4 ms·
This is more likely a response to Google Glass, not Oculus. I assume Google has built a patent portfolio around Glass. This may even be a defensive move by Mic
by nealabq 13y ago
This is more likely a response to Google Glass, not Oculus.
I assume Google has built a patent portfolio around Glass. This may even be a defensive move by Microsoft. Still, looks like another tragedy of patent abuse brewing.
I wonder about the upcoming patent lawsuits against Oculus. Maybe that's their real reason for embracing FB -- protection.
- SixSigma 13y agoEspecially considering that MS has a ~1.3% Facebook (preferred) shareholding; that's 32.5 million shares, currently priced at $1.95bn - they won't be attacking FB with a patent suit any time soon. Interestingly the Oculus buyout has also been viewed negatively by the markets, wiping 7% off the share value since the announcement.
- malandrew 13y ago"wiping 7% off the share value since the announcement." I wish everyone would stop citing this figure. Several major tech companies lost about the same amount off their market cap on the same day. Yes, some of that 7% might be attributable to the Oculus acquisition, but most of it was the result of market sentiment that day.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- SixSigma 13y agoShame on me. I hadn't actually looked at the rest of the market data. I came across that figure while researching how many shares Microsoft had in Facebook from a "Related Links" box. Even if I had, I still shouldn't have repeated the speculation of the cause. Maybe the announcement stopped the share value sliding by 14%. I was already aware that one of the great fallacies of market reporting is News Item X caused change in Share Price Y.
- jerknextdoor 13y agoI agree that from a quick look it seems much closer to gGlass than Oculus. As much as we give Microsoft crap these days (I run in a *nix crowd), I think this is great for the sake of innovation. I really hope it's not just defensive, because I like the idea of the future happening soon and nothing will bring that on like some healthy competition.
- sitkack 13y agoThese patents look silly. I have done work in the AR/VR space and these patents are chaff. Much of the stuff coming to market right now is not patentable because this research goes back so far. Which is a GREAT thing.
- Excavator 13y agoJust in case, you have heard of Ask Patents prior art request 'section'¹? There's a lot of 'unpatentable' stuff that gets through or almost gets through the process. ¹ http://patents.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/prior-art-request http://patents.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/prior-art-...
- sitkack 13y agoI am going to get a migraine and an ulcer reading those. I think filing bogus patent claims should be an actionable offense.
- illuminate 13y ago"This is more likely a response to Google Glass, not Oculus." Glass, Oculus, and Microsoft's eventual device are all going to be competing in the same space.
- Pxtl 13y agoI disagree. The difference between AR/Glass and VR mirrors the difference between PC and mobile machines - one is a fully-engaged immersive experience, and one is a mobile experience that's meant to compliment your interaction with the real world around you. Expect AR devices to take off in the mobile space while VR devices take off in the PC space. Would you want to use a VR device on the train? Completely blind yourself? Walk around in public wearing one even though you can't see a wall in front of you? Conversely, would you want to play an immersive VR game where you still see the walls of your geek den?
- illuminate 13y agoDo you think Oculus is going to be limited to just VR? Facebook didn't purchase them for VR alone. Their gains in VR tech will help them in AR.