or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Microsoft reveals Windows Phone 8.1 with Siri-like 'Cortana' personal assistant
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Microsoft reveals Windows Phone 8.1 with Siri-like 'Cortana' personal assistant - Page 2

post #41 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post

The copy machine is alive and well in Redmond

Copy what ? Purchased tech like Siri... that is powered by those purchased Bing and Azure servers

post #42 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post

They might get some from Apple, but it's mainly against Android as they make the only other popular OS that can be used by anyone.

The HUGE difference (which will be a big selling point) is MS has an indemnification policy (something Google lacks, and MS loves to make fun of). With all the lawsuits going on this is a big advantage for Windows Phone over Android.

Ah found it.
http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Windows/Microsoft-Indemnifies-Its-OEM-Partners-Against-IP-Attacks/
"Microsofts embedded offerings are excluded, given that some OEMs are allowed to modify that code, which complicates the issue of indemnification for those products, he said."

That would be the same issue with Android and the manufacturers who are allowed to modify and/or overlay the basic code wouldn't it?
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #43 of 113

I wouldn't say Microsoft is attempting to copy Apple at least not at the same level as Samsung. Microsoft needs to move in a direction that has been proven to be successful, they have to try and make up some ground after having Steve Ballmer as a CEO. Ballmer took a fairly strong company and just about drove it into the ground. 

 

Working on having universal apps that work across all devices is just a smart move. If anyone has used Kit Kat I would say Android is now a copycat of both Apple and Microsoft. I was playing around with a Samsung Galaxy Tab Pro at Costco the other night it felt like I was using Windows 8. 

post #44 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


I vaguely recall something about Microsoft and indemnification but can't remember any of the details. Do you perhaps have a link to it? No biggie if you don't.

 

Do a Google search for "microsoft indemnity agreement". It's the first link that appears and it's a .doc file (I was going to embed the link but it's too long).

 

This is from Microsoft. However, it's a little hard to follow at times. There have been many articles online about the practical implications of this policy. Most recently relating to Android and WebM (two products that Google does not indemnify users of, yet still claims are not patent encumbered). MS challenged Google on the WebM front recently stating "If Google is confident WebM is free from patent encumbrances, then they should have no problems indemnifying users of WebM".

 

Here's a perfect example, and so relevant:

 

MS started going after Android OEMs because Android uses MS IP. Google sat back and did nothing (except whine and complain that MS was basically "extorting" money from these OEMs). MS has since settled with over 20 Android OEMs (including all the big names like Samsung) and they now pay MS royalties for any device shipped with Android.

 

If Google had the same indemnification policy that MS does, then Google would have taken a license from MS directly, avoiding the need for MS to go after all the OEMs.

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply
post #45 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by agramonte View Post

Apple bought Siri so not like it was an original thought from the start

It was original to SRI, from the start. But the important thing is to deny Apple credit. 1smile.gif

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #46 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


Ah found it.
http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Windows/Microsoft-Indemnifies-Its-OEM-Partners-Against-IP-Attacks/
"Microsofts embedded offerings are excluded, given that some OEMs are allowed to modify that code, which complicates the issue of indemnification for those products, he said."

That would be the same issue with Android and the manufacturers who are allowed to modify and/or overlay the basic code wouldn't it?

 

If you read MS's policy I posted about it includes "Mobility and embedded OEM/embedded distributor".

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply
post #47 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by AtlApple View Post

I wouldn't say Microsoft is attempting to copy Apple at least not at the same level as Samsung. Microsoft needs to move in a direction that has been proven to be successful, they have to try and make up some ground after having Steve Ballmer as a CEO. Ballmer took a fairly strong company and just about drove it into the ground. 

Working on having universal apps that work across all devices is just a smart move. If anyone has used Kit Kat I would say Android is now a copycat of both Apple and Microsoft. I was playing around with a Samsung Galaxy Tab Pro at Costco the other night it felt like I was using Windows 8. 

I thought the stuff Microsoft is now releasing, such as Windows Phone 8.1, Office for iPad, and whatever else is a sign of a "new Microsoft" was started under Ballmer. A company that big doesn't turn quickly. It doesn't negate the missteps like Windows 8, Surface RT, Zune, Kin, Tablet PC, that failed under Ballmer's watch. But I think he should get credit for the more recent positive products coming from MS.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #48 of 113

Here's an interesting point that someone on another forum made:

 

If I'm a smartphone vendor I have two choices:

 

- Pay MS a royalty per device and use Android without an indemnification policy.

- Use Windows Phone for free and get indemnification.

 

Quite the choice when you look at it that way.

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply
post #49 of 113
Microsoft doesn't innovate anymore, my a$$.
post #50 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post
 

 

They might get some from Apple, but it's mainly against Android as they make the only other popular OS that can be used by anyone.

 

The HUGE difference (which will be a big selling point) is MS has an indemnification policy (something Google lacks, and MS loves to make fun of). With all the lawsuits going on this is a big advantage for Windows Phone over Android.

The fly in the ointment with this scenario is MS' acquisition of Nokia, which had already been the preferred Windows Phone OEM. While a free/cheap and indemnified OS seems like an appealing pitch, OEMs have seen how MS will abruptly shift platform strategies and leave their purported partners in the lurch. Their past behavior of undermining OEM partners has not earned them the benefit of the doubt. Given that Nokia will continue to have most favored nation status and majority market share in the Windows Phone universe, any new OEM vendor would face a steep uphill climb. And that might not be worth the effort, given Windows Phone's limited market traction.

post #51 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by addicted44 View Post
 


I am talking about touch controls only. iOS (and consequently Android) use tapping as the primary touch gesture to move between panels (the exception being the home screens). WP7, OTOH, uses swiping as the primary gesture to move between panels. So, for example, on iOS, to switch from your Facebook news feed, to your Friends list, you will probably tap an icon. On WP, you will probably swipe left to right, or right to left.

 

I am not saying it is better. However, it was at least an attempt to do something other than straight up copying iOS.

 

This post suggests that you're not overly familiar with how Android functions (except for somehow being certain that they're copying Apple).  In Android, swiping between screens is the standard method.  Sometimes tapping works too, but swiping is the more common method.

post #52 of 113
What annoys me is how much Apple products get rubbished by the media and tech press yet when they need clicks these same products find their way into headlines. Most of the headlines around the Amazon STB call it an Apple TV competitor and never mention Roku (even though I keep hearing about how it's so much better than ATV). The New York Times had an article on Cortana and Google Now was never mentioned in the article. Yet Google Now supposedly wipes the floor with Siri. Really pathetic. If Apple products/services are that inferior then quit using them for click bait.
post #53 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by DroidFTW View Post

This post suggests that you're not overly familiar with how Android functions (except for somehow being certain that they're copying Apple).  In Android, swiping between screens is the standard method.  Sometimes tapping works too, but swiping is the more common method.

When android was released swiping wasn't the standard method.

But you are right. Android is now also copying from Windows Phone.
post #54 of 113

Quote:

Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post
 

Here's an interesting point that someone on another forum made:

 

If I'm a smartphone vendor I have two choices:

 

- Pay MS a royalty per device and use Android without an indemnification policy.

- Use Windows Phone for free and get indemnification.

 

Quite the choice when you look at it that way.


But, an additional point on the second point is "and compete with an OEM owned by the WP supplier." This is a very different situation from Google's ownership of Motorola, given that Motorola was only one among several other prominent Android OEMs. And even with Google owning Motorola, it did not seem like Motorola received preferential treatment. If anything, Google went out of their way to at least appear that they were playing fair with other Android OEMs.

 

Before purchasing Nokia's mobile division, MS had already made special accommodations, which likely contributed to other OEMs staying away from WP. Now that MS owns Nokia, the disincentive seems even greater.

post #55 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post

WOW, you made the assessment based on a press release, don't you think you should at least wait until you actually used it. How many times does companies like MS have slideware that people buy into only to find out it does not work as claimed which it better than anything else out there.

Remember this, engineer who make these product think they are god because they can create things, so by definition it the best thing ever.

Integration with apps is nice thing, presuming it works (or will work eventually) as advertised. According to a bit more detailed article in DailyTech.com, it will let people call someone from Skype (so it should be possible from Viber and other apps as long as developers upgrade them accordingly), open specific person's FB page... things like that. Don't know if I am going to use it, but sure as hell I'm going to play with it for a while.

Re name... I'm Playstation person when it comes to consoles, but I like the name. It sounds a bit exotic, a lot feminine, and if I may say, a little bit sexy without feeling cheap. Good name for AI with female "personality". Not that Siri isn't good name as well, I just like more how "Cortana" sounds. Rumour is that voice actress who voiced Cortana in games will voice her in this app, and I think this is nice - she does have great voice and the whole concept warms my gamer's heart a little bit.

The only thing is, there should be "Cortan" male voice/personality for female users - well, everyone who would prefer male personal assistant in general.
post #56 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ezhik View Post
 

Actually Apple does do this, just on a smaller scale - iPhone and iPad use the same app platform. MS is just taking it further and extending it to desktops and TVs.  Processors shouldn't be an issue, as Windows RT can already handle it pretty well.

Actually MS is implying that if you have a program on you PC it will also work on the phone or tablet as well, Apple is not doing this, Application for the Macs are completely different and based on the different processor architecture. Now I do believe Apple plans to navigate their iOS architecture in to the desktop and laptop world, if that happen then maybe you will have true cross platform apps that work seamlessly.

post #57 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by addicted44 View Post


When android was released swiping wasn't the standard method.

But you are right. Android is now also copying from Windows Phone.

 

File source: http://ohinternet.com/File:JeanLucPicardFacepalm.jpg

post #58 of 113
Looks really nice, and I like that Cortana has a text entry option via keyboard (I.e. Isn't voice only) which I've complained about with Siri since day one.

If I wasn't so invested in iOS I think a Lumia with WP would be my phone of choice, to my eyes the OS has a coherence that is superior to iOS's current offering.

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #59 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post

Actually MS is implying that if you have a program on you PC it will also work on the phone or tablet as well, Apple is not doing this, Application for the Macs are completely different and based on the different processor architecture. Now I do believe Apple plans to navigate their iOS architecture in to the desktop and laptop world, if that happen then maybe you will have true cross platform apps that work seamlessly.
that's what I said, though. Apple only has a common platform for phones and tablets, while Microsoft is extending it to desktops and tv.
post #60 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post

They might get some from Apple, but it's mainly against Android as they make the only other popular OS that can be used by anyone.

The HUGE difference (which will be a big selling point) is MS has an indemnification policy (something Google lacks, and MS loves to make fun of). With all the lawsuits going on this is a big advantage for Windows Phone over Android.

Well, Android has more share to grab from... but eventually, I don't think MS would be too choosy, as long as they are grabbing something. Anything! 1wink.gif
post #61 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post

Do a Google search for "microsoft indemnity agreement". It's the first link that appears and it's a .doc file (I was going to embed the link but it's too long).

This is from Microsoft. However, it's a little hard to follow at times. There have been many articles online about the practical implications of this policy. Most recently relating to Android and WebM (two products that Google does not indemnify users of, yet still claims are not patent encumbered). MS challenged Google on the WebM front recently stating "If Google is confident WebM is free from patent encumbrances, then they should have no problems indemnifying users of WebM".

Here's a perfect example, and so relevant:

MS started going after Android OEMs because Android uses MS IP. Google sat back and did nothing (except whine and complain that MS was basically "extorting" money from these OEMs). MS has since settled with over 20 Android OEMs (including all the big names like Samsung) and they now pay MS royalties for any device shipped with Android.

If Google had the same indemnification policy that MS does, then Google would have taken a license from MS directly, avoiding the need for MS to go after all the OEMs.

What IP has Microsoft identified as being infringed by Android? Google says no Microsoft patents are infringed. AFAIK Microsoft has never offered any proof contrary to that. Not saying it might not be a pragmatic move to take a license anyway but I've not ever seen anything from Microsoft as to what that licensing buys them that they don't already own. Do you really think if Android itself was the problem that Microsoft wouldn't go after Google directly just as Oracle did, particularly with the pressure they feel from Google products?

As far as that indemnification part the quote I offered was from Microsoft themselves., David Kaefer, director of business development in Microsoft's Intellectual Property and Licensing group. He says that Microsoft's embedded offerings are excluded, given that some OEMs are allowed to modify that code. Maybe they've changed it in the past couple of years and cover them even if modified or skinned as an Android licensee does.. Doesn't really matter all that much to me personally in any event and I doubt it will sway manufacturers away from Android and towards Windows, at least not anytime soon. I was simply curious what the MS indemnification covered and when it activated. Thanks for your link.

The tides ebb and flow and someday MS may be back on top again in mobile with Apple and Google looking up at them. That won't be tomorrow despite Microsoft's Google-inspired free OEM software,
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #62 of 113

I watched a couple demos and I must say I'm very impressed, especially with the natural quality of the voice. It's sure come a long way from Microsoft Sam.

Also it's as much a copy of Siri as the Empire Stat Building is of the Eiffel Tower. A voice assistant is a method of input and everyone's entitled to make their own. Add to that the fact that it doesn't look remotely like Siri, and you realize that argument is futile.

As for the name, Halo has made appr. $50M in sales, and even people who haven't played the game have at least heard of it, so using a name from an extremely popular game is actually a very good idea.

post #63 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


Microsoft wouldn't go after Google directly just as Oracle did, particularly with the pressure they feel from Google products?

No. Microsoft would not be able to make any money off Google because Google does not directly make any money off Android.

 

Microsoft simply repeated their Linux strategy. They went against the vendors (Suse, and IBM during the Linux days). They did the same thing with Android, and are getting paid by nearly all Android vendors. They never went against the Linux Foundation.

post #64 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by addicted44 View Post

No. Microsoft would not be able to make any money off Google because Google does not directly make any money off Android.

Microsoft simply repeated their Linux strategy. They went against the vendors (Suse, and IBM during the Linux days). They did the same thing with Android, and are getting paid by nearly all Android vendors.
What do you base the "can't get any money from Google" on? Of course you can. It's not a requirement that a company profit from their infringement to be ordered to pay damages to the IP holder. It certainly didn't stop the smaller and lesser-armed Oracle.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #65 of 113

I owned a 'Holden Cortina' once, I wonder if it is similar to a 'Cortana'?

 

Seriously, Microsoft is either chained in the old world, trying to be everything to everyone, or stuck copying others work, and charging a MINT for the privilege of using their stolen software. Do they really have a future ? - Not now, I don't think so, its going to be a slow decline to death. Nothing to see here.....throw to crickets.

post #66 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post

The copy machine is alive and well in Redmond

Nonsense.

 

Siri is a Clippy ripoff, the latter was a descendant of Microsoft Bob. Microsoft was miles ahead of Apple regarding the development of a personal assistant. 

 

;) 

post #67 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


What IP has Microsoft identified as being infringed by Android? Google says no Microsoft patents are infringed. AFAIK Microsoft has never offered any proof contrary to that. Not saying it might not be a pragmatic move to take a license anyway but I've not ever seen anything from Microsoft as to what that licensing buys them that they don't already own. Do you really think if Android itself was the problem that Microsoft wouldn't go after Google directly just as Oracle did, particularly with the pressure they feel from Google products?

As far as that indemnification part the quote I offered was from Microsoft themselves., David Kaefer, director of business development in Microsoft's Intellectual Property and Licensing group. He says that Microsoft's embedded offerings are excluded, given that some OEMs are allowed to modify that code. Maybe they've changed it in the past couple of years and cover them even if modified or skinned as an Android licensee does.. Doesn't really matter all that much to me personally in any event and I doubt it will sway manufacturers away from Android and towards Windows, at least not anytime soon. I was simply curious what the MS indemnification covered and when it activated. Thanks for your link.

The tides ebb and flow and someday MS may be back on top again in mobile with Apple and Google looking up at them. That won't be tomorrow despite Microsoft's Google-inspired free OEM software,

You are correct in saying we have never seen anything from Microsoft about the patents that Android violates. And Microsoft have a long & inglorious history of strong arming third parties into submission. It may well be pragmatic for phone vendors to take a license. We simply don't know the real story, do we?

Going after Google won't work - they don't produce a saleable product with Android-they give it away- you have to go after the manufacturer who is selling the actual product. Larry Ellison went after Google as favour to  Steve Jobs.

Regarding your comment about Microsoft's Google-inspired free OEM software - no sarcasm tag, so I assume you are being serious. That's all good, but openly acknowledging that vendors inspire each other logically leads to the conclusion that Google's Android was inspired by Apple's iOS. You may want to tread carefully there.

post #68 of 113
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

 

 

This is how large Microsoft thinks people ACTUALLY WANT THEIR PHONES TO BE. :lol:

 

Also, is it the voice actress from the series? Seems pointless if it isn’t.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #69 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by aussienorm View Post

You are correct in saying we have never seen anything from Microsoft about the patents that Android violates. And Microsoft have a long & inglorious history of strong arming third parties into submission. It may well be pragmatic for phone vendors to take a license. We simply don't know the real story, do we?
Going after Google won't work - they don't produce a saleable product with Android-they give it away- you have to go after the manufacturer who is selling the actual product. Larry Ellison went after Google as favour to  Steve Jobs.
Regarding your comment about Microsoft's Google-inspired free OEM software - no sarcasm tag, so I assume you are being serious. That's all good, but openly acknowledging that vendors inspire each other logically leads to the conclusion that Google's Android was inspired by Apple's iOS. You may want to tread carefully there.

Being inspired by a painting, sound, location, person, activity or product happens millions of times a day, every day. No tech is immune to it, and following logic they all find inspiration from outside of themselves. No need to tread carefully, Embrace it.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #70 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


What IP has Microsoft identified as being infringed by Android? Google says no Microsoft patents are infringed. AFAIK Microsoft has never offered any proof contrary to that. Not saying it might not be a pragmatic move to take a license anyway but I've not ever seen anything from Microsoft as to what that licensing buys them that they don't already own. Do you really think if Android itself was the problem that Microsoft wouldn't go after Google directly just as Oracle did, particularly with the pressure they feel from Google products?

As far as that indemnification part the quote I offered was from Microsoft themselves., David Kaefer, director of business development in Microsoft's Intellectual Property and Licensing group. He says that Microsoft's embedded offerings are excluded, given that some OEMs are allowed to modify that code. Maybe they've changed it in the past couple of years and cover them even if modified or skinned as an Android licensee does.. Doesn't really matter all that much to me personally in any event and I doubt it will sway manufacturers away from Android and towards Windows, at least not anytime soon. I was simply curious what the MS indemnification covered and when it activated. Thanks for your link.

The tides ebb and flow and someday MS may be back on top again in mobile with Apple and Google looking up at them. That won't be tomorrow despite Microsoft's Google-inspired free OEM software,

 

You've got to be kidding me. Are you that dense, or are you simply trolling?

 

First off, I told you specifically how to find MS's indemnity document which explains what is and isn't covered (and I mentioned above that mobile and embedded is covered). Yet you ignored that and still continue on with the assumption that embedded isn't covered.

 

Let me make this really clear for you. Here's an article where they talked to David Kaefer (whom you quoted) and he explains that mobile and embedded are now also covered under MS's indemnity policy. He also goes on to describe they were working on this for some time, but it took longer due to the differences between their regular products and embedded systems. BTW, this article is dated AFTER the one you provided.

 

http://www.internetnews.com/ent-news/article.php/3584181

 

What MS IP do they infringe? Again, are you that dense? It's a well-known fact that MS is getting a license fee from virtually all Android handset vendors. MS has a NDA with each of them which is why we don't know the patents involved or the fees agreed to (though many have speculated about both and seem to think $15 per device is what MS makes).

 

In fact, there are so many articles about Android vendors paying MS royalties for each device sold, I'm quite frankly completely amazed you could make such a stupid comment, as if it's not actually occurring. If you you want to find out for yourself, just do a search for "microsoft android licensing brad smith" where Brad Smith is the lawyer for Microsoft who handles the deals. He has numerous blog posts about all the companies they've signed up and is quite specific about how the deal is arranged (that MS gets a royalty for each Android device that infringes MS IP). The only thing he doesn't explain is the patents or the fees.

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply
post #71 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

This is how large Microsoft thinks people ACTUALLY WANT THEIR PHONES TO BE. lol.gif

Also, is it the voice actress from the series? Seems pointless if it isn’t.

What do you mean? Current Windows phones are covering range from 4" to 6". If any company takes for granted what they think phone size should be, it has to be Apple.

There is info that the same game Cortana's voice actress Jen Taylor will be the voice of phone Cortana, but I haven't seen official confirmation (or denial) yet.
post #72 of 113
I'm sorry but I'm just not a fan of the Windows Phone UI. Too much black & white and too much bold and different text sizes. Also I'm not a fan of all lowercase words. The new Spotify app UI on iOS 7 is really nice because it blends black and white with some color as well as the blurring effect that's predominant in iOS 7. It's a nice mix and it's the right font size so you don't feel like you're being shouted at. I'm hoping Apple introduces a dark theme or at least tones down the white a bit. But please don't follow windows phone 8!

33autxu.jpg
post #73 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post

You've got to be kidding me. Are you that dense, or are you simply trolling?

First off, I told you specifically how to find MS's indemnity document which explains what is and isn't covered (and I mentioned above that mobile and embedded is covered). Yet you ignored that and still continue on with the assumption that embedded isn't covered.

Let me make this really clear for you. Here's an article where they talked to David Kaefer (whom you quoted) and he explains that mobile and embedded are now(which means they weren't) also covered under MS's indemnity policy. He also goes on to describe they were working on this for some time, but it took longer due to the differences between their regular products and embedded systems. BTW, this article is dated AFTER the one you provided.

http://www.internetnews.com/ent-news/article.php/3584181

What MS IP do they infringe? (Yes, what does Android infringe?)[/I) ]Again, are you that dense? It's a well-known fact that MS is getting a license fee from virtually all Android handset vendors. MS has a NDA with each of them which is why we don't know the patents involved or the fees agreed to (though many have speculated about both and seem to think $15 per device is what MS makes).

In fact, there are so many articles about Android vendors paying MS royalties for each device sold, I'm quite frankly completely amazed you could make such a stupid comment, as if it's not actually occurring. If you you want to find out for yourself, just do a search for "microsoft android licensing brad smith" where Brad Smith is the lawyer for Microsoft who handles the deals. He has numerous blog posts about all the companies they've signed up and is quite specific about how the deal is arranged (that MS gets a royalty for each Android device that infringes MS IP). The only thing he doesn't explain is the patents or the fees.

Take it down a notch Eric. I specifically commented that perhaps MS had changed their indemnification policy since Kaefer had made the original statement I linked. You've found another quote where they say they have. Thar's nice. Then you jump to throwing more personal insults because you think I and everyone else should believe that paying royalties is proof of Android patent infringement. Sure it is Eric. 1rolleyes.gif If infringement is so blatant and obvious then explain why MS would hide the patents involved. As I recall you consider refusing to disclose the patents being infringed as a sign of patent troll. Right? Yeah there's perhaps some stupid comments being made, but I don't think it's by me.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #74 of 113
EDIT: deleted
post #75 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

This is how large Microsoft thinks people ACTUALLY WANT THEIR PHONES TO BE. :lol:

...Yeah, why not? At least they don't force people into one phone size like Apple does.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

Also, is it the voice actress from the series? Seems pointless if it isn’t.

It hasn't been confirmed yet but it sure sounds like it.

 

EDIT: Yes it has, never mind. Jen Taylor confirmed that her voice is being used for Cortana, but only in part. The phrases she hasn't provided are generated by MS TTS, but she is still recording and as the Beta progresses more of her voice will be used.


Edited by Emes - 4/2/14 at 8:06pm
post #76 of 113
Re name... I'm Playstation person when it comes to consoles, but I like the name. It sounds a bit exotic, a lot feminine, and if I may say, a little bit sexy without feeling cheap. Good name for AI with female "personality". Not that Siri isn't good name as well, I just like more how "Cortana" sounds. Rumour is that voice actress who voiced Cortana in games will voice her in this app, and I think this is nice - she does have great voice and the whole concept warms my gamer's heart a little bit.

The only thing is, there should be "Cortan" male voice/personality for female users - well, everyone who would prefer male personal assistant in general.[/quote]


Is not a bad name. The only thing i dont like id that is sounds like "cortina" which is spanish for curtain. And "cortan" literally translate to "cutting" but they sound good 🙉
Edited by idrey - 4/2/14 at 6:47pm
post #77 of 113
"Actually MS is implying that if you have a program on you PC it will also work on the phone or tablet as well"

Close. The catch with this new feature is that yes, you can use any language, but they have to be Windows RunTime applications, NOT Win32 apps(though I believe they are working on an integration feature like such for another update).
post #78 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by jason98 View Post
 

What an ugly name. They must be thinking that their target customer base are all Halo fans.

It's far better than something like Windows Voice-activated Personal Assistant.

post #79 of 113

'Cortana' sounds like a type of pasta to me.  Or maybe a type of dance.

 

As a name, it strikes me as rather formal-sounding, and not very warm.

 

(If you named your daughter Cortana, what would her nickname be?  How would you shorten/familiarize it?)

Quality isn't expensive... it's priceless.

Reply

Quality isn't expensive... it's priceless.

Reply
post #80 of 113

Welcome, Microsoft, to 2011!  Hopefully Cortana won't have millions of people looking for the premiere of Terra Nova.

iPhone 5 64GB, iPhone 4S 16GB, mid-2011 iMac, Apple TV 2nd Gen, iPod Nano

Reply

iPhone 5 64GB, iPhone 4S 16GB, mid-2011 iMac, Apple TV 2nd Gen, iPod Nano

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • Microsoft reveals Windows Phone 8.1 with Siri-like 'Cortana' personal assistant
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Microsoft reveals Windows Phone 8.1 with Siri-like 'Cortana' personal assistant