Untitled
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| tracyanne Oct 11, 2009 9:10 AM EDT |
Quoting:I’m not sure how well this is going to go down with folk who are used to paying for their software with a single, one-off, license. Does this application reveal that Microsoft is going to get serious about Software as a Service after all? However, as we get increasingly comfortable renting our applications (anti-virus being a prime example) and increasingly comfortable with our software being in the cloud, it is surely only a matter of time before that includes the OS. Anyone prepared to wager if Windows 8 will be the first OS for hire from Microsoft? Shrug, business as usual. More pain for Windows users, but like the frog in hot water, they will adapt as the water gets hotter. |
| Bob_Robertson Oct 11, 2009 1:11 PM EDT |
Or merely Microsoft patenting something first, so no one else does. There should be plenty of prior art on this one, IBM and other mainframe application houses sold software on a time-base decades ago. |
| hkwint Oct 13, 2009 12:45 PM EDT |
Well, if the USPTO did their job than Microsoft added an 'innovative non-trivial step' to the existing IBM technology, or the patent shouldn't have been granted. |
| softwarejanitor Oct 13, 2009 12:53 PM EDT |
@hkwint The USPTO generally seems to not do their job, or at least to do it very poorly. A very large percentage of patents granted probably shouldn't be because they don't pass muster of being innovative, non-obvious or not having prior art. |
| gus3 Oct 13, 2009 1:13 PM EDT |
As a commenter on Slashdot pointed out, one thing's for certain: The USPTO are definitely not hitting the bong. If they were, the examiners would actually read the apps for laughs, and then dump them into the shredder. |
| Bob_Robertson Oct 13, 2009 1:34 PM EDT |
Sadly, the USPTO has fallen into a lazy way of doing their "business". They accept the applications, and wait for someone else to present prior art or otherwise object. No objections, no problem. Patent granted. Then if it's later overturned, it didn't COST the USPTO anything either. They just mark it "void". All the costs are born by the 3rd parties. |
| bigg Oct 13, 2009 1:34 PM EDT |
> As a commenter on Slashdot pointed out I don't know what's worse, the USPTO not doing its job, or reading comments on Slashdot. |
| softwarejanitor Oct 13, 2009 2:59 PM EDT |
@bigg I used to love Slashdot, back when it was only recently evolved from Chips N Dips... But then it devolved and the quality of its community went all to h*ll. Kind of like USENET only faster. Alas. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!