SuperSite Blog

I see no windows key. Wonder what they plan to do with the OS for it.

Paul

Comparing just the hardware form factor is as silly as saying that your Lenovo ThinkPads and your MacBook are the same thing as an HP-110 from 1984 because they're all clamshell laptops.

Paul,

Have you seen those two phones with your eyes or touched them ?

Have you used them ?

So how the hell, can you have even a remotely viable opinion of them ?

Since when the look of a smartphone really show how worthy it is ?

i th

Just adding to the "If they're the same form factor they just copied"

The Apple ][ is just a copy of the Processor Technology SOL20

The IBM PC is just another 3-box like virtually every system out there since people hooked keyboards and video displays to their Altairs.

The Compaq Portable is just a copy of the Osborne 1

The Apple Macintosh is just a copy of the HP-150 but without the touch screen

What the hell? I agree with Mike.

I'm gonna have a beer to celebrate this momentous occasion.

And just to add to that

The Microsoft Courier Tablet (yet to move on beyond anything rendered on a screen) is just a copy of the Apple Knowledge Navigator from 1987.

"mikegalos@msn.com said: Paul Comparing just the hardware form factor is as silly as saying that your Lenovo ThinkPads and your MacBook are the same thing as an HP-110 from 1984 because they're all clamshell laptops."

Ahh. I was going to write precisely the same thing, but couldn't be bothered to find the model of a well-known-laptop-from-yonder, and didn't know the term "clamshell".

I think the focus is on the software and developing reference designs - as opposed to any specific, or past/existing hardware design, including those pictured here.

Like the Zune HD appears to be as much of a reference design as a product in and of itself, I assess the pictured devices to be as much design mules

as they may eventually emerge as actual products.

I think Paul's stated perspective is unfortunate, because it seems short sighted. Nothing Microsoft has done the past couple of years has

been anything but indicative of the execution of long term strategies populated with solid intermediate products and releases.

These look like concept designs anyways.

Robert

While I might give you some latitude on these supposed leaked shots, the Pure isn't really a copy of anything, it's just a continuation of the slide out keyboard form factor, as Mike and others have stated.  Can you call it unoriginal?  Yes.  A copy?  Not really.

I'd really like to see the software, though.  The Pre form factor itself is blah in my mind, but I like the WebOS software very much, and that is what attracts me to the device.

Regarding form factors, there is really only a few different ways to make them.  The only one that actually had a different form factor is the new Nokia Twist.  Everything else is pretty much either a clamshell or a candybar.

Pingback from  Twitter Trackbacks for                 Microsoft's smart phone strategy: Copy, copy, and then copy again - SuperSite Blog         [winsupersite.com]        on Topsy.com

This is not PINK!!!! bunch of idiots are running around the web spreading rumors cause they want to be the first to break news of MS's phone. This is MS/Dangers forte into the second gen sidkick family. They will be made by sharp and will be dumbphones with a hint of Zune connectivity for music downloads. This has been blown WAY out of proportion and people need to stop. MS owns Danger and danger is releasing some new sidekicks, that's all and nothing else!

I wish Paul would share with us what he's trying to accomplish.

I mean, if he's trying to get Microsoft to do something in particular, or innovate around a specific feature - I wish he'd just say up front what that is and if that is the case (or not).

I think purpose and intent matter a lot when interpreting what our industry's pundits have to say - it is very easy to misinterpret their work and some context is needed.

Copying or not, I have a phone already and it works fine still.

Pass.

Paul,

Ouch! Did MSFT miss sending you a check this month? Talk about biting the hand that feeds you.

I dig that Jessica Smithson chick.

If the form factor of the "Turtle" phone doesn't require displacing a 16:9 widescreen display, I would favour the smaller design in a natively front-facing style over a larger side-slider phone.  It just looks more easily pocketable.

If the form factor of the "Turtle" phone doesn't require displacing a 16:9 widescreen display, I would favour the smaller design in a natively front-facing style over a larger side-slider phone.  It just looks more easily pocketable.

Maybe they'll copy the "innovative" way Palm breaks the rules to allow iTunes syncing. Whaddya think, Paul? Good idea? After all, you praised Palm for it when they first pulled this stunt.

arstechnica.com/.../usb-group-none-too-happy-with-palms-itunes-hack-either.ars

lotsa

The question isn't whether Paul thinks Apple intentionally changing iTunes' sync interface to keep competitors out is "innovative", or whether the USB consortium thinks it's inside the letter of the spec, it's whether the DOJ thinks it's "anticompetitive"...

prs

I had the advantage of not having to look up the HP-110 since I still have one sitting in a closet. (It still works on AC power but the lead acid battery is long past its lifespan)

Great little product for its day. Built-in apps in ROM including Lotus 1-2-3, HP-IL interface, equivalent of SSD storage and rugged enough to survive repeated 6 foot drops onto a concrete floor.

Pingback from  Microsoft’s smart phone strategy: Copy, copy, and then copy again | The Software Nook

Mikey, we all know how you feel about standards and specifications. "If Microsoft didn't make 'em, they don't matter."

I'm going to swim past your irrelevant "DOJ" bait. It has EVERYTHING to do with Palm breaking the rules. Period.

Seriously who gives a rats arooose about the hardware.  Each vendor will have 5 versions of their own, made by HTC and others, so if you dont like these two there will be many, many more.

I want to know about what is on the screen.  Is that the new OS or just some simple graphic?  Will that new OS access the Zune store?  With the monthly pass?

Now that is funny.....

www.appleinsider.com/.../google_sneaks_webkit_html_5_support_into_internet_explorer.html

Pingback from  » Microsoft's smart phone strategy: Copy, copy, and then copy again …Phones:All about it

lotsa

That's really, really funny.

You honestly claim that "standards" forced poor, little Apple into having to block a competitor from integrating with their monopoly product.

Wow

www.cnn.com/.../index.html

again......who is looking like a fool?

rrode:

You know what Google's app/mail reliability record is like?

Try over 35 outages in the last 18 months.

And it's supposed to be business ready???

Totally OT (but a great article)

4sysops.com/.../seven-reasons-why-it-pros-who-skipped-vista-should-regret-it-now

Nice try, Mikey. Your body must hurt from stretching like that.

"NoNameAtAll said:...I have a phone already and it works fine still. Pass."

Right. You, personally, are not in need of a phone at present. Well, thanks for that. Are there any other banal fact about your current condition you think we should know? Have you just had your shoes resoled? Too cold? Not hungry at the moment?

lotsa

Not a stretch, that's what you're claiming. Poor little Apple was force by big bad Palm and the requirements of "standards" to make sure that nobody could use their monopoly product except Apple.

Poor, poor Apple. Always getting blamed for abusing their monopoly to screw over their competitors, partners and users when everyone knows they're just doing what the "standards" people are forcing them to do.

Seriously, you really believe that?

Again, Wow.

"lotsamystuff said: Nice try, Mikey. Your body must hurt from stretching like that."

That's good enough for me. I mean, if you've sneered at something, then it must be wrong. Who needs reasons anyway?

mike Galos is right Paul and also... What do you want Microsoft to do if they cannot use a soft keybord because this will copy IPhone and they cannot do a hardware sliding vertical keyboard because this will copy the Palm Pre and they cannot do a hardware sliding horizontal keyboard because this will copy the HTC Magic?? Do you want they do a sliding diagonal hardware keyboard... Heeee... This is just not a good idea ... so ... You know these design are not own by any company so why don't use good ideas from others... Like alot of companies doing on their back...

I really don't understand your point on this Paul ... These Phone seems to be great!!

"Microsoft's smart phone strategy: Copy, copy, and then copy again"

Take out "smart phone" and you have a good summary of Microsoft's approach:

"As the war of Operating System dominance wages on, Microsoft is taking a new approach to solidify itself as a premiere but-not-so innovative company. Their plan: blatantly copy Apple’s computer store experience and brand it as their own."

www.steele-agency.com/.../innovation-vs-carbon-copy

What's the big disappointment here Paul? Microsoft's creed has, and always will be, to copy.

Admit it. Except it. It's the first step in the program.

Mike,

I think you need to look up the definition of a Monopoly.

While the IPod/ITunes combo is certainly the most popular way that consumers choose to buy their music players and music, it shows none of the price discriminating or market controlling behavior.

Q) Does Apple have the power to dictate pricing to their suppliers?

A) No.  While a few years ago, Apple was able to keep the record labels from raising prices above $.99, that is no longer the case. In fact, all suppliers of content to the itunes store can pretty much name their price. Apple is not able to unilaterally dictate pricing to their suppliers.

Q) Does Apple charge a monopolist premium for ITunes content or iPods.

A) Certainly not for content. The prices at Itunes are pretty much the same as every other store out there.  As for the hardware, their prices are in line with other hardware in the same range. Zune HD vs. Ipod Touch.  Ipod Classic vs. Zune, etc.

Q) Is there a lack of competition in the market.

A) No. There are literally dozens of on-line stores where consumers can purchase content. In additional there are hundreds of devices available in a variety of shapes, sizes, forms and functionality available for consumers to choose from.

Q) Does Apple in any way prevent competition from creating their own hardware, software, or on-line stores to compete with iTunes/iPods.

A) No.  Apple does nothing to prevent others from marketing their own devices, or creating their own stores. As evidenced by the above, there is significant competition as choice available to consumers.

Just because Apple chooses not to license their property to others, does not prevent others from creating their own.  

"chuckb84 said: "Microsoft's smart phone strategy: Copy, copy, and then copy again"

Take out "smart phone" and you have a good summary of Microsoft's approach:

"As the war of Operating System dominance wages on, Microsoft is taking a new approach to solidify itself as a premiere but-not-so innovative company. Their plan: blatantly copy Apple’s computer store experience and brand it as their own.""

Indeed. "Store experience" is the litmus test for literally everything else. If something as subjective and esoteric as a "store experience" (whatever it actually means) is copied, then everything else must be copied as well.

@wae, I would never use gmail for anything other than a front to my personal email.

I would use in this order.....

hosted exchange for small company......

SBS/Exchange for a small to growing company that has an office/s 10-250

full blown Exchange for a corporation.

Kerio makes some interesting stuff for the small - medium.  For a small all Mac shop, SL server's email would work fine.

Mike can I plug my iPod or Palm Pre into the Zune software and sync with it?

Pingback from  Microsoft's smart phone strategy: Copy, copy, and then copy again … | Cdcopy new online

These phones look like pieces of crap. I hope these are only concepts. The form factors are horrible; the Turtle looks like its made for a 5 year old or something. The keyboards are incredibly sparse (but then again I'm used to my Touch Pro's 5 row keyboard with 57 keys, which is far above average). Surely they could fit a few more keys without cluttering it.

And apparently these aren't even smartphones. Does Microsoft even care about Windows Mobile anymore?

They look very nice. I would like to buy the wife a smartphone with a large screen that does not require a data plan, as she would never use the internet, but likes the smartphone PIM stuff, and needs a bigger screen than the Treo. I don't dig paying the $30/month for the iPhone data plan when her usage would be 0 MB/month, but she can use the big screen.

yoshipod,

Bravo! An outstanding reply!

Indeed. It's not like Apple is coercing stores to sell only iPods (like Microsoft did with OEMS to thwart sales of the Be OS). Nor does Apple require something proprietary like AppleScript to access the iTunes store now that they've established dominant marketshare (like Microsoft did with ActiveX and IIS).

Now sit back and watch as the resident history revisionists pop their heads out of the sand and pipe out their zealous dismissals.  

You really don't know much about WinMo phones Paul.  I'm on my fifth in 4 years with the arrival of my HTC Touch Pro 2.

The Touch Pro 2 at least for the moment has a better screen and speaker phone than any device on the on the market.  800x480 WVGA 3.6" screen, blows an iPhone so away.  This is a phone OTHERS will be copying and are starting to already.

As for the phone on the top, ever heard of the HTC XV6600 introduced 4 YEARS AGO?  Look it up and then get back to me about who copied who.

Pretty bad stuff  here Paul.  I'm a big fan but you dropped the phone on this one!

rr0de

"Mike can I plug my iPod or Palm Pre into the Zune software and sync with it?"

Nope and if Microsoft had a dominent position in the portable music player market that would be an issue.

But, it turns out, Apple DOES have monopoly power in that market. As such, the rules are different.

"ever heard of the HTC XV6600 introduced 4 YEARS AGO?"

I have.  That was the precursor to the PPC6700 that I had before the Moto Q.  It was a chunky little phone, but the keyboard was superior to the tic-tac style keyboard on the Q.  I still have it, even though it's deactivated.  UT Starcom was the North American distributor of HTC phones back then, and most had UTS's logo on them instead of HTC.  That was before HTC branded their phones, and they released them mostly as ODM devices through distribution.

Yoshipod

Actually, I have quite a bit of experience with US antitrust laws so I'm not as confused as you appear to be.

Your "Q&A" shows you don't understand the terms "monopoly", "supplier", "price control" or "competition" as they're used in antitrust law. You see, making up your own meanings for terms really doesn't mean that words now mean what you wish they did.

I may not be a lawyer but I sure know that what you wrote bears no resemblence to the law.

Apple has monopoly power in the music sale market, the music retail store market and the music player market. At each possible interface Apple exerts control beyond what a monopoly can do to prevent competitors from participating in the controlled markets.

Can non-Apple music players interface with iTunes? Nope

Can non-Apple stores interface with iPods? Nope

Can non-Apple software interface with the iTunes Store? Nope

Can users use iTunes to purchase products from non-Apple stores? Nope

Can users use their iPods to sync with non-Apple software (using Apple released and supported APIs)? Nope

Just a few examples of Apple's abuse of their monopoly power.

Ok Paul, I'm kind of confused. Isn't this what you've always wanted from Microsoft? For them to make their own kind of phone instead of OEMs!?

" I don't dig paying the $30/month for the iPhone data plan when her usage would be 0 MB/month, but she can use the big screen."

I wish my data plan only cost me $30/mth.

My current data plan is $45/mth, was "unlimited" (up to 5GB) when I started, but has now been reduced to 500MB for new subscribers.

I'd really like to see all data offered at the same rate, not this segregated data packages where IM data is different from web/app data, is different from TXT'ing data, is different from email data, etc.

If Microsoft can commodotize these into the sub-$100 market, I could see many people getting these.

IANAL but isn't it great that not only does mikegalos develop software he is also a lawyer. It can surely only be a matter of hours before a competitor of Apple reads this blog, exclaims 'Why did we not see this all along' and complains to the DOJ. Sell! Sell! Sell your Apple shares now!

I hear ya, Wae. Also, my hospital discount drops the fee to $23/month. I'm just cheap that way ;)

The ATT smartphone selection sucks. The only phone that she would like would  be the iPhone. I might just get her the new 3GS for XMAS. I'd still rathe get her the Touch or Storm without a data contract. But you have my sympathies, especially with health care up there ;)

Mike -

"Apple has monopoly power in the music sale market, the music retail store market and the music player market. At each possible interface Apple exerts control beyond what a monopoly can do to prevent competitors from participating in the controlled markets."

No it does not. There are many competitors to Apple. Apple does nothing to prevent such competitors from existing. It does not interfere with other online stores making deal with content providers. It does not try to stop hardware manufacturers from coming out with new music players. In no way does Apple do ANYTHING to prevent competition. It simply does not let others take advantage of their work.  

"Can non-Apple music players interface with iTunes? Nope"

There is nothing wrong with that. They don't need to support their competition.  Why can't Palm write its own software to interface with the Pre. Apple is surely not preventing them from doing so.  They are not preventing ANYONE from writing software for either OS X or Windows that syncs with a music player. They are simply not allowing competitors to use their software which costs them millions to develop.

"Can non-Apple stores interface with iPods? Nope"

But you can put any non DRM music you own on your ipod regardless of where you get it from.  Apple does not prevent you from buying your music from other on-line stores and playing it on your iPod.  In fact, there are numerous ways to get music to play on your ipod. The itunes store is just one of many.

"Can non-Apple software interface with the iTunes Store? Nope"

"Can users use iTunes to purchase products from non-Apple stores? Nope"

Once again, since there is plenty of competition who cares.  Does Target have the right to sell CDs in Walmart's stores? Apple created their software and store, and does not have to open it. Market share does not equal monopoly. Monopoly and anti-trust are about preventing competition. Apple is in no way preventing competition by not opening up itunes/ipods.  There is a vibrant market for both music players and music purchases. Consumers have plenty of choice and price competition.

"Can users use their iPods to sync with non-Apple software (using Apple released and supported APIs)? Nope"

I have not tried it with my iPhone,but in the past there were plenty of software programs not written by Apple that allowed you to access iPods.  Once again, because it is not an open system, does not mean it is an abuse of monopoly.

"Just a few examples of Apple's abuse of their monopoly power."

Nothing you have said shows any abuse or even the existence of monopoly power on Apple's behalf. All you have shown is that Apple has a relatively closed system with iTunes/iPod.  However, since there is plenty of competition, and Apple does NOTHING to prevent others from entering the market or negotiating with the same suppliers and distributors, is not illegally undercutting the prices to drive out competitors or engaging in monopoly pricing towards consumers (eliminating the consumer surplus),  there is no monopoly and therefore no abuse.  

In short,  Apple does have by far a very large market share. However, there is plenty of competition in every area of the music industry from distribution, to software, to hardware.  Apple does not use its market share in anyway to illegally manipulate the market.

Closed System != Monopoly Power

yoshipod,

Once again a brilliant retort!

"Right. You, personally, are not in need of a phone at present. Well, thanks for that. Are there any other banal fact about your current condition you think we should know? Have you just had your shoes resoled? Too cold? Not hungry at the moment?"

I'm giving my opinion on the subject. Nothing more. If you don't like it, then disregard it, rather than act like some elitist jerk.

Actually, you're not even being elitist. You're just being a ***. I said nothing that should've provoked such a post from you.

I'm not taking sides in this fickle Apple vs. Microsoft gig. I'm merely commenting on what I'm seeing. So lay off.

Yoshi,

Nope. If you have monopoly power than a "closed system" is absolutly abuse of that power. You're just flat out wrong there.

Each interface that isn't open to competitors equally as to your own internal divisions is considered restraint of trade.

I'm sorry that you think the rules shouldn't apply to Apple but they do. And they've been violating a TON of things. If the DOJ rules them a monopoly (not, in and of itself a bad thing anymore than ruling somebody a "small business" is a bad thing - just means you get different rules) then Apple is going to face a LOT of very, very serious issues with a very likely outcome that they will have to open up the APIs on iPod, iTunes and the iTunes store to competitors and possible split up the store and the hardware/software products into two separate companies with no contact that isn't equally available to all their competitors.

trieste

I am not a lawyer but I've been through the DOJ anti-trust process when I was with Microsoft in the 1990s and I know a lot more about it than the people here who are almost totally just guessing about how they think it works or expressing their own wishes as though they were facts.

While it is expertise I'd rather have not spent several annoying years gaining, it is, in fact, actual experience.

Mike,

You still have not shown that Apple has monopoly power, or even that it is a monopoly.

Market share != Monopoly.

"In economics, a monopoly ... exists when a specific individual or an enterprise has sufficient control over a particular product or service to determine significantly the terms on which other individuals shall have access to it.... Monopolies are thus characterized by a lack of economic competition for the good or service that they provide and a lack of viable substitute goods." - Wikipedia

Given there is plenty competition and the availability of substitute goods, Apple does not have a monopoly.  Given that Apple does not have sufficient control over the portable music player and online music distribution systems, Apple does not have a monopoly.

"Each interface that isn't open to competitors equally as to your own internal divisions is considered restraint of trade."

So I can use the Zune software to sync to the music player I am developing?  I can sell my products through Xbox live?  Walmart has to stock my products on their shelves?  Best Buy has to carry the CD I just recorded in their on line store? That does not make sense.

I think what you are getting at is that when you have a monopoly, like Microsoft had with Windows, then not opening it is restraint of trade.  The problem with this argument is that OS X is open. Anyone can use the APIs to create their own music software, hardware, and store that run on it.  Apple's interface is OS X and Cocoa, not Itunes.

The rules certainly apply to Apple, the problem is they have not broken any.  You seem to think that just because they have a dominant market share that they are a monopoly. They are clearly not.  I have shown there is plenty of competition and consumer choice.  There are dozens of companies that make music players and dozens more that sell music.  Apple's market share does nothing to stop that.

If Apple was preventing Palm for distributing software to sync the Pre to OS X or Windows, that would be a problem.

If Apple was stopping Amazon from selling MP3s from their online store, that would be a problem.

If Apple was forcing Best Buy to not carry the Zune if they want to sell ipods, that would be a problem.

As long as the DOJ uses Wikipedia for legal research, Apple should be fine.

Look at Mike coming in with a frenzy of activity to defend Microsoft's lame phone offerings. Not only is the hardware bad, the software is even worse.

Does anyone have the first inling this is real? Are these plants? By another sorry media hungry blogger, or maybe MS themselves? Who the hell knows. So stop with the oh I hate this or that and wait for what is real. like tomorrow!!!

"Each interface that isn't open to competitors equally as to your own internal divisions is considered restraint of trade."

Citation, please?

"But you have my sympathies, especially with health care up there"

WHAAA??!?

I have a family doctor, and it doesn't cost me a cent.  I can also get emergency care without needing private insurance.  I don't have to wait at a walk-in clinic, but people will if they're sensible enough (and most people are around here) not to bother the hospital ER for stupid sh!t.  Our walk-in clinic isn't big for the size of the town, but I've only had to go once for a cold bug that was going around town, and I only waited about a half-an-hour when it was full, so it's pretty efficient.

Of course, if you're talking about doctors not making it rich like they do in private practises and HMO's in the US, then I guess you'd have something to complain about.

I know that most people here will buy health insurance before going to the US though.  Many will get it even for day trips, in the event that they're stuck there in an emergency.

I've seen drivers on the other side of Niagara Falls, so I know the score.

"Each interface that isn't open to competitors equally as to your own internal divisions is considered restraint of trade."

"Citation, please?"

EU vs. Microsoft

>> like Microsoft did with ActiveX and IIS

Actually, ActiveX was, and is, open to anyone who wants to bother to take the time to learn COM. It was developed at the same time the Unix world was creating a competing technology. This is back  in the days of IE 3 if I remember right.

IIS is an open platform, again, all one has to do is bother to learn the technology (there are PHP variants that run under IIS) and be willing to code in C++.

Even though both were developed by Microsoft, neither is closed technology.

>> "Each interface that isn't open to competitors equally as to your own internal divisions is considered restraint of trade."

Pure nonsense, written by a bunch of lawyers don't don't know how to program, driven by a bunch of lazy programmers who can't be bothered to figure out how to read either an SDK.

yoshipod,

If this were thoroughbred racing you'd be the Triple Crown with these responses. Well Done!

I hope everyone now understands that a monopoly does not equal market share but rather market control.

Monopoly definition aside, we should also note that Apple didn't resort to giving iPods away in order to establish their market share (loss leader), but rather earned it by offering a product that the majority of consumers saw value in and ultimately were willing to pay for.  

BTW Doc:  this so-called Socialist regime health care system allows me to choose my own doctor, despite what the whackjob Republicans would have you think.  Of course, who actually believes anything they say anyway?  Bill O'Reilly is probably more satirical than his wannabe protege Stephen Colbert....not to mention that our gov't IS Conservative, and yet our health care system is still fairly moderated.

My old family doctor retired, so I looked for another one that's available.  There are MANY doctors in the area that are looking for new patients (doctors can turn away new patients if they feel they have too much of a burden already, just like I can tell people to go to the other computer store in town to get service if they want it in a rush and I can't guarantee their requested completion date).  I picked one, and am happy with them, but I could easily choose one of the other 8-10 doctors in the area that are currently accepting patients if I wasn't.

Sorry Wae, the stats that you give are not the norm in Canada where waits can be months for typical stuff where there is no wait in the US. Here's a favorite of mine showing real people in Canada, unlike Moore's scripted version.

www.pjtv.com/.../2153

"Each interface that isn't open to competitors equally as to your own internal divisions is considered restraint of trade."

"Citation, please?"

"EU vs. Microsoft"

Therefore this has no bearing on US law.  

Okay, first things first: there are waits for health care in the US, and there are waits for it in Canada. The difference is that Canadians don't have to talk to a company whose primary goal is to avoid covering you.

On to the phones.

Yes, these are copies. There's only so much wiggle room, but both Pure and Turtle are so similar to existing designs (look at the Samsung Propel Pro or Motorola Hint for Turtle-alikes) that it would take a tremendous effort from the operating system and underlying guts to truly separate it from the pack.

Looking forward to HTC dropping nearly all its Windows Mobile projects in favor of Android at this rate.

@mikegalos - "Apple has monopoly power in the music sale market, the music retail store market and the music player market."

If I am not mistaken, only 1 of those things is true - the music player market. If you add the word "digital" or "online" to your descriptions, they may become more true. As you like to point out, just because you say something is true, does not make it true. Details, mikey, details!

--tayme

""Each interface that isn't open to competitors equally as to your own internal divisions is considered restraint of trade."

"Citation, please?"

EU vs. Microsoft"

Is this true in the hardware interface world. I believe that the MS issue was in the software interfaces...again, details matter.

--tayme

My opinion on the Palm vs Apple deal is that if there was a legal issue with it, Apple would have lawyers working on it instead of programmers.

--tayme

There is the written law and then the is the laws that are upheld.  

Apple maybe close, to some definition of monopoly, is some areas, digital distribution of media probably.  However because they dont use the bully tactics that Microsoft has in the past probably means nothing will happen to them.

Microsoft was huge (is still) and acted like arssse hats, using their power to make it really hard for other competitors, and they attracted attention.  Once they started coming after MS, MS acted like they did not care.....and they have payed dearly for their arrogance.

This stems from Microsoft not being as innovative as others, so they must protect their market share another way, while they copy something and then 3 versions later their version can compete with almost as good products and giving it away free until their competitors run out of money.

"Each interface that isn't open to competitors equally as to your own internal divisions is considered restraint of trade."

"Citation, please?"

"EU vs. Microsoft"

In other words, you got nothing.

Yeah Paul.. I have to agree with the early posters here... I'm not sure you can really say anything about a phone just from its form factor.

The reality is, we're talking about the exterior of a phone... there are only so many designs that make sense and work. Copying a form factor, especially this late in the game pretty much just tells me that these are the form factors that work.

Ultimately it's what the phone does, and how it does it, that really matters.

>> This stems from Microsoft not being as innovative as others, so they must protect their market share another way, while they copy something and then 3 versions later their version can compete with almost as good products and giving it away free until their competitors run out of money.

Same old, tired stupid argument that others use to put Microsoft down because they don't like Microsoft - trouble is, those making the claim can't seem to put up much in the way of examples.

Hmm, Microsoft is planning on spending $9.1 billion in research alone for 2009 - sounds like they are serious to me about innovating.....

"What the hell? I agree with Mike."

Me too!

"I'm gonna have a beer to celebrate this momentous occasion."

Me too! Or maybe a *case* of beer!

"Copy, copy, and then copy again"

That's been Microsoft for all time. Lame is Microsoft. Microsoft is Lame.

Microsoft is clearly threatened by Chrome:

arstechnica.com/.../microsoft-google-chrome-frame-makes-ie-less-secure.ars

How pathetic is that?

And why wouldn't they be? In a short time Google has surpassed IE in the browser game. If you know about IT, even if you don't, and you "prefer" IE -- you have no intelligence whatsoever.

It's clear that Paul, Mike and Microsoft are on the defensive. Feeling terribly threatened. They are on a slow moving tanker (Microsoft). Wasted a lifetime with the inferior products and now they'll say anything to justify such wasted time. Its hard to admit you were wrong, right? If not, if you think it's all good, then you have no taste. I think it's a little of both.

Another example of how bad IE8 is looking these days:

"IE 8 runs ten times faster with Google Chrome plug-in"

Microsoft must be hating this. Threatened, surely!

news.techworld.com/.../internet-explorer-8-runs-ten-times-faster-with-google-chrome-plug-in

This is what Microsoft is and does, Paul isn't always so scathing.  He hasn't been over Bing, or the Windows Stores [complete with 'Gurus'], or xbox Avatars/Natal...  just to name/shame the latest and greatest 'me too's.

@roteague  "trouble is, those making the claim can't seem to put up much in the way of examples."

There would have been no Zune HD, had their not been a iPod Touch.  The new Microsoft stores are a photo copy of the Apple stores.  These are the most recent.

Copy or not, I'd would really like to buy one for my wife.

But it's a phone and has a screen , and keyboard. There probably not many possible usuable or ideal combo's other than what's on the market, so every one copies each other.

I know Wae, I'm El Cheapo. But I probably ewill get her a smartphone with a data plan as all the other ATT phones have small screens, so we're probably stuck with the iPhone data plan. We like the phone, but she just doesn't need a data plan. But, I will give her the new one [3GS] and keep my jailbroken 3G. FREEDOM!

"I have a family doctor, and it doesn't cost me a cent. "

I always figured you were a tax evader, Wae.

It "costs" you, alright. To claim otherwise is to be blind to reality or deusional. You pick.

"It "costs" you, alright. "

That depends on if his store is successful or not...if he is below the poverty line, it very well may not be costing him anything.  ;-)   <--- Wink, wink; nudge, nudge; say no more!

--tayme

"NoNameAtAll said:

Actually, you're not even being elitist. You're just being a ***. I said nothing that should've provoked such a post from you. I'm not taking sides in this fickle Apple vs. Microsoft gig. I'm merely commenting on what I'm seeing. So lay off."

All right. Fair enough. Sorry. My response was indeed draconian.

Y'know, these phones might actually be a hit if Microsoft markets them as well at they're marketing Windows 7, what with launch parties and such.

Yep Chip, you would think that a large install base with Windows should welcome a WinMo phone, and WinMo 7 has yet to be released. They could easily grap a large market share, especially with the right data plan. Sell affordable, or less expensive plans [rather than force you with one, like ATT iPhone] and ppl may flock to the stores. Gotta keep the phone price as low as iPhone as well. Charging less for a limited data plan, but more for the phone may not work.

"Here's a favorite of mine showing real people in Canada"

The line "As seen on Fox News" automatically discredited that.  What they state isn't the norm.  Emergency healthcare is immediate.  What isn't, is elective surgeries.

As they mention though, specialists are hard to come by.  That's not an issue of socialized health care - that's just an issue of supply not meeting demand.

Also the part about a public clinic recommending a family doctor is a laugh, because it doesn't cost anything for a private family doctor.  When a clinic is full, that happens.

Oh, and btw: It isn't owned by the government.  It's REGULATED by the gov't.  There are no "public" health care organizations anymore.  They are all businesses.  In fact, back when the government DID own the hospitals, they ran it as a much tighter ship.  Ever since they started doling out contracts to private organizations, it's been slipping - that's the problem.  And your Republicans want to do the same thing.  Huge amounts of money have been lost to hospital administration.  What ends up happening is our health care will end up like your insurance, where the government will just bail out the private companies.  Because the Canadian government already regulates private companies, it's a quick step to scratch their back when it gets itchy.  When the government was in control, the public was able to point the finger at them, so there was better accountability.  Now the government has a proxy to blame.

"if he is below the poverty line, it very well may not be costing him anything."

Sorry, but I'm not, TYVM.

Regardless of my income or insured status, I can get emergency medical care, as can all other citizens in my country.  Can you say that?

Wae, stick with computers. I've been a doctor for 23 yrs. Most of medicine IS ELECTIVE, not emergent. The long waits in socialized sytems and 'national systems is as bad than having no insurance. The reason that there is a supply probklem is because NOBODY WANTS TO BE A DOCTOR IN CANADA. AND your health care is rationed. Your taxes are very high to pay for big government, which is partly why you pay more for your phone service.

Other countries have tort limits, but Obama is pandering to the lawyers. ALso, other countires pay for much of the medical training. Not so in the US where can end up with $ 200K to $ 300K in school loans. If you want to fix the sytem in the US, do it right. Regulate the abusers, which are namely the drug companies and insurance companies. Since around 20% of the expense is due to defensive medicine, regulate tort too. But that won't happen because the trial lawyers lobbyist.

Docotrs spend too much time with bureaucratic paperwork, and not enough with patients, because of government rules and regulations, and insurance companies that are hell bent on denying needed care [they call it pre-authorization]. Of course in Canada, you just would not get the service. Where malpractice is put of a control, doctors had left states, creating a void of services, including neurosurgery and high risk obstetrics to the point where needed services are sparse in states with high malpractice, but not so in states where there is tort reform. Fix this and provide more free governemt services will decrease cost. If not, you're just adding expense and not fixing the real problem.

But this is OT so I'll stop. However, I am indeed an expert on the matter.

BTW, no one gets turned away from a US ER for emergencies if they have no insurance. Our hospital alone does multi-millions of dollars in indigent care. They send out bills, but don't get paid. My group alone did $ 3 million in pro bono services because of the lack of insurance. They don't get told to leave the ER because they cannot pay. The waits can be long at busy times because the ER is used as a clinic for the uninsured, many of which are illegal aliens, although probably not the majority. But we take care of them like another patient. I don't even know that they have no insurance when I perform any serivce, including angioplasty/stent work, or just reading a chest xray. I jsut don't get paid, just like any other doctor treating them. What's important is that I give them competent care, not getting paid, although it would be nice too.

Steve Ballmer was quoted as saying: "when 1.3 billion phones a year are all smart, the software that's gonna be most popular in those phones is gonna be software that's sold by somebody who doesn't make their own phone."

" NOBODY WANTS TO BE A DOCTOR IN CANADA"

I know that.  That's why there's very few specialists.  Specialists in the US get paid huge money when they open up their own practise or work for an HMO.  I know this, because I know of 2 doctors that recently moved to the US for that exact reason, one of which is my father's cousin, and another is a doctor that my mother, who is a retired RPN, worked with.  These are doctors, wanting to get rich off the US health care system.  You call it broken.  I call it abused.

" Your taxes are very high to pay for big government, which is partly why you pay more for your phone service."

Also not true.  The government (specifically, the Canadian Radio and Telecommunication Commission, or CRTC) doesn't regulate the cellphone industry.  They used to in the 90's when there were 6 different companies, most of which were US offshoots, like Cantel AT&T, Sprint, etc.  They decided the industry didn't need further regulation because there was enough competition back then.  Only 2 of the original companies still exist (Bell and Rogers) but they aren't same companies they were back then.  Now there's basically a tri-opoly of companies, and no gov't regulation.

".... insurance companies that are hell bent on denying needed care [they call it pre-authorization]. Of course in Canada, you just would not get the service."

There's another difference.  If it's life-critical service, insurance companies can't deny service in Canada.  In fact, the government regulates those industries already.  If it's needed care, they can't deny service either, and the doctor's get the final say, not the insurance company, so you're wrong about that last part.

" I don't even know that they have no insurance when I perform any serivce, including angioplasty/stent work, or just reading a chest xray. I jsut don't get paid, just like any other doctor treating them."

See that's the difference.  Doctors in Canada get paid regardless.  It's not a commission job.

"The waits can be long at busy times because the ER is used as a clinic for the uninsured"

Our ER's aren't.  Our clinics are publicly-accessible, regardless of insured status.  The admin nurse for the ER will redirect non-emergency patients to the clinic.  They get pissed if someone comes into the ER with a cold or sore throat or whatever, and send people out if the clinic is open.  Otherwise, people will wait according to emergency priority.  Obviously, ambulance emergencies will take a high priority over waiting patients too.

"Where malpractice is put of a control, doctors had left states, creating a void of services, including neurosurgery and high risk obstetrics to the point where needed services are sparse in states with high malpractice"

That's another topic of interest.  Malpractise lawsuits aren't common in Canada.  All doctors and nurses require malpractise insurance now, and Canada's law system is not the same in the US.  In Canada, like in many other countries, the loser pays the legal fees of the winner, which nearly eliminates frivolous lawsuits.

Eventually, our health care system will end up like Ontario Hydro, where government ran it as a public utility, and now it's been deregulated, and private providers and distributors abuse the public's requirement.  Our health care system has begun to fail because private organizations are turning it towards the ideals of "Americanization".  That's a commonly held truth that most doctors and health care workers believe.

www.profitisnotthecure.ca/.../americanization.html

All hail to Yoshipod.

Our fictious intellect Mike has again been put in the shades by facts. Not too difficult, but for this I salute thee, Yoshipod.