Microsoft patent application hints at pay-as-you-go PCs
By Donald Melanson 
posted December 29th 2008 4:47PM
posted December 29th 2008 4:47PM
Heavily subsidized computers are hardly a new idea, as evidenced by the number of carriers now offering "free" netbooks, but a recently revealed patent application indicates that Microsoft might be thinking about taking the idea a few steps further. Apparently, the company is at least toying around with the idea of offering a computer with "scalable performance level components" and selectable software, which sounds somewhat similar to the "managed PC" that Microsoft developed with Korea's KT telecom a few years back. That would effectively let users only pay for the features that they used, with some added graphics performance or storage space simply a few bucks an hour away, as helpfully illustrated above. To prevent folks from "unlocking" the PC, each computer would also come equipped with a security module and metering agent that locks the PC to a particular supplier, and presumably offers up a whole host of other restrictions. Of course, this is a Microsoft patent application and, as we've seen, that hardly assures an actual product.
[Via Electronista]
[Via Electronista]
Chuck Norris would kick Microsoft's ass for this
It's just a patent. I'd rather have M$ patent this and never deliver than this idea going patented and becoming commonplace.
besides, this isn't that bad of an idea for those public terminals you find in airports and hotels. those things charge about $1/min just to check your mail.
Dear MS....go fuck yourself. I will NEVER lease my computer or software. Go ahead and try it. See what happens. I dare ya.
How on earth is this new?
And how could it even get past the patent office?
IBM's been doing this FOR AGES with their servers and mainframes (zSeries, for example).
anything pay by the hour = fail
I see this as a way to reign in computer prices. Sure you can get a cheap "metered" computer and pay your monthly "computing" utility bill, or you could pay out some serious wing wangs to buy an "un-metered" computer. If something like this catches on and is actually secure, say goodbye to the sub-1000$ computers we've come to know and love.
This is what I've been telling you fools for some time. MS runs the pc through its fucking software! And you say Apple is screwing you. Fucking assholes. Yeah, you can pick up a pc on the cheap and god knows engadget and the rest of these tech sites shower their pages with new pcs every damn day. That is the trade off, give MS your fucking soul for a cheapo pc with a bunch of bells and whistles. Now the consumer will start looking for an alternative to this shit but it is toooooo late. Yall done gave MS an extraordinary head start. their swag power almost everything. Thank you!
And you wonder why Apple keeps it OS to itself. Apple will soon be making its own chips. They are positioning themselves to be independent of intel. God knows they don't have that stank known as MS to power their shit.
This article appeared to focus on the abstract and the disclosure of the patent, and suggests that the language in those sections determines the scope of the patent rights -- rights to exclude others from commercially exploitation over the patent term in exchange for public disclosure.
However, the relevant portion of the patent document for ascertaining patent rights are the claims, which are enumerated at the end of the document, in a very specific linguistic art with special legal interpretations. In that sense, I believe this article may be somewhat misleading.
The filed claims may be amended during the course of the application process, to overcome prior art to arrive at something patentable. In many cases, this results in very narrow claims being ultimately issued, and thus becoming legally binding if valid.
In this particular case, all the claims have been rejected by the examiner in a first office action. This means that the claims can be argued over the examiner's findings, or may be amended to overcome the prior art cited by the examiner. As such, it is questionable whether the issues raised in the article would ever actually come to pass in view of this particular patent application.
I am certain that there are already many patent claims issued in the "pay-as-you-use" segment of computing. The published office action should theoretically point to the closest references with regard to this Microsoft application, but there are likely hundreds of other patents out there covering various aspects in this space.
One processor (the best of the best)
One speed of ram (the best of the best)
etc
Just pay for the performance you need.
Brilliant!
Hmm, so how many dollars per gigahertz hour?
Not so simple as it starts at 2GB and ends at 8GB.
No way even Microsoft implements pay as you go/micropayments on a PC. The idea as presented in the diagram is just horrible and cringe-inducing, this must be some sort of exploratory patent.
Here's a pretty good idea on why micropayments in general have not made a significant splash-
http://www.shirky.com/writings/fame_vs_fortune.html
Even if we're talking about larger payments than what are traditionally considered 'micropayments', I think the same basic arguments would hold here.
This article appears to misrepresent the actual situation in the "pay-as-you" use space for methods of paying for software. This MS patent is simply a tiny modification of the method, and there are many issued patents in this space. As such, this entire discussion appears unfounded and misleading. I am amazed that such misrepresentation of the facts would hit the news wire and be picked up by CNN.
This is even worse than using Windows to begin with!!
ShamWOW it is not! This thing better make Waffles!
More crappy Pay-as-you-____ services.
Jesus, after your done paying all the little extras, you minus well drop the 275 for a crappy netbook, or just upgrade to a cheap 350 Acer Aspire One (what I am using to write this comment)...
DEATH TO MICROSOFT HUZZAR! HUZZAR! HUZZAR!
it would definitely be hacked and the whole idea would go out the windows :-)
Lame!! M$ is in business in spite of itself. When will they actually innovate? Probably never.
uh, this article is reporting on an idea that seems pretty innovative to me
So, the way I use my computer, I run it either 12 or 24 hours a day, and I am always running audio and or video, often painter/photoshop, often DTP, often lots of other stuff, games, Maya... Always a browser... and I mess with and tweak shit all the time, so I reckon that I would be at least to 2$ an hour... @ 12 hours= $24 a day * 365 = $8760, or, more succinctly... MS fuck off, I will use my current gear to the end of time with all open source code in a heart beat before I allow you so far up my ass that I hear you talking out of my mouth...
cheers.
Actually, I think the idea is that you would purchase a base computer with minimal features. Then, through the magic of the internet, you can supplement your computer's hardware through microsoft's server farms to increase your computer's performance if perhaps you want a lag-free gaming experience for an hour or two.
As I recall, the US Patent office issued a patent to Amazon for "one-click shopping". Given enough money, I suppose one could get a patent on different ways of using toilet paper. At the core of this initiative is Bill Gate's obsession to try and get a patent on all the various ideas Microsoft has expropriated from others over the years, starting with the graphic operating system they ripped off from Apple. Apple had earlier ripped it off from Xerox, who based their Star System in 1981 on ideas which had agglomerated over a period of two decades prior to that.
At every turn, greed-driven entrepreneurs have attempted to take ownership of the entire pyramid of man-hours, trial and error, and little fragments of innovation, most of them a function of timing and circumstance, which have evolved into a reasonably coherent, albeit massively complex infrastructure of global computing.
At the heart of it all has been the failed attempt by Gates, and his legions of millionaire sycophants at Microsoft, to take ownership of all that, an effort which has cost the global economy trillions in the form of gratuitous changes in standards, deliberately defective software designed to impair competition, and predatory licensing practices which seek to make of their customers indentured servants. Add this 'patent' to the list of corrupt practices which have evolved under the heading of "Intellectual Property Rights". It's a diversion, designed to keep us talking about the pricing model, in order to distract us from the central purpose: to preserve the most pernicious monopoly in the history of free-enterprise.
Well. I'll just put this on the list of things I am never, ever going to do. I'll put it under "gangbanged in the prison showers."
Clearly this is patented to prevent apple/SUN/etcetera from releasing it, after all, if MS actually charged then customers would expect things to work or have a good suit against them, need I say more?
IBM has been doing something similar for years with their pSeries (AIX) servers. Buy a box with saym, 16 processors. Start out with 4 or 8, and as your capacity demands, you can call them and "enable" the other procs - permanently, temporarily for fluctuating workloads, trial for workload testing, etc etc. I knew it was only a matter of time before some of the software guys caught up.
Thank you for letting me actually use some of this useless pSeries sales knowledge.. Lord knows I never sold any boxes with it.
You know, other than (1) user-free, ad-supported web-based apps are getting better and more common [Google Docs, anyone?]; (2) netbooks have cut the price of basic laptops in half this year; (3) China or Korea will probably introduce a $99 netbook by the end of '09; (4) people are moving their digital lives into the cloud in droves, almost all with free services; and (5) this is a really stupid idea--other than that, this could work.
Just one question, Microsoft guys--what are you folks smokin?
I really hope Microsoft has a practical plan for this because I cannot see this idea ever becoming practical. I for one can not work knowing that I have got more ram (than what I am utilizing) in the box.
They stole my idea, whose bastards!!!
The prices are so high, becouse the dollar will be worthless in 5 years :)
@all the "pay as you go" idiots:
Computing power is not toilet paper. You cannot use it up! The only thing that can happen is that it breaks or the power goes out. What this is, is the worst kind of artificial scarcity and the latest M$ fart in terms of Software-as-a-Service: converting it to Hardware-as-a-Service.
What they really, really want? Redefine EVERYTHING you do about computers to be a Service that you have to pay money for. Should that become a reality, the computer power you use is locked away in some server facility running software that you don't own and could never check on. A nightmare in security, anonymity and autonomy.
But hey - since Vista, I have complete confidence that there is a proper market of people who are not only willfully ignorant, but actually BATHING in their own ignorance... RUBBING their ignorance in your face... singing "da, dada, dada - I'm so ignorant, I want to be bullied around by the big boys at Microsoft and Apple and roll over until they have stomped on all sides of my face" and, with a part juvenile, part moronic laughter, splashing their hands in their own SEA of ignorance.
You know what operating system I have switched to years ago. Never looked back, never apologized. Life without a master? Feels good, man.
If some one uses a computer for 4 hours a day, and 365 days a year, they would pay $1460 hour for some really crappy settings
For anyone doing the numbers, @ $1.15/hr (as pictured) that PC would cost you $10,074 a year.
rock. on.
I only see this being accepted under two possible scenarios, either Microsoft starts charging for updates or they simply stop selling Windows as it is and insist we all start using this new "model."
I can't see it being anything other than a disaster, PC's are already getting very cheap, and the consumer resistance against the idea that you can buy your ram but you have to pay Microsoft extra to use it will be fierce. People already know that Microsoft builds Windows as one version and then cripples/removes features to make the other versions. Microsoft should have figured it out already from the scores of people NOT deciding that they like Vista Home Basic so much they'll spend a few hundred more for Ultimate.
Gamers will only care about DirectX version whatever, and business users will so for the extra security and networking features. At $1.15 an hour I hope the meter won't be running all the time even when the computer is sitting idle, and I think the costs and hassle will make even the most oblivious business users start looking for something else.
Finally, Microsoft needs to wake up to the modern day, this meter-as-you-go concept has been in their closet for years, and it might have worked for awhile in the day when there was no OpenOffice and Linux was still lacking jaor hardware support. People keep on using Microsoft because of the convenience, the familiarity and the hassle of relearning on an Apple or Linux. They don't use Microsoft products because of gee-whiz features that no one else has, the lock-in for that went away a long time ago.
I guess eventually I'll be installing Ubuntu on all my computers.......
I wouldn't mind the idea if it was a subscription-based plan, instead of metered, pay-as-you-go. I think a better approach would be to leverage broadband internet connections against a remote virtualization system, offloading the performance requirements to mainframes. Why have a desktop with throttled performance? I don't think anyone will buy that when they calculate the actual cost/benefit of having to deal with extra software just to use their PC and billinb (ZOMG!!1 the BILLING!).
Dear ABMers:
I don't see anyone forcing you to use an imaginary patented product.
So shut up.
This does appear as an extension to the Vista Video multi-media dumb down egg in conjunction with the Movie industry.
Wouldnt it be scary of this patent was the begining of 1984 Big Brother.
Imagine the Alexa results that could come from being able to know what each user is doing all the time.
Dont need a seperate internet Filter, each users browsing could be taylor provided.
An end to Internet blogged terrorism, ahhhh wonderful.
Ooops, whatever happened to the first ammendment ?
Reminds me of the days of "DIVX (Digital Video Express)" (also: Flexplay & DVD-D).
Or even pay-as-you-go phones.
May end up costing those who don't know what they're doing (or their careless teenagers) much more,
than just buying a medium-spec PC, that's easily upgradable.
Meh.
:@\