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.
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 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.
"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".
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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!
Comments
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
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?
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 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.
It was original to SRI, from the start. But the important thing is to deny Apple credit.
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".
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.
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.
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.
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.
When android was released swiping wasn't the standard method.
But you are right. Android is now also copying from Windows Phone.
Quote:
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.
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.
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.
When android was released swiping wasn't the standard method.
But you are right. Android is now also copying from Windows Phone.
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.
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!