc. are going to be - by FAR - the largest segments of the market in the years to come. You may need an MS desktop, but I have run many businesses since 1986 and don't have a single piece of their hardware or software. I have never needed it.....just imagine how much more true this is today than 10-20 years ago.



There is continual and BIG growth in internet servers. Intel is getting this business, but not MS...to any real degree, since Unix flavors run most of the net.



The stock has gone nowhere for 12 years.....that is more than a little burp. In fact, it looks to be at 1/2 it's high from 12-13 years ago.



I would use their products if they fit - and I am not denying they may fit many applications. However, it ends up being a tiny portion of the total tech spending of the world today....whereas it was not that way in 1990-2000.

:rolleyes: I'm not responding anymore after this.

Microsoft does empower their customers, the Kinect being a prime example of this. They have thousands of teams worldwide creating different hacks to do things that are just simply amazing with it. The same goes for many of their cloud services. Spending money, buying out companies aren't monopolistic, they're standard business practices and Apple and Google do the same thing. Monopolistic business practices would be the deals that Microsoft made with OEM's back in the 90's, which they got nailed for.

I know plenty of people who work, or would love to work for Microsoft. While they're not to the degree of Google, they offer quite a bit in benefits, and they often reward their employees. Google and newer startups tend to be the touted about examples because they're the 'new age Silicon Valley', and because they do things quite differently from companies like Microsoft.

Microsoft does have a lot of people working on projects such as Windows, but those people are all separated into departments that have a particular focus, the same as there is with pretty much every other company. So yes, they get better results from working with more people on a single project, because each department has an individual team focused on its own tasks, making things optimized. This is what they did with Windows 7, which is far from 'a hairball' product.

Hasn't Apple done the same thing? They're suing most Android OEM's over ridiculous patents that are just common sense, or have been used for years. They've also partnered with Microsoft to buy out a large amount of patents that could be used against Android OEM's.

Mobile devices will be a large part of the future, but that doesn't mean traditional PC's will die out. There are just to many failings of mobile devices that make them unlikely to replace the standard computer.

Windows is actually commonly used for servers, it all depends on what you need the server for. Your standard webserver is Linux, but many application servers are Windows.

Windows 8 is forecasted to jump the stock price of Microsoft, mainly due to the mobile devices that'll be powered by it. Their stocks might have gone down over a ~12 year period, but most companies do, and that is only logical.

Until Apple can completely overtake Windows, Microsoft will always stay relevant. Until Windows 8 is out, you also cannot make any assumptions that they'll not be relevant in the mobile market either.
 
MS is not going to go extinct - just become less and less relevant to most people. That is not what businesses aspire to.
Yep... Microsoft just refuse to listen to their customers, that is their primary problem. They are simply too set in their ways and refuse to really change.

Apple pretty much revolutionised app based design, Google grabbed that and stuck with the same concept. Both are having tremendous success as that is what customers are demanding, hence your posted results speak for themselves.

Microsoft keep trying to be unique and different, and they just keep going backwards. Even Windows 8, whilst they have opened it up to touch screen and more an application framework, they still aren't mimicking similar to Apple or Google.

Once Google get a solid app based OS on the market for PC's... I see the desktop market residing primarily between Apple and Google. Windows will become less obvious in the PC sphere the way they're headed.
 
Top Bottom