Microsoft's biggest mobile money-maker is Android, not Windows Phone 7

[Goodman007]

If Microsoft is making $5 for every htc android phones sold and may be more from others. If this the case Microsoft can't go wrong with either Win 7 Phone or Android. Is this correct?

Gizmodo says that according to Pritchard's report, Microsoft gets five times as much money from Android than it does from Windows Phone 7, because of a settlement in an intellectual property infringement case against HTC. The terms of the settlement call for HTC to pay $5 to Microsoft for every Android device HTC sells. Citi claims that HTC has sold 30 million Android smartphones, and so Microsoft has taken in $150 million so far as a result of the suit.

 

[AndroidSPCS]

WP7 = fail. I played with it in stores, tried to like it. So far every time I play with it, I whip out my Android phone and thank God for having Android.

I also put Android on my wife's old Windows Mobile 6.5 HTC Touch Pro 2 device, runs so much smoother.

 

[Goodman007]

Does it matter for Microsoft? Sine it can make $5.00 or more per Android phone sold.

 

[AndroidSPCS]

Long term yes - mobile is the hottest growing space. If Microsoft is not directly involved with their own OS, they are in big trouble.

 

[Goodman007]

Does it mean Android is copy of Microsoft technology? If this is the case google have copied the software and no more?

 

[AndroidSPCS]

No it doesn't. It means HTC may have used some technology that Microsoft patented, in their HTC Sense overlay, but Android is not involved, only HTC is.

 

[Goodman007]

Not only htc is paying, Microsoft is also asking others to pay more. The htc is long parter of Microsoft
And that may be just the beginning. Microsoft has sued other makers of Android devices, and Citi estimates that after settlements, Microsoft will get between $7.50 and $12.50 per device.

The link is
Microsoft's biggest mobile money-maker is Android, not Windows Phone 7 - Computerworld Blogs

 

[Goodman007]

It seems android is just the copy of Microsoft technology.
Otherwise why would any one pay?

 

[jroc]

If thats the case....Microsoft better hope Android sticks around for a long time.

Mo Money
Mo Money
Mo Money

And wait a min...I thought Android was copying Apple. Now which one is it? I get lost with all these whose copying who claims...

 

[Goodman007]

It seems it is copy of Microsoft technology. That's why others are paying Microsoft and not apple. Microsoft can't loss. Make mony with win phones and android phones.

 

[Guamguy]

Not only htc is paying, Microsoft is also asking others to pay more. The htc is long parter of Microsoft
And that may be just the beginning. Microsoft has sued other makers of Android devices, and Citi estimates that after settlements, Microsoft will get between $7.50 and $12.50 per device.

The link is
Microsoft's biggest mobile money-maker is Android, not Windows Phone 7 - Computerworld Blogs

Who will they sue?

Yes, Microsoft tried to sue Motorola. Motorola sued them back. Motorola hit Microsoft with a whole range of patent infringements that goes well beyond mobile into server technologies, Xbox and Kinect.

Microsoft tried to sue Barnes and Noble. BN is making it appear bad for Microsoft at the court by making it appear Microsoft is trying to monopolize. That can get the FTC's attention.

Microsoft didn't count on something. Those other guys fighting back.

Microsoft can't sue LG, Samsung, and the others for fear of alienating them. See, they are also selling Windows phones. And see, these companies also have immense patent portfolios and can sue back. Try suing Huawei and ZTE? Those companies have immense telecom patent portfolios, and they can countersue. Furthermore, they got the backing of the Chinese gov which can end up getting pissed at Microsoft.

Suing Motorola was a big mistake. US corporations are not going to use Nokias. Motorola is a trusted brand for corporation phones. The Windows mobiles sold to corporations are usually Motorola branded. Not HTC, not Samsung.

 

[Goodman007]

Who will
Microsoft didn't count on something. Those other guys

Motorola is a trusted brand for corporation phones. The Windows mobiles sold to corporations are usually Motorola branded. Not HTC, not Samsung.

I don't know what time frame you are in. Most corporation use either black berry, iPhone or win phone. Know one is using motorola. Send me a link showing motorola is the main brand when it come to phones?
Wake up. The Htc is bigger than motorola when it come to phones

 

[Goodman007]

Also name me one motorola model running win os?
Please don't start making things up. This not only miss lead readers also shows how some people have limited knowledge but like to show off.

 

[Guamguy]

What a fool.

Have you heard of the Motorola Q9?

That was the phone Steve Ballmer showed back in 2007 that he claimed will defeat the iPhone.

Motorola Q9 Windows Mobile 6 Smartphone Mobile Phone review - Trusted Reviews

Motorola introduced this vertical market Windows Mobile as late as June 2010.

Motorola unveils rugged ES400 Windows Mobile phone | Mobile Devices | ZDNet UK

Some more Motorola Windows Mobile.

The famous Q8

http://www.gsmarena.com/motorola_q8-1232.php

The Q11

http://www.gsmarena.com/motorola_q_11-2541.php

HTC only became famous in the final years of Windows Mobile and so (2008). That was the time they started to emphasize their branding. Before, all their phones are branded to carriers.

Also, corporations are very conservative, they don't like touchscreens. The business Windows Mobile are those that have keyboards and with a vanilla interface. HTC Windows Mobile with Touchflo is consumer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motorola_Q

During the period when Motorola and Palm were the top Windows Mobile vendors, Windows Mobile accounted for as much as 24% of the smartphone market in 2006.

Motorola's Q pages are still up.

http://www.motorola.com/mdirect/q/

http://asia.motorola.com/q9/

 

[Goodman007]

All the links shown are for 2006, 2008 etc. If you move to the current time frame 2011 you will see that Motorola is not the main player when it come to mobile phones. Before Android Motorola was going to close down the mobiles.

No company use the Motorola because it only do Android phones which have too many viruses due to being open source. The companies use Black Berry, iphone or Win phone due to protected system.

The fact is fact the Motorola is not used by big or small companies.

 

[jroc]

^If thats true....thats all about to change:

Washington Post says Feds are replacing BlackBerry with Apple and Android devices - Phone Arena

With Motorola making a Blackberry Android clone, I think Samsung did too I can see Motorola becoming a big player with federal workers.

Add the encrypted bootloader the current Motorola phones have and they could become a real big player with the govt. I said this before: with Motorola encrypting the bootloaders, who would they rather please? The handful of ppl that want unencrypted bootloaders....or to try to take a piece of the Blackberry market...

If Motorola phones do become one of govt folks favorites Android phones, this article might prove what Motorola was after all along by encrypting the bootloader...

 

[MyNamesTooLong]

If Microsoft is making $5 for every htc android phones sold and may be more from others. If this the case Microsoft can't go wrong with either Win 7 Phone or Android. Is this correct?

Gizmodo says that according to Pritchard's report, Microsoft gets five times as much money from Android than it does from Windows Phone 7, because of a settlement in an intellectual property infringement case against HTC. The terms of the settlement call for HTC to pay $5 to Microsoft for every Android device HTC sells. Citi claims that HTC has sold 30 million Android smartphones, and so Microsoft has taken in $150 million so far as a result of the suit.

So how long do they have to keep paying the $5 per droid phone?

 

[SB13X]

No company use the Motorola because it only do Android phones which have too many viruses due to being open source.

WTF?? Cite a reference for that comment please...

 

[momoceio]

This dude is cracking me up, so many false statements. Android being open source has nothing to do with viruses. Most issues come from dumb people that install malicious applications on their phones. Which means they had to give the application permission to access the phone. Windows OS is a closed system and look at how many viruses are out for it...that's what being popular does.

Android is not a copy of Microsoft (or Apple) technology. Microsoft sued HTC (not Google) for patents that HTC Sense supposedly infringed upon. Kind of funny to think that a Linux based OS is a copy of a Microsoft product. Get your facts straight, gather your sources and learn how to present a valid argument. This board isn't full of 10 year olds that don't question information.

 

[Snow_Fox]

When in doubt.. Pull a name out of a hat and sue someone.

I'm so tired of seeing innovation and evolution stifled by intellectual property lawsuits.

I understand intellectual property laws to some degree... but, idea's naturally come from already existing idea's.

So... truth be told.. Intellectual property really equates to anti innovation.

 

[Goodman007]

Android is not a copy of Microsoft (or Apple) technology. Microsoft sued HTC (not Google) for patents that HTC Sense supposedly infringed upon. Kind of funny to think that a Linux based OS is a copy of a Microsoft product. Get your facts straight, gather your sources and learn how to present a valid argument. This board isn't full of 10 year olds that don't question information.

Because android is open source patents can only apply to companies using them. You can not sue google because the os is free. Nothing to do with Htc sense. Samsung, motorola etc will also need to pay.

It is only correct to protect patents. If google have send a lot of time and money to create a product, google will not like it if other copied without paying.

If iPhone was copy of android os would google like it?

 

[jroc]

^Your first 2 sentences and last sentence are confusing....

Because android is open source patents can only apply to companies using them. You can not sue google because the os is free. Nothing to do with Htc sense. Samsung, motorola etc will also need to pay.

It is only correct to protect patents. If google have send a lot of time and money to create a product, google will not like it if other copied without paying.

If iPhone was copy of android os would google like it?

 

[G.Armour]

It's pretty bad that Microsoft makes more money off Android than Google does.

 

[momoceio]

Because android is open source patents can only apply to companies using them. You can not sue google because the os is free. Nothing to do with Htc sense. Samsung, motorola etc will also need to pay.

It is only correct to protect patents. If google have send a lot of time and money to create a product, google will not like it if other copied without paying.

If iPhone was copy of android os would google like it?

...I'm not sure this even deserves a response. Yes Android is open source, but the features it contains were implemented by Google. Microsoft could go after Google if they wanted to. Just take a look at the Oracle v Google lawsuit. All of the mobile companies go after each other for IP infringements. Just because Android or HTC Sense or MotoBlur has a feature that Microsoft has a patents on doesn't mean that they stole it from Microsoft. I don't really feel like arguing with you because you don't have a clue. If you think Android is anything like Windows Phone 7 then there is no hope...