Microsoft Engineers Invent Displays That Top LCDs For Efficiency 283
MechEMark writes with this excerpt from a hope-inspiring article at the IEEE Spectrum, which says "Researchers from Microsoft say they've built a prototype of a display screen using a technology that essentially mimics the optics in a telescope but at the scale of individual display pixels. The result is a display that is faster and more energy efficient than a liquid crystal display, or LCD, according to research reported yesterday in Nature Photonics ... The design greatly increases the amount of backlight that reaches the screen. The researchers were able to get about 36 percent of the backlight out of a pixel, more than three times as much light as an LCD can deliver. But Microsoft senior research engineer Michael Sinclair says that through design improvements, he expects that number to go up — theoretically, as high as 75 percent."
One problem. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:One problem. (Score:5, Funny)
The only colour plane that works right now is blue.
But how do you know whether to reboot the display or the PC?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But how do you know whether to reboot the display or the PC?
See if they are on.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:One problem. (Score:5, Funny)
The Random Victim Limerick Troll:
he likes to poke fun at our holes.
He clicks 'post anon'
as he shouts at his mom -
cause the basement is getting too cold.
Re:One problem. (Score:5, Funny)
The only colour plane that works right now is blue.
The blue is a feature. It has a calming effect while you contact tech support to ask why your computer was bricked by the new and exciting upgrade you just installed. The loud hum coming from the monitor is also supposed to be a relaxing sound and the smoke is supposed to remind you of a warm fireplace much like the smoke from an Xbox does.
Re:One problem. (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I get some good ones when I go to the toilet...sometimes.
You can have one of them, if you like. ...or perhaps you'd prefer to make some of your own. I recommend a diet with a lot of eggs.
Re: (Score:2)
I wouldn't bother. The copy protection can be a real pain in the ass.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
As an owner of a Microsoft Natural keyboard that is still going strong, I'd say that you are mistaken... some of their hardware has been quite good!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That's really unfair. Their hardware is way more reliable than their software.
If they've figured out how to put a lens in front of an LED I can't see how reliability will be a problem.
OS Agnostic? (Score:2, Interesting)
Well it seems obvious to me that a display technology should not be impacted by an OS but then my more synical nature takes over and asks if there is SOMEHOW a way that they could make this a Windows only thing.
Well is it possible?
obviously (Score:5, Funny)
I can even think of two ways to block Linux.
If you can too, SHUT UP ABOUT IT!
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Yes, it is possible for this to be a Microsoft-only technology.
For example, they could just link it with their wacky 'Surface' [or whatever], so you have to buy the whole display/computer together, and since it'll be a proprietary, custom solution, sorry, but no Linux support. Or license it to companies making AllInOne computers [iMac knockoffs], but with the licensing restriction that Linux be prevented from running on it [what, more secret anti-competitive licensing terms].
Hell, they could mandate that t
Re:OS Agnostic? (Score:4, Insightful)
Nothing Linux cant adapt to.
Re:OS Agnostic? (Score:4, Insightful)
Unless you consider adaptation to be waiting 2.5-5 year for something that works about 90%, I won't be eagerly awaiting the reverse engineering!
Re:OS Agnostic? (Score:5, Insightful)
Who cares? Insofar as Microsoft is in the hardware business, they don't seem to discriminate except by providing only Windows and Mac driversâ"but everyone does that, so no biggie. Lots of people use their Intellimouse or their Microsoft Natural Keyboard on their pet OS. I don't see what Microsoft would gain by doing more work to discriminate: they'd just give people a reason to buy some other excellent monitor. It's more of an Apple thing to do, and even *their* displays work fine on any OS.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Or you can just buy an LG at two thirds the price, spray paint it shiny white and bung one of your kid's fruit stickers on the front.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:OS Agnostic? (Score:4, Insightful)
Actually, all they need to do is follow the DRM laden specs that high end monitors on HDMI are supposed to use in Vista - and lock the monitors in that mode.
All Linux and other OS's need to do is enable DRM... MS isnt locking them out of anything... they arent implementing the right technology to use it, even though they "can" (or can't because the video card manufacturers wont release the specs needed to modify drivers under Linux).
This would have the same effect, and put the blame at someone else's feet (ie: not Microsoft's).
Note the sarcasm in the words... yet it is quite possible the truth will follow that path nonetheless... but it would be a stupid move. Especially with other technologies out there that would be competing against this.
Re:OS Agnostic? (Score:5, Interesting)
You mean require HDCP? Why would they do that? So that suddenly 75% (guess) of their customer base couldn't use their choice of monitor? For what possible gain?
HDCP is only required when you play blu-ray or hd-dvd discs. I suppose Microsoft could agree to require it on DRMed media -- but they've never even hinted that they would be stupid enough to require it for general purpose computing. What would be the point?!
Honestly, this train of thought looks like the paranoid rantings of a delusional conspiracy theorist.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Right,
The whole concept of DRM looks like the paranoid rantings of a delusional conspiracy theorist. Honestly, why would there be situations where I don't have the right to see a movie I bought?
However, DRM exists and people begin to get used to it, sadly. If it can profit to Microsoft to lock their hardware to be only compatible with Windows, they'd do it, without looking back.
Re:OS Agnostic? (Score:4, Insightful)
I think you are being paranoid. MS didnt do that with any of their other hardware. (joysticks/keyboards/mouse/etc) Really, is there any practical way to keep someone from plugging a monitor into a linux box?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Your quite valid point aside, here's another one to throw into the mix...
Dont OLEDs obsolete this technology already? And I am pretty sure they get more than just blue out of an OLED display... :-)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah OLEDs are superior by nature. No backlight thus no efficiency problems.
The light is generated on demand.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Inferior don't you mean? - Hence the fact that they're hardly used. They're really expensive and only last a few thousand hours before fading. They also bring back the burn-in problems which we thought we'd long since forgotten from phosphor based displays. Hence, if I walk into a local shop, they have NO OLED screens at all.
Actually, Dell is selling laptops that have OLED options for the screen. They have improved quite a bit since when you last looked at them.
That aside, I still think they beat MS's new technology (I havent looked at a monochrome monitor in years - nor do I plan on again if at all possible).
As both technologies mature, I would thus expect that OLED technology remains above the curve. In addition, it is still far more efficient in lighting... MS's idea uses tricks to decrease light waste on a wasteful techno
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
If it got too big then Ballmer would scrap the project and allocate its resources toward futile attempts to dethrone Google.
I see what you did there. He has to take GOOG's chair before he can throw it at them!
OLED (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Yeah but they're a pain to manufacture still (still stuck to small form factors,) expensive for the number of square inches you get, hard to get really awesome brightness out of and then there's still problems with one of the colors (blue, I believe) fading much faster than the others.
For that matter, aren't quantum dot based displays a lot more efficient? Well, yes. But.
Re:OLED (Score:4, Interesting)
Where have you been? OLEDs are easy to make these days. There was even an article on PRINTING OLEDs on poster size paper some months back.
Re:OLED (Score:4, Insightful)
Then where's my cheap 24" OLED monitor?
OLEDs? SEDs? (Score:3, Informative)
OLEDs and SEDs have many advantages over LCD (the big disadvantage being that they're not mass-produced cheaply currently: OLEDs are produced but they're not cheap)..
So I'm not very excited about a technology which only cuts the power consumption of LCDs..
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
You're not excited about an advance that can improve the type of monitors that we actually use? You must not get excited about display technology advances very often.
Or is it that you don't get excited about advances in general unless they speak to any of the various orphaned technologies you have adopted, simply for the sake of safeguarding your delusion that your understanding of technology is wider and deeper when compared to other students of technology?
I'm guessing it's a combination of the two.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
By the same token Linux should have never appeared since Hurd was just around the corner. But hurd never came and Linux stole its thunder.
In the marketplace success is very dependent on price. If OLED does not get cheaper and easier to manufacture faster than five years, not to mention in larger sizes and with longer life, this improvement may well find a very nice place if it does come on said schedule.
What's true also is that a lot of these articles are just "look at what cool things we have developed in
Re:OLEDs? SEDs? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:OLEDs? SEDs? (Score:4, Insightful)
Except that OLEDs and SEDs in theory also reduce the power consumption over normal LCD, as the pixels themselves emit light so there's no need of backlight.
Sure SEDs and OLEDs are not really mass produced currently, but neither is this new technology for LCDs.
And SEDs and OLEDs have many other advantage over LCDs: better refresh rate, contrast, viewing angle (reliability for SEDs).
So this new LCD technology isn't very exciting..
Re: (Score:2)
But my point here is that one shouldn't discount this new LCD technology, and place all of our eggs in a single OLED basket. I'm still not convinced of solutions to problems such as 1) the longevity of the organic elements, and 2) the ability to consistancy produce quality in quantity in order to get the price down.
Side note: I wouldn't reccom
Re: (Score:2)
At the moment OLED is a possible contender to LCD and Plasma screens however the cost of OLED screens is still much higher then LCD and it is still lim
contrast ratio: 20:1 (Score:3, Informative)
And that's uselessly low.
It's easy to make an LCD more efficient, just block less light. The problem is that the contrast ratio is the difference between the least amount of light you can block and the most you can block. They've just basically made a system that isn't capable of blocking much light and so it's brighter. But at the expense of the contrast ratio.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:contrast ratio: 20:1 (Score:5, Informative)
"The first prototype's contrast ratio was 20:1, mainly due to the use of non-collimated back light. This was a limitation of the current prototype, not of the technology. This is supported by simulations
20:1 may not be particularly useful, but 800:1 is certainly usable, and modified with "at least" makes this a technology "at least" worthy watching for future development. It's not reasonable to judge a technology by its first prototype.
Re: (Score:2)
Contrast Ratio is probably the most misleading "specification" in the LCD universe.
You go to shop for an LCD TV, and the major retailers put a few things on the tag: Size, Resolution, Refresh Rate, and Contrast Ratio.
3 of these are measured in universally accepted ways. One is not. Can you guess which one?
EVERY manufacturer measures contrast ratio differently. That's why you'll see, say, a Samsung LCD boasting its 20:000:1 contrast ratio, with, say, a Sharp right beside it at 800:1.
Yet, the actual screens f
Microsoft's niche (Score:4, Interesting)
I always said that Microsoft was pretty good as a hardware company.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
F-Lock? (Score:3, Informative)
It's not that F-Lock is so bad, it's the fact that it is ON BY DEFAULT EVERY TIME YOU BOOT THE FRIGGIN PC that's the problem.
The keyboard I'm on right now (a Logitech) has the F-Lock key and I never think about it because it remembers the setting between reboots.
They also make really good mice (Score:3, Interesting)
I have no clue why. Dell/HP/Logitech mice, meh, they're essentially disposable -- I get a new one with every new computer because they're generally on their last legs by then. Persistent gunk issues, laser malfunctioning when running over certain colors, total hardware failure, button responsiveness drops, what have you.
I got a Microsoft laser mouse for ~$50 back in, crikey, must have been about 2000. It isn't a gamer anything -- just two buttons and a wheel -- but that thing is an absolute tank. If its
Re: (Score:2)
I believe so. So just get a slightly better logitech one.
Re:Microsoft's niche (Score:5, Insightful)
I always said that Microsoft was pretty good as a hardware company.
My dead Xbox360 would respectfully disagree with you.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I thought about that after I posted. Let me try again:
I always said that Microsoft was pretty good as a peripherals company.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
See how stating anecdotal facts doesn't actually mean anything?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
I'm not sure if you're being snarky or if you didn't know this, but the 4 LEDs surrounding the power button also tell you how many controllers (between 1 and 4) are connected to the system. In many peoples' opinions, they also look cool.
I'm not saying they're completely necessary, but given the popularity of case mods, I don't think a company deserves to be criticized for putting extra lights on their system (especially on
The OLPC screen already does this (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
The Magic of Black and White (Score:2)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the diffraction grating 'helps' by replacing the color filter. The color filter absorbs a portion of light, so when there is no color filter, then there is less light lost. Less light lost translates into less light you have to generate, and a power savings.
I believe the OLPC screen [olpcnews.com] has 2 modes. Mode 1 is for backlit color like a normal screen, and mode 2 is for reflective black an
Re: (Score:2)
Not to be ignored... (Score:5, Interesting)
...is the faster switching speed. Considering this prototype has a ~1ms switching time, and LED backlights are already popular, it may be feasible to create, in effect, a flat panel DLP display by rapidly cycling the backlight color.
Current flat panel displays have three sub-pixels in every pixel. One only allows red light, one blue, and one green. It's very inefficient: You need three LCD elements to display each pixel, and two-thirds of the backlight is blocked outright by the color filters.
With a color-cycling display, every element displays every color in turn, so (all else being equal) you triple the resolution *and* the efficiency.
The only downside is a possible rainbow effect if the display does not cycle colors quickly enough.
Re: (Score:2)
DLP based projectors cause this issue; LCDs basically do the same thing as LCD monitors - pump a bunch of light through one (or several) tiny LCD panels and then throw it on the wall.
I had severe issues back in the day when I was using a cheapie 2x projector - but now I'm using one that has a five segment wheel with a five-times rotating speed. It doesn't totally eliminate the problem, but it did eliminate any real fatigue I was getting with my initial setup.
Different point of view (Score:5, Insightful)
Not a complete loss... (Score:2)
If this is 100% right. (Score:2, Funny)
That means that Microsoft has, for the very first time, invented something useful.
No, please, I'm dead serious about this !
it's microsoft... (Score:5, Funny)
... quickly bash them, before they do anything good.
Viewable angle (Score:5, Interesting)
If this really works like a telescope, then wouldn't that mean the display would have a very low viewable angle? After all, a telescope is just a telephoto lens. And telephoto lenses have a narrow field-of-view.
So, you'd probably have to look directly at the display from a perpendicular angle. Move a little to the side, and you're going to lose the image altogether, or have it severely degraded. LCDs are already bad enough in this respect.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually low-viewing angle screens can be useful...
Everywhere: prevents shoulder surfing....
Work: prevents the boss knowing you are now on the 200th round of solitare...
Re: (Score:2)
As I work for a tech firm I can loosely argue I'm doing part of my job while reading /. - keeping up with current tech related issues/events is part of my job :)
Re: (Score:2)
I like how you asked a question, then used your presumed answer as the premise for a critique.
All the while, not knowing a damn thing about the actual truth of the matter.
But maybe you missed these 2 words in the summary: "essentially mimics."
All I'm saying is, why pass off some half-baked premise as truth when you really have absolutely no clue?
Still waiting for color reflective displays.... (Score:2)
Scary thought.... (Score:2)
Do you really want over a million Microsoft-constructed telescopes pointing at you while you *ahem* surf the web?
Service Pack (Score:3, Funny)
Red Colour Hue on MVLB Displays
Some users have noticed a slight rosy color hue on their new Microsoft(TM) MVLB (MakeVistaLookBetter) displays. This is a design feature, but users who have downgraded their computer systems to vastly inferior Operating Systems (Windows XP or Lin.. [MSKb Editor: REMOVED - Mention that and you're sacked]) may wish to obtain MVLB Service Pack 1 to re-balance the colors to a more natural 'look-and-feel'.
Article ID : 45888372
Last Review : July 25, 2008
Revision : 1.0
SYMPTOMS:
You look at your MVLB display and the world seems rosy.
TECHNICAL INFORMATION:
MVLB display optics have been chromatically adjusted to emphasise the red end of the color spectrum to enhance the user experience with Windows(TM) Vista.
RESOLUTION:
Users can obtain MVLB Service Pack 1, which comprises 3932160 (1280x1024x3) colour-corrected nano-dots. Using the supplied grid alignment device (ruler) and tweezers, one dot should be carefully applied to the surface of the MVLB immediately above each pixel. Note that each nano-dot is color-balanced for a specific pixel color (red, green and blue) and so must be applied above the correct display pixel - each nano-dot has an identifying letter ('R', 'G' and 'B') stamped on its edge. Users will require a tube of superglue and possibly a scanning electron microscope.
NOTE: Do not sneeze whilst applying the nano-dots.
APPLIES TO:
MVLB V1.0 displays
KEYWORDS: MVLB, rosy, tinted, Vista
This looks like a variation on DLP (Score:3, Interesting)
Something that was invented 20 years ago. I wonder if Texas Instruments have their lawyers on standby...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DLP [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
It's like DLP in the sense that it uses mirrors to reflect light.
If that's your definition of "similar" then TI ought to ramp-up their legal team because they've got a lot of patent enforcement work ahead of them.
The real difference is that DLP is a digital technology. This is, effectively, analog.
Filling efficiency (Score:3, Insightful)
Pixels are placed next to each other so that the maximum possible fill factor of 78% is achieved. [...]
The maximum transmission of a single pixel in the on state can be derived from the fact that the secondary mirror has a diameter equal to half that of the primary mirror and blocks 25% of the backlight. Thus, 75% of the backlight will reach the primary mirror. Simulations indicate that 95% of the light from the primary mirror can reach the pixel's output. In the experiment it was measured to be 61%, which can be further optimized.
The total amount of backlight that can be transmitted by a telescopic pixel display based on the experiment is pi/4 times 0.75 times 61% approximately 36%, and simulations show that up to 56% is possible. The current experimental value is 3.5-7 times greater than that of LCDs, and therefore for the same backlight intensity, the telescopic pixel is 3.5-7 times brighter.
That pi/4 (78.5%) filling density comes from the fact that the circle-shaped pixels are aranged in a square grid, if they arrange them in a hexagonal grid, they would achieve efficiency of pi/(2*sqrt(3)) - 90.7%.
Great hardware company (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm not joking here, I'm genuinely confused.
Why is it that Microsoft is actually a pretty good hardware company? All their peripherals are pretty good. Xbox has a few issues but it's really a one off.
Intel on the other hand is just about the worlds best software company. I spent a lot of time at university working with intel developer tools and libraries without ever encountering a single issue.
Re:Great hardware company (Score:4, Insightful)
My guess is because when making the hardware, they don't have to deal with the last 25 years of legacy code and support. With the Zune, the Xbox, their mice, etc. they're generally just free to go crazy and not care about whether MS Works '97 will work or not.
Of course the 360 was backwards compatible with the original Xbox and users are experiencing widespread problems with that. Probably more of a coincidence than anything though.
The display is made of... (Score:2)
Polo mints. I wonder what they did with the holes?
Go Team USA! (Score:3, Insightful)
The one thing that I really do like about the closed model is that Apple and Microsoft seem to be the only two American companies capable of actually taking on foreign competition in their core competencies and winning.
They are just kicking the shit out of Sony and as guy who watched RCA flounder and go down for an answer to the Walkman every iPod and xBox 360 sold just gives me great delight. And now, the even possibility of Microsoft taking back at least the design of electronic screens back from asian manufacturers is pretty damned sweet.
You all may hate Microsoft and Apple and love Linux, but is there any doubt that if Ford and GM were as adeptly run as Microsoft and Apple were, American car companies wouldn't be caught building giant trucks -again- and then take seemingly 5 years to turn around.
Microsoft engineered something? (Score:2)
Wait, you mean Microsoft does something besides create fodder for anti-Microsoft discussions here? Aaaah! (all of Slashdot implodes)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Anna Pyayt led the research as part of her Ph.D. thesis at the University of Washington in collaboration with two Microsoft engineers. Microsoft funded the work and has also applied for a patent on the technology.
See, they may not manufacture it themselves, but they'll certainly be getting license fees for each unit sold...
They need something to make up for their lack of Vista sales.
Who knows, maybe the display will incorporate a TCPA/Palladium chip, so a licensed OS will be required also.
e.g. For
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, how dare someone who has invested money and effort, not to mention talent, into innovating be rewarded for that investment with exclusive rights for a limited period of time via a patent?
Of course by patenting it, the details of how it works become public and once the patent expires the technology is up for grabs for whoever wants to use it, too.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course by patenting it, the details of how it works become public and once the patent expires the technology is up for grabs for whoever wants to use it, too.
But by then, it might become obsolete before some other, even better display system. And so the cycle repeats...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You can make a very good argument that Vista is crap technology, but lack of sales is not something they really have to worry about. Microsoft has sold something like 100 - 150 million copies of Vista.
Re: (Score:2)
You can make a very good argument that Vista is crap technology, but lack of sales is not something they really have to worry about. Microsoft has sold something like 100 - 150 million copies of Vista.
The problem with this is how many copies of Vista came with new PC's? Also if a business has a corporate license then they have the right to the total number of Vista licenses that they paid for and this counts as Vista licenses sold even if the corporation does not install Vista.
It would be much more telling if Microsoft let out the number of Vista licenses paid for by the home user to upgrade their XP machines. I won't hold my breath on this though.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with this is how many copies of Vista came with new PC's?
Why is this a problem ? Most (non-corporate) users get a newer version of Windows with a new computer because, to most people, the computer and the OS are a single unit. On average, people replace PCs about every 3-4 years, which means Vista isn't going to be even close to a majority share before mid-2009.
Corporate users are beholden to their IT departments, who generally work on conservative, 3-5 year schedules. So no-one sane expec
Re: (Score:2)
Are you writing a novel soon? I sure hope so with that imagination and prose.
already posted (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
It was done by a student, the Microsoft engineers were probably taking notes ;-) business as usual.
Re:DLP rainbows (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Haha, let's see "Linux" do something like that (Score:2, Insightful)
Linux is an operating system kernel. Microsoft ( note not Windows ) is a huge multi billion dollar technology company with diverse interests. You are a troll and whoever modded you insightful - what happened, linux ran off with your girlfriend ?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Damn, I've got mod points and there's no "-1, Wrong"
Re:Haha, let's see "Linux" do something like that (Score:5, Insightful)
You're all wrong - open source software IS capable of innovation. For instance, take a look at LyX [lyx.org], a document processor that beats all else hands down. For that matter, LaTeX itself is open source and is the gold standard in creating technical documents. Neither of these is a copy of a closed source original.
The free software/open source approach works well where people can scratch their own itches - in fields where those who need technical innovation are also capable of developing the technology to do it, such as science and mathematics. It fares less well for products which are developed to be sold to someone else - `office suite' software, or for that matter computer monitor hardware (to get us back onto topic). However, saying that open source is incapable of innovation is like saying that all major discoveries are made by commercial entities rather than universities.
Re:Haha, let's see "Linux" do something like that (Score:5, Interesting)
'Invention' is compatible with open source 'schtuf', but the GP is right that Linux is a unix-clone and therefore, limited in the amount of (software) invention it will allow. Granted, /any/ OS is limited and unix is a better choice than most, but there /are/ better models out there, including, ironically, models invented by the very inventors of unix that were already available when Linux was still in its infancy. All you get from cloning unix is a lot of eyeballs and a lot of already compilable source-code. But many choices of better desktop-OS-es and better server-OS-es and better embedded-OS-es have since come and gone.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Haha, let's see "Linux" do something like that (Score:5, Insightful)
Your point has been repeated over and over. You are -1, Redundant.
Linus Torvalds is not a great thinker, but he has some reasonable ideas. Not long ago he said that innovation is overrated. Anybody can come up with new ideas. The thing is implementing them, and good.
Xerox was great, but Macintosh was more important in bringing the desktop to people.
There are good ideas everywhere, we don't need new ideas, we already know what we want, what is needed is good implementations.
Aside from that, MS is not that good an innovator, either. They didn't come up with WIMP, they didn't come up with the idea of selling it to the masses. They didn't come up with office productivity software. They didn't come up with media players, consoles, mouses, anything.
The thing they are good at is building a product that is good enough (good, when it comes to hardware), and selling it. They rule at marketing. They are the kings of it. They are innovators in that area. But that doesn't benefit the users, so I think it's not important for us, but for their shareholders.
GNU/Linux is a way to get good software, on _my_ terms. It's what I want, and it works. There are alternatives, a lot worse in most regards, and somewhat better in other, but they are not provided on terms that are fair to me, so it's a no-brainer who I will choose. It's not about innovation either. It's about fulfilling my needs, without asking for my first born baby in return.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not Microsoft. If you RTFA, you'd see it was some lady at a University. MS just provided funds, and two "engineers" to take the credit and any patents the poor college student did all the actual work on. :)
Re: (Score:2)
So...they financed it...they provided engineers...and of course it's not their invention. On the other hand had Apple done the same this site would be fanboi heavy today rather than laced with criticism and jokes.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)