New Microsoft Tech Makes Battery Changes a Breeze
in [Embedded]
|
Prev: need ur help for my Masters project(TASM project)
Next: Full-featured Controller Area Network simulator available for free
From: tim.... on 3 Jul 2010 05:21 "Paul Gotch" <paulg(a)at-cantab-dot.net> wrote in message news:yrt*H85ct(a)news.chiark.greenend.org.uk... > In comp.arch.embedded Tim Wescott <tim(a)seemywebsite.com> wrote: >> It doesn't quite meet the "not obvious" criteria -- it makes you wonder >> why Microsoft is even bothering with a patent. > > Because they can and because they appear to be only licensing it > royalty free for certain classes of devices. That is to say certain > ones that don't compete with the thing they developed it for which > appears to be wireless keyboards and mice. Can you see anybody buying a product because of this USP? I can't. It's a nice gimmick, but not one that translates into money IMHO. tim
From: Sylvia Else on 3 Jul 2010 05:34 On 3/07/2010 7:21 PM, tim.... wrote: > "Paul Gotch"<paulg(a)at-cantab-dot.net> wrote in message > news:yrt*H85ct(a)news.chiark.greenend.org.uk... >> In comp.arch.embedded Tim Wescott<tim(a)seemywebsite.com> wrote: >>> It doesn't quite meet the "not obvious" criteria -- it makes you wonder >>> why Microsoft is even bothering with a patent. >> >> Because they can and because they appear to be only licensing it >> royalty free for certain classes of devices. That is to say certain >> ones that don't compete with the thing they developed it for which >> appears to be wireless keyboards and mice. > > Can you see anybody buying a product because of this USP? > > I can't. > > It's a nice gimmick, but not one that translates into money IMHO. > > tim > > It would elminate warranty returns by people who've put batteries in the wrong way. Equipment damaged that way wouldn't usually be covered by warranty, but just determining that that was the cause of the failure costs money. Sylvia.
From: Rod Speed on 3 Jul 2010 05:45 Don McKenzie wrote: > Tim Wescott wrote: >> On 07/02/2010 02:55 PM, Don McKenzie wrote: >>> New Microsoft Tech Makes Battery Changes a Breeze >>> >>> http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2365995,00.asp >>> >>> On Thursday, Microsoft announced a technology called InstaLoad, >>> which will allow you to insert a battery into electronic devices >>> any way you please. >>> >>> The InstaLoad technology will be licensed on a royalty-free basis, >>> Microsoft said. Duracell was named as a partner for the technology, >>> as well as several manaufacturers of electronic devices, including >>> ClearSound's hearing aids, NovaTac's LED flashlights, and Black >>> Diamond's headlamps for mountaineering. >> >> It doesn't quite meet the "not obvious" criteria -- it makes you >> wonder why Microsoft is even bothering with a patent. > Just wonder how tested against little children and preying fingers they are. Just how many children do you know with preying fingers ? > Did Micro$oft test them to the nth degree like they did with Vista? > :-) Likely better than your proof reading.
From: tim.... on 3 Jul 2010 05:59 "Sylvia Else" <sylvia(a)not.here.invalid> wrote in message news:898ehsFs4fU1(a)mid.individual.net... > On 3/07/2010 7:21 PM, tim.... wrote: >> "Paul Gotch"<paulg(a)at-cantab-dot.net> wrote in message >> news:yrt*H85ct(a)news.chiark.greenend.org.uk... >>> In comp.arch.embedded Tim Wescott<tim(a)seemywebsite.com> wrote: >>>> It doesn't quite meet the "not obvious" criteria -- it makes you wonder >>>> why Microsoft is even bothering with a patent. >>> >>> Because they can and because they appear to be only licensing it >>> royalty free for certain classes of devices. That is to say certain >>> ones that don't compete with the thing they developed it for which >>> appears to be wireless keyboards and mice. >> >> Can you see anybody buying a product because of this USP? >> >> I can't. >> >> It's a nice gimmick, but not one that translates into money IMHO. >> >> tim >> >> > > It would elminate warranty returns by people who've put batteries in the > wrong way. Equipment damaged that way wouldn't usually be covered by > warranty, but just determining that that was the cause of the failure > costs money. do you think that anybody returns a 9.99 mouse under the warranty? tim > > Sylvia. >
From: Jasen Betts on 3 Jul 2010 05:56
On 2010-07-02, Tim Wescott <tim(a)seemywebsite.com> wrote: > On 07/02/2010 02:55 PM, Don McKenzie wrote: >> New Microsoft Tech Makes Battery Changes a Breeze >> >> http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2365995,00.asp >> >> On Thursday, Microsoft announced a technology called InstaLoad, which >> will allow you to insert a battery into electronic devices any way you >> please. >> >> The InstaLoad technology will be licensed on a royalty-free basis, >> Microsoft said. Duracell was named as a partner for the technology, as >> well as several manaufacturers of electronic devices, including >> ClearSound's hearing aids, NovaTac's LED flashlights, and Black >> Diamond's headlamps for mountaineering. > > It doesn't quite meet the "not obvious" criteria -- it makes you wonder > why Microsoft is even bothering with a patent. It's stick they can beat smaller players with to get the smaller players to share patents, or profits, with Microsoft. It doesn't matter if the patent is invalid or not unless you have enough money to stand up to M$ in court. It's not the first time they've been granted an invalid patent. If someone had come to me and said "I want a battery holder that will accept an AA cell inserted in either direction and correct the polarity" I'd have designed something similar, but possibly in different materials. One thing's I've seen before is they gave it a name that has very little to do with what the technology does. Was "Rightway" taken? --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news(a)netfront.net --- |