Google Did Not Do "What Was Necessary" and Now Tries To Play Victim

I think patent trolls are bad things for the tech market or any market for that matter.  They represents the worst elements of the system. And the system needs to be reformed.  But at the same thing, reformation of the patent system does to negate one thing:  the need to have patents or the need to innovate.

I fault Google for not protecting Android and not having the leadership to foresee a future in which rivals will not be willing to allow Android device makers to simply usurp the technology they developed by competitors.  

In an interview with Techcrunch, Kent Walker, Google's General Counsel, seems to be suggesting as much.  On top of that, I suggest that Google fire Walker for his ineptitude.  It would have been under his leadership to secure the Nortel patents and he failed to do that.  I see this interview as his attempt to cover his mistakes.

Having lost the bidding with to rivals, he now consider patents to be "government-granted monopolies".  Well, duh.  Then having no patents to back up their own OS, he goes on to suggest that some patents should not be valid without providing specifics.  But Walker has to understand that the Android lawsuits are not about patent trolls, especially in the case of Microsoft.  If he does think the Microsoft situation and patent trolls are the same thing, then it underscores my earlier point:  Larry Page, get rid of this guy now!

Google's history regarding other's intellectual properties and patents are clear.  You'll have to decide which side you come down on and make an honest assessment.  If something path to your final product or process is blocked by a patent, you have one of two choices.  Fight to invalidate it or innovate around it.  

At the moment, Google has done neither and outside of a few sorts, Google's partners could be feeling pretty sore about the whole situation.  Now, if Google decides to foot some of the payments and legal fees....

Mozilla - Firefox To Become Mobile OS

"Boot to Gecko" is Mozilla's answer to Chrome OS and new entry into the mobile market.  And it will not be for netbooks but also tablets and phones.  And it seems like Mozilla is taking aim directly at Google and trying to do for the mobile in ways that Android has failed to do.  Failed in what ways depends on your perspective.

Mozilla promises real-time openness without Google's invisible hands and the times when Google controls things with Android that is not entirely transparent.  In essence, The Firefox OS or whatever it'll be called will be truly open in ways that Android is not.

Now, you've noticed that I don't want to call this exciting new project by its current given name because it is pretty lame.  "Boot to Gecko"?  Please, Mozilla.  I think Firefox OS sounds better, don't you think?

And yes, this is very exciting news if Mozilla can truly come through.  We need more competitors in the mobile market than not.  One thing I think Mozilla has to be conscious of is that it will avoid stepping on the toes of the current incumbent OS patent-wise.  

The ultimate goal is "breaking the stranglehold of proprietary technologies over the mobile device world".  I know that sounds good.  Let's see it happen.

Does it really have a chance to compete against Google's Chrome and Android?  There could be a core group of mobile warriors, "purists" I like to call them, who are likely going to endorse this Firefox OS wholeheartedly.  I wish them the best.  Again, there is no words on how to get around current patent restrictions, the overwhelming lead that Android and iOS have, or if Mozilla has any heavy weight tech companies supporting it.

Still, we should be watching this closely.  Maybe it might not work to the extent we hope but it could at least keep Google more honest with Chrome OS and Android, both of which are neither open and has become more and more proprietary with each release

Source:  CNet.

Clear's New Spot; WiMax Strong at 1 Billion Users

If you're new to the mobile scene, you should know that Clearwire, is a company partly owned by Sprint that provides the WiMax network in the United States.  It's not doing well.  But I'm hopeful.  And I'm hopeful that my iSpot will see a lot of milage for years to come.  I am expect another three, maybe four, years before the WiMax network in the US changes for good

Meanwhile, Clear is still trying to capture a piece of the lucrative wireless data market.  And even without my iSpot, which connects only to iOS devices for $25 a month, this new $99 Spot 4G from Clear is in its own right, a pretty compelling deal.  See, I went with my iSpot because I wanted to see if I can live off this $25 a month rate without owning a phone.  I did that for about seven months before I got reapplied for the iPhone and Triumph.

So, my question is you is whether anyone out there is running their home network off an WiMax hotspot like this.  Typically in my area, I am gettting between 4-5 Mbps downstream and about 1Mbps upstream.  

My only issue with these mobile hotspots is that their battery life is pretty limited.  During my iPod touch and iSpot experiment, I typically ration between whatever public hotspot I can find and the iSpot.  It would be terrific if these come with the option for a larger battery.  

I have on some occasion artificially increased the iSpot through external battery sources.  But it really beats the point about mobile if you're forced to carry an extra device.  

But then your mobile needs couple possibly be very different from mine.  You may need mobile connect only for a little while at a time.  Then any Spot from Clear could be what you're looking for.  And unlike the data plans from T-Mobile, Verizon, and ATT, Clear's "unlimited" still means unliimited while competitors are still looking to nickel and meter you to death.

Regardless of the portability issue, I think the death of Wimax chats are premature given the limited LTE rollout by Verizon Wireless in the US and ATT who have yet to even have one LTE market.  Furthermore, the complication in the wireless market generated by the ATT and T-Mobile merger could give Sprint and Clear's WiMax a second look by mobile warriors.  And Sprint is the only major carrier left that still offer truly unlimited data plans.

And to top all this off, there are currently 1 billion users connected to the Internet through WiMax (Wireless Week).  I think we're quite  away off from the WiMax network in the US being taken down for any reason whatsoever.  

Interesting Data on In-Game Payments That May Say A Lot About Who We Are As Gamers

Here is an interesting fact about gaming, free-to-play games and just how much we'll pay. And apparently, the average amount a dedicated player is going to expose their wallets to is $14 per game.

This is dramatically higher than "free" that these players were willing to pony up to start with.  However, there are not that many players with the willingness to pay that amount.  

What potential game developers should realize is that they need to understand as long as they can develop a large following with free to start and can retain a loyal following, they can expect to the revenue to start flowing in.  But just 3% are willing to spend the $14.  

I can't say if that's good or not.  Of course, there is the ad revenues that also come into play for most free games.

Source:  Toucharcade.

Reasons For Closing Fake Apple Stores In Kunming Shows China Is Not Serious About Interllectual Properties

The reason that the Chinese government in Kunming gave for closing the fake Apple stores was not over intellectual property rights or trademark issues but over the lack of permits to operate the stores.  

I know the Chinese government has a seriously need to save face, like all the time, but these kinds of double speak at home and saying something else entirely whenever a Chinese official visits a Western nation shows just Beijing either has no control over the situation or they are no serious whatsoever about enforcing international laws.

How bad is this?  Only two of five stores were shut down.  So, I am guess the other three has the backing of the local government through actual business licenses or has the local political boss' support.  

What's worse?  The people who work there actually thinks they work for Apple.

Source: Pulse, Reuters.

Retina Display Coming To the Macs - We Just Don't Know When

It looks like Retina display is coming to the Macs.  When?

it's anyone's guess but Arstechnica has a good detailed section on it within their Lion review article.  It's definitely must read on both accounts.

Again, the question is when will this happen?  I think Apple is likely trying to leverage this technology as soon as it can.  It'll be inconceivable that its competitors can move fast enough.  After all, Apple is probably going to update the iPad with the Retina display sooner rather than later.  This could mean that the economy of scales of the iPad screens can also help Apple absorb any increase in display prices for the Macs in the future.

That said, when Apple increase the  iPhone 4 due to it having the updated Retina display over the 3GS, it could be promising that the Macbooks, iMac, and the Cinema displays get Retina upgrades without much if a price increase if any.  I would not be shocked if Apple does provide the current LCD display with the Retina option in future Mac upgrades.

Such a move could potentially bring the new Retina displays faster to the market.  Let the customer chose if they want to pay a premium for better displays.  Therefore, I disagree with Arstechnica's assessment that we will have to wait quite a bit longer for it.

Source:  Macrumors, Arstechnica.

Amazon's Next Quarterly Earnings - Will Tax Collection Requirements In California Impact It's Earnings?

I'm a simple person when it comes to commerce taxes and whatnots.  So, when California, my home state asked for taxes to be collected by out-of-state online retailers, to me it made sense.  For too long, many residents, myself included, buy from Amazon because it was not only cheaper at some brick-and-mortar stores, you did not have to pay taxes upfront

Well, there is sales taxes on your online purchases which you're supposed to send to the state yourself during the course of the year or during tax filing times.  Billions of dollars of taxes were lost over the course of the last 12 to 13 years.  

I'm not here to debate that issue.  I'm wondering about the tax issues as it relates to Amazon's earnings.  California itself is the 9th biggest economy in the world even as we struggle through our own recession and employment problems but we continue constitute a large percentage of Amazon's online market.

Now for many online buyers, there may be no reason to buy from Amazon if they are forced to automatically pay the sales taxes.  They can go to local and home-grown retailers like Buy.com that could offer similar prices and, since the fulfillment centers are in California, we could also get our goods faster.  Or they can just go with local retailers' online sites like Costco, Target, and Walmart that often ship to the store for pick-up.  This is an option for Best Buy online purchases.  I reckon that those retailers could get a piece of Amazon's revenue should the affiliate embargo continues.  

At the end of the day, it all comes down to pricing as smart consumers continue to shop for the best prices around.  But I also expect a push by local retailers to fill any short-term gaps created by Amazon's exit.  

In the coming election cycle, Amazon is trying to put the issue to the voters.  Left of center Californians.  And they run the risk of permanently damaging relations with voters and the government.  And that could have a long-term impact on its ability to profit from California  

Note: I totally get the other side of the tax revenue issue as well.  Hundreds if not thousands of companies will be moving their operations to one situated out of California.  Just how this will play out is anyone's guess.  

Another Note:  I think there could have been some compromises that be worked out for a transitional period.  Amazon and etailers outside of California has had an advantage for years because they did not  have to collect taxes from Californians.  And they could also fold that into the pockets of shareholders and be able to pay affiliates.