Coming towards the end of 2008, it appears Microsoft has one late xmas present for you (or more likely themselves) with a little nugget of a patent that it is being alleged that they have applied for.
Over on CNET (click here for the article) it is being reported that U.S. patent application number 20080319910 i”details Microsoft’s vision of a situation where a “standard model” of PC is given away or heavily subsidized by someone in the supply chain. The end user then pays to use the computer, with charges based on both the length of usage time and the performance levels utilized, along with a “one-time charge.”
Doesnt that sound great? Id suggest you check out the entire enlightening article for further details.
So will it take off? Would you be happy? With the amount of time it took for me to boot a Windows system when I was running one at home, Id probably run out of cash before the system was even ready to use! Would we get compensation for system failures and crashes?!? That would be a good way to make easy money.
If the allegations are correct about this patent, then this to me is the best example why Microsoft should be challenged. Do we really want to live in a MS PPV world?
Switching on your computer and “having a mess around” is something we can all do without thinking about it, but what if we had to pay everytime? would we get “the basement programmer”? would they be willing/able to afford it? and what about computing for all? can you imagine if MS had this idea running in the mainstream how many people would effectively come off the net purely because it was an extra expense they could not afford? I believe we saw the beginnings of this with the Live Marketplace on the Xbox 360, theres definately no such thing as a free lunch with MS, and in my opinion not only is the lunch very expensive but the waiter is dipping into your pockets while your back is turned.
Microsoft have allegedly said:
“Rather than suffering through less-than-adequate performance for a significant portion of the life of a computer, a user can increase performance level over time, at a slight premium of payments,” the application reads. “When the performance level finally reaches its maximum and still better performance is required, then the user may upgrade to a new computer, running at a relatively low performance level, probably with little or no change in the cost of use.”
and I would reply to the above, that users are suffering les when they discover alternatives. Less-than-adequate performance in my experience has only been an issue when ive use Microsoft products, now they are suggesting that their scheme is a good one because we will finally be able to run MS products acceptably. Yep, thanks for that Microsoft, paying you on a pay per play basis to get the functionality we expect from your software. I think I will stick with Linux though, where tech specs are ahead of the requirements of the software, not the other way around.