Microsoft boasts patent licenses with over half of Android market

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 46
    conradjoeconradjoe Posts: 1,887member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TBell View Post


    On top of that Google isn't making money on Android. When you consider all the patents Google has bought and the purchase of Motorola to try and defend Android, it is losing money.



    You say that, but you have no hard information. You say that, but you have no way of knowing if it is true or false. You say that, but it is just wishful thinking. You say that, but you are just taking out of your
  • Reply 22 of 46
    kpomkpom Posts: 617member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ConradJoe View Post


    Apple is running scared. They know that Andorid will be the new Windows, if it gains traction. Their strategy was to prevent that at all costs. Litigation is expensive - and so far, Apple has gotten only very limited relief. A tablet here and there has been delayed in the market, not much else.



    I think their primary concern is Samsung, which is about the only Android OEM capable of selling a high margin product. HTC has mixed loyalty (committing to Windows Phone as well as Android), and Motorola Mobility's products tend to be lower margin.



    While Apple needed the AT&T exclusivity in order to launch the product, I think it was a year too long. That said, I don't think Apple ever expected to dominate the smartphone market in the same way that it does the music player and tablet markets. Nokia, at its peak, had about 45% of the market, mostly made up of low-end devices sold in markets that Apple doesn't compete in. Android seems to be taking up most of that business, as well as winning the converts from RIM. Where it's a threat to Apple is in devices like the Galaxy Nexus or Samsung Galaxy S II, which are high margin products that can cut into Apple's share of the high-end market.
  • Reply 23 of 46
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MaroonMushroom View Post


    I don't think Oracle is a fraction of a threat to the platform.



    Microsoft may make some money off of the Samsung devices, but in the end it won't be near $15 per device.



    We'll see how it all pans out. But Android and the OEMS aren't going anywhere.



    while you may be right about Android not going anywhere, the delicious irony of Microsoft leveraging not just licensing but additional use agreements (as reported elsewhere) for the Windows mobile platform by the OEMs is interesting. Their interface and platform development is different and potentially strong, but given the lock-in effect that the current OSes tend to have - they will have to bring to the table something significantly compelling to pry loose all those Android and iOS users from the respective platforms.



    The question is how long will Google push Android as it does now. As long as they can deliver Android on low-end "smartphones" that continue to erode the feature phone market, Google is well-positioned. Remember Android is functionally not a profit center - which is demonstrated by the fact that Google doesn't report Android broken out in its financial filings, choosing to lump it in under (optimistically assuming of course that it produces) "Other Revenue" that is only, as an aggregate of all other revenue activity outside of search/ad, a paltry 4%.



    The OEMs are not seeing the huge profitability from smartphones originally anticipated, with the possible exception of HTC and possibly Samsung.
  • Reply 24 of 46
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ConradJoe View Post


    You say that, but you have no hard information. You say that, but you have no way of knowing if it is true or false. You say that, but it is just wishful thinking. You say that, but you are just taking out of your



    These sorts of entries lead one to ask if perhaps you might have aspberger's syndrome or something similar.



    Back On Topic: The fact that Android is not broken out as a profit center for Google in it's financial reporting, and that ALL other revenue streams outside of ad/search amount to about 4% of revenues, demonstrates that Android IF it is making any money for Google is not making significant amounts. That can be essentially established from the financial reports without significant extrapolation.



    If Android was in fact delivering significant revenue for Google, it would be broken out by Google to demonstrate its viability financially in the filings and reports. It's not, and therefore can be reasonably discounted as as a major profit center. Wishful thinking and hopeless optimism on your part for Android doesn't make the numbers look any better in the financials, no matter how Google tries to mask it's status.



    Ultimately marketshare is only meaningful as a statistic if it represents impacts to profitability and viability as a platform. Since Google derives no significant revenue from Android, and the OEMs struggle to build profitability with smartphones using Android. To constantly proclaim that Android is winning on marketshare as your sole statistic is rather silly, and ignorant.
  • Reply 25 of 46
    macrulezmacrulez Posts: 2,455member
    deleted
  • Reply 26 of 46
    wovelwovel Posts: 956member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    You couldn't possibly know that.



    Oracle's lawsuit has the potential to totally eviscerate Android. Now, no one knows how it turns out, but the potential to have the entire core of the OS ripped out is clearly a major threat.



    Indeed. Without Java there are no apps, not even googles.
  • Reply 27 of 46
    steven n.steven n. Posts: 1,123member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ConradJoe View Post


    When they start losing money on Android, they will need to face that decision. As of now, you may as well ask the same question about Apple and the iPhone.



    They ae already billions in the hole with playoffs measured in many many years, if ever. Google paid over 12 billion for a failing hardware business with a vast, but strategically weak, patent portfolio.
  • Reply 28 of 46
    steven n.steven n. Posts: 1,123member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DrDoppio View Post


    So Google is losing money on Android? Wouldn't they have included that in their financial report?



    Try don't break it all down. We don't know if the mobile revenue has development costs stripped out. What about the billions and billions spent on M&As? Toolset development?



    Due to the minor revenue reported for all of mobile (with an estimated 60% from iOS) and the known 15-20 billion spent building/defending Android, we know for a fact it is loosing F

    Google an average of about 4-5 billion/year with no end in sight for the mounting losses.
  • Reply 29 of 46
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post


    Probably.



    Oracle is less of a threat than people think but we will see how that pans out. Apple as well as they seem to focus their efforts on more specific things. Microsoft is an extortionist through and through and I'm shocked people are all for it simply because they are being anti-Android.



    Apple is the most just of the anti-Androiders especially when going after Samesung.



    But alas, the patent system being what it is, and Microsoft probably having a patent on everything under the sun I could understand why they feel the need to strong arm everyone for protection money.



    They stayed static in the mobile OS field...OSX is gaining on them, Android took all their old customers...and their new OS isn't selling well.



    They still gotta eat.



    PS...articles like this are why you have so many "fandroids" on this site.



    How can you be sure that M$ is simply extorting money from OEMs and don't have viable patents that are infringed upon? We already know that Android infringes on SOME IP from Apple and Oracle from the ongoing court cases because either Google or the infringing OEM (HTC) has admitted as much. It's not a huge leap to think that M$ also has some IP that is infringed upon. Would you prefer that M$ act as Apple and NOT try to negotiate licenses and just sue them like others?



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MaroonMushroom View Post


    I don't think Oracle is a fraction of a threat to the platform.



    Microsoft may make some money off of the Samsung devices, but in the end it won't be near $15 per device.



    We'll see how it all pans out. But Android and the OEMS aren't going anywhere.



    Guess what, M$ won't make the $15 as long as the OEM continues making WP7 phones. The minute that they stop making them, the $5 price goes back up to $15. Just ask B&N.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Nairb View Post


    Says a lot for Microsoft mobile OS when a phone manufacturer is better off paying Microsoft money not to use their OS.



    Actually, they aren't. If the OEM stops making WP7 phones, then the price triples. So basically, M$ is being paid by OEMs to MAKE WP7 phones.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ConradJoe View Post


    You say that, but you have no hard information. You say that, but you have no way of knowing if it is true or false. You say that, but it is just wishful thinking. You say that, but you are just taking out of your



    Oy. Simple addition and subtraction of the stuff we KNOW about shows that Android is nowhere near profitable. Lawsuits, purchase of Android, cost of development and purchase of patents AND Mototrola. Google reported $2.5B in mobile advertising revenue which doesn't even break out revenue from non-Android devices. Not profitable. . . yet.
  • Reply 30 of 46
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MaroonMushroom View Post


    I don't think Oracle is a fraction of a threat to the platform.



    Microsoft may make some money off of the Samsung devices, but in the end it won't be near $15 per device.



    We'll see how it all pans out. But Android and the OEMS aren't going anywhere.



    Just how does that work out -- especially if Google ends up indemnifying the handset makers for their costs.



    AIR (to lazy to surf), in the Moogle discussions, somewhere, Google is estimated to get about $6 per year in ad revenue per Android handset.



    If that is true, and the handset makers must be reimbursed for MS and Oracle licenses -- it could easily exceed $15 per handset. And if the average life of a device/contract is 2 years -- every Android activation will be a hit to the Google bottom line.



    'Course, maybe we'll see an accurate accounting of Android/device sales -- just to satisfy the IRS
  • Reply 31 of 46
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post


    Just how does that work out -- especially if Google ends up indemnifying the handset makers for their costs.



    AIR (to lazy to surf), in the Moogle discussions, somewhere, Google is estimated to get about $6 per year per Android handset.



    If that is true, and the handset makers must be reimbursed for MS and Oracle licenses -- it could easily exceed $15 per handset. And if the average life of a device/contract is 2 years -- every Android activation will be a hit to the Google bottom line.



    'Course, maybe we'll see an accurate accounting of Android/device sales -- just to satisfy the IRS



    Actually, Schmidt said that he HOPED to get $6-10 per handset. No evidence that Google has reached that goal.
  • Reply 32 of 46
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ConradJoe View Post


    Apple is running scared.



    Can't we please get some trolls with IQs > 50?



    Apple is running scared? Their profits are growing faster than the entire industry. Sales growing by substantial double digit rates. Record profits - and projections for another incredible blowout quarter coming up. Everyone else seems to be spending more energy copying Apple than innovating. Great new products.



    I'll bet the rest of the Fortune 500 would love to be 'scared' like that.
  • Reply 33 of 46
    kbrkbr Posts: 8member
    Since the new Amazon Kindle Fire uses a fork of Android I would expect that Microsoft will go after Amazon as well. I think when the other phone makers pay Microsoft they get a discount if they agree to make Windows Phone 7 phones but since Amazon doesn't make any phones they might not get a discount. Since Amazon has been recognized to be selling the Kindle Fire at a loss this will just increase their lose. Also the viability of Microsofts patents will be tested when the suit between Motorola and Microsoft comes to trial.
  • Reply 34 of 46
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by KBR View Post


    Since the new Amazon Kindle Fire uses a fork of Android I would expect that Microsoft will go after Amazon as well. I think when the other phone makers pay Microsoft they get a discount if they agree to make Windows Phone 7 phones but since Amazon doesn't make any phones they might not get a discount. Since Amazon has been recognized to be selling the Kindle Fire at a loss this will just increase their lose. Also the viability of Microsofts patents will be tested when the suit between Motorola and Microsoft comes to trial.



    You are correct that the handset makers get a discount for making WP7 phones. See my post above. B&N was asked to pay $15 per device because it doesn't sell any other tech devices that can utilize M$ software. I do wonder if Amazon would be in a different boat though since it is a 3rd party computer seller.
  • Reply 35 of 46
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    Can't we please get some trolls with IQs > 50?



    Or at least not single-digit?
  • Reply 36 of 46
    conradjoeconradjoe Posts: 1,887member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Steven N. View Post


    Try don't break it all down. We don't know if the mobile revenue has development costs stripped out. What about the billions and billions spent on M&As? Toolset development?



    Due to the minor revenue reported for all of mobile (with an estimated 60% from iOS) and the known 15-20 billion spent building/defending Android, we know for a fact it is loosing F

    Google an average of about 4-5 billion/year with no end in sight for the mounting losses.



    Wow. You sound like an ANALyst.



    Except you have no information other than what is fed to and then regurgitated by the media, via all the other ANALysts who have entire departments to do research.



    No?
  • Reply 37 of 46
    tsatsa Posts: 129member
    Has Microsoft actually shown which of their patents are violated, or is this exactly the same as the whole Linux patents thing? And if so, why don't all these Android companies work together to get rid of MS once and for all?
  • Reply 38 of 46
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by tsa View Post


    Has Microsoft actually shown which of their patents are violated, or is this exactly the same as the whole Linux patents thing? And if so, why don't all these Android companies work together to get rid of MS once and for all?



    Was wondering that myself for a while. But there may be legal reasons why they can't commingle their patents plus they compete against each other as well.
  • Reply 39 of 46
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by tsa View Post


    I think I miss something here. Has Microsoft actually shown which of their patents are violated, or is this exactly the same as the whole Linux patents thing? And if so, why don't all these Android companies work together to get rid of MS once and for all?



    The patents have been shown to the companies that have products which infringe on the patents.



    After being shown these patents a majority of said companies agreed that they were infringing on these patents and need to license the technology from Microsoft.



    As to why these companies don't work together to get rid of MS once and for all one has to assume that a collaboration of companies with products with infringe on Microsoft patents don't have any more solid legal ground to stand on than individual companies with products with infringe on Microsoft patents.
  • Reply 40 of 46
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Firefly7475 View Post


    The patents have been shown to the companies that have products which infringe on the patents.



    After being shown these patents a majority of said companies agreed that they were infringing on these patents and need to license the technology from Microsoft.



    As to why these companies don't work together to get rid of MS once and for all one has to assume that a collaboration of companies with products with infringe on Microsoft patents don't have any more solid legal ground to stand on than individual companies with products with infringe on Microsoft patents.



    I'm pretty sure every electronics company in existence violates at least 1 of Microsoft's patents...not hard to strong arm a smaller company into complying with Microsoft's wishes.
Sign In or Register to comment.