So anything that relies on the device layer is not going to be supported (Sound, Frame-Buffer, etc). Any respectable nerd would already know this.

The old slashdot would have posted a detailed story on why some Android Apps will not work on the Blackberry/iPhone/Win7 phone etc.

Enjoy.

Every time I see these Windows 8 stories I keep thinking ESPN 8, the Ocho.

We need a new slashdot meme around here anyway.

Enjoy,

In this case, careful review by a number of hardware makers has led them to pay Microsoft to license the patents. We may not know exactly what they are using but you can bet the companies paying Microsoft had to have pretty good proof before they simply handed over per-device fees to another company.

I doubt that. All the companies that have licensed the patents for their Android devices also ship Windows devices. More than likely Microsoft threatened them over Windows pricing if they didn't agree to the patents. See the monopoly trial transcripts on Microsoft's use of predatory pricing tactics.

The one Android using company that didn't license the patents also doesn't ship any Windows versions. According to Barnes and Noble the patents are weak. See

http://yro.slashdot.org/story/11/04/28/039255/BampN-Responds-To-Microsofts-Android-Suit

Food for thought,
Enjoy.

I hear he will live on as a kernel module.

insmod linus

insmod: can't read 'linus':

Trouble is Redmond didn't innovate. Powershell is a weak copy of IBM OS/2 Workplace Shell / System Object Model (SOM).

See here: http://www.warpspeed.com.au/cgi-bin/inf2html.cmd?..%5Chtml%5Cbook%5CToolkt40%5CWPSGUIDE.INFl

Enjoy,

Blasphemy. My limited edition "Woz" IIgs has a 65816 in it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WDC_65816/65802

Enjoy,

* BTW what is broadband?

An upgrade from 300 baud to 14400 without any government assistance.

Enjoy,

Network Neutrality was lost the day they/we allowed E911 calls over the internet. The network neutrality folks would argue that P2P traffic has the same priority over 911 VOIP packets. They don't.

I'm using Verizon as a sample because thats what I currently have (Replace Verizon with whatever ISP you have). Should Verizon discriminate packets between a streaming video NetFlix user and an FiOS on-demand video user on their network? No. If I was the NetFlix customer I would file a consumer complaint. Should Verizon discriminate between me watching on-demand and the NetFlix user watching a streaming video while the P2P Verizon user downloads Debbie Does Dallas from Russia at the same time? Yes, if it interferes with the paid for transmissions. Both I and the NetFlix user paid extra (State/local Taxes, Fees, etc.) for the priveledge of watching an un-interrupted streaming video.

In the USA, this isn't a Federal issue its a local issue. Its a grass roots effort that requires you to go down to the local zoning/franchise board in your community. Get the Franchise ISP's to sign a some sort of customer Bill of Rights. If they violate it, then they loose the franchise. The community gets to vote for a new ISP.

We, the USA internet users, need to craft this Bill of Rights for our ISP's. Not, congress, not the president, and especially not the courts. Make the internet Bill of Rights a GPL/ANSI/ISO/FSF etc. standard. How do we do this? I don't know. Maybe usenet, IRC, etc. Maybe each local ISP block needs to send two users to a internet forum to discuss, debate, and ratify. Then those users take it back to the ISP users for a vote. That's how the US constitution was formed. Its how democracy works.

Food for thought,
Enjoy,

The 5 primary Desktop computers in my home run Linux. I purchase services (annual subscriptions in Microsoft speak) from the NFL/MLB/HBO and several others. They all work with Linux. They all work with my Windows Netbook, Wii, MacBook, and Linux Laptop. The producers know the product they produce is viewable with Linux and several other OS's. They get my subscription fees while Microsoft doesn't. Check it out, I'm not tied to any platform.

        Cross platform does not mean Windows XP/Vista/CE/7 only. Cloud services does not mean Windows XP with IE 99 or Windows 7 with IE 8.5. Cross platform and cloud services mean Droid, Windows, Linux, Mac, Blackberry, iPhone, HP, Wii, PS3 or any other platform that is standards compliant.

Come out with a .Net runtime with Silverlight that runs native on Multiple non-Microsoft platforms. And no, Mono sucks and is full of traps.

My rant.
Enjoy

Motorola makes other devices besides phones that use Windows. Why is Microsoft suing one of their own partners? Do they want Motorola to drop Windows all together? Dell, Acer, Symbol, Samsung etc. will all pay attention to this. Microsoft to partners: "In the future, as a Microsoft partner, we will dictate to you the OS your product uses or else we will sue you! We don't care if your hardware requirements cost more using our software."

Why not sue Google directly. Apple didn't, Oracle did. It doesn't matter if Android is open source or not, if Google violated your patents then sue Google. I'm not suing the DOT if my automobile has a flaw. I'm suing the source.

This reeks of extortion. Why isn't Microsoft targeting other Android phones? Oh, the manufacturer also supplies Windows based phones. I think the DOJ needs to re-open the Monopoly case again, specifically the section that details how Microsoft once used office/windows pricing to abuse the hardware manufacturers. Hey IBM, you owe Microsoft $500 million for Windows licenses because you also provide OS/2. Dell only owes us a $100 million for the same amount of licenses.

Those patents listed are weak at best except for the FAT one. Hey Microsoft, users have been synchronizing network data since before 300 baud modems. Rsync pre-dates ActiveSync, and I have scheduled a meeting using a (Yes a) Motorola beeper back in 1995

Motorola owns a shit-load of patents too. Is Microsoft doing the right thing? My inner Yoda says: The patent wars they have begun.

The technology group at Microsoft and the legal/marketing group at Microsoft are not on the same corporate page: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/10/strange-bedfellows-eff-apache-back-microsoft-in-patent-dispute.ars

Microsoft isn't interested in cloud computing. Instead of offering services to Android users (Office, Silverlight, .net etc), they are more interested in protecting the Windows hegemony. This means they have no plan for providing internet services to non-Microsoft clients wanting to use/subscribe to Microsoft cloud applications

Lets discuss..

Enjoy,

Don't know why you got modded to 1. I'd mod you +5 for getting the patent numbers together.

5,579,517 "Common Name Space for Long and Short File Names"
5,758,352 "Common Name Space for Long and Short File Names"

So, these two are the the infamous FAT patents.

These are the only two that will stand in court. All the others have prior art. Does the droid phone support fat out of the box?

Enjoy,