| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Linux may lose Windows file system | |
|
||
| Time: 10:52 EST/15:52 GMT | News Source: APC Mag | Posted By: Kenneth van Surksum | ||
|
Recently, TomTom and Microsoft reached an out-of-court settlement agreement to end a dispute that started when Microsoft sued TomTom over alleged patent infringement over its aging FAT file system.
| ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 217 Last | Next |
The time now is
9:34:48 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 20505 (216.102.144.11) at 4/7/2009 4:16:36 PM |
| So, as a point of information for the less technical amongst us, namely me, uh... how easy is this to do? |
| #2 By 15406 (72.140.218.146) at 4/7/2009 6:24:33 PM |
| #1: How easy is what to do? Removing FAT from the kernel is simple. Getting every device maker that uses FAT to use an alternate file system that doesn't have strings attached is not so easy. And, at the end of the day, MS needs to also support the new file system. Despite all their blather about interoperability, you just know MS is not going to do that. |
| #3 By 20505 (216.102.144.11) at 4/7/2009 7:08:48 PM |
|
Latch,
I hear you, but obviously computer systems with different files systems can exchange info via an interface (i.e. a browser). Is this particularly difficult to accomplish on a small device? My 3 year old cell phone runs a browser. New cell phones contain both a GPS and a browser. I know I'm being simplistic but what's the problem with this reasoning? Isn't the browser the future of all computing? |
| #4 By 12071 (203.210.68.145) at 4/7/2009 11:31:28 PM |
|
#3 I think you're confusing things - or I'm not sure exactly what you're asking...
Any device that accepts pluggable storage, i.e. mobiles, cameras, pc's etc. needs to be able to both read and write to that storage and it needs to know the file system structure to do so. Therefore the potential solutions are: 1) Implement custom file system. Issues with this are that if the pluggable storage isn't in that format, it'll need to be formatted first before being able to be used. Secondly, you can only then plug that storage into another device that understands the custom file system otherwise it's relatively pointless as "pluggable" storage. The only exception here is if every device you own or at least care about is from the same manufacturer - so if you're Lloyd or Parkkker this isn't an issue :) 2) Implement multiple file systems so that you can at least read/write the most common file systems. Issues with this are that you now have to potentially license multiple file systems and if a device comes with a new file system you'll have to upgrade your firmware to support it - if that's at all possible or risk it! 3) Implement a single well known file system that's supported by as many manufacturers and operating systems as possible. Like FAT :) The browser is all well and good - but you still need to be able to read and write to that device. Something needs to know the structure of the file system. More info if you're interested: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_Allocation_Table |
| #5 By 8556 (12.208.163.37) at 4/8/2009 9:04:37 AM |
| Where is the EU when you need them? I have a strong distaste for MS's claim of interoperability while at the same time setting up the competition for failure. |
| #6 By 92283 (70.67.3.196) at 4/8/2009 9:25:29 AM |
| #6 Microsoft charges reasonable fees for its IP. Why should they give it away? |
| #7 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 4/8/2009 9:44:06 AM |
|
#5: As I've said many times before, MS says a lot of things and some of them are even true.
#6: Talking to yourself again? Why should MS give it away? Well, they keep talking the talk about interoperability. Offering FAT with a royalty-free license would be a good start to walking the walk of which MS has yet to take a real first step. This is especially true when the patent is dubious to begin with, and wasn't asserted generally for the past decade or two. It's moot anyway, as I suspect another challenge to FAT is coming. And now that MS has tipped their hand about FAT, I can see device makers moving away from it to ensure MS doesn't come knocking. |
| #8 By 92283 (142.32.208.232) at 4/8/2009 5:21:02 PM |
|
interoperability != free except when open source companies like TomTom want to earn billions and not pay a penny to use someone elses IP.
Companies license IP from each other all the time, or trade software patent access in cross-licensing agreements. TomTom has enought money to buy patents from others: "Amsterdam, 21 June 2007 - TomTom, the world's largest navigation solution provider, announced today that it has acquired the entire world-wide patent portfolio of Horizon Navigation Inc. Horizon has been a leader in the design of vehicle navigation systems for eighteen years. It developed original equipment navigation solutions for General Motors, Ford, Chrysler, Porsche, and Nissan. In addition, Horizon designed aftermarket products for Audiovox, Clarion, Dual and Cobra Electronics." http://www.ipfrontline.com/depts/article.asp?id=15472&deptid=8 TomTom is just another cheapskate pseudo-OSS company wanting to freeload! No wonder they are your heroes. |
| #9 By 12071 (203.210.68.145) at 4/9/2009 1:21:06 AM |
|
#8 Microsoft don't license IP if they believe the patent is invalid... so why should anyone else?
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860_3-10215680-56.html?tag=mncol;posts |
| #10 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 4/9/2009 8:09:49 AM |
| #9: Come now, you know it's different if it's MS. They're big and rich. They deserve to act any way they please and get whatever they want. |
| #11 By 92283 (70.67.3.196) at 4/9/2009 12:50:42 PM |
|
Yawn. I know ... its a happy gleeful day when someone sues Microsoft for IP infringement but its a crime against OSS when Microsoft sues someone that uses Linux for IP infringment.
#10 Billions in sales = big. TomTom is big. |
| #12 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 4/9/2009 1:59:14 PM |
| #11: I'm glad that you finally see things my way. However, in this case MS was found guilty by the court, and not just a FUD-based accusation via suit that anyone can file about anything. As usual, MS bleats that it's done nothing wrong and the patent is invalid. Their hypocrisy knows no bounds. Microsoft needs to stop stealing from other companies if it expects its own IP claims to be taken seriously. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 217 Last | Next |
The time now is
9:34:48 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
