Top
All Channels
420°

Meet Microsoft, the world's best kept R&D secret

As far as 99.9 percent of the world population is concerned, Microsoft is a stodgy, old-guard technology company. Its bottom line is fully leveraged against PC operating systems and business software—hardly the building blocks of a future-thinking portfolio, right?

But scratch that cold, conservative, pedestrian surface, and you’ll find a Microsoft that’s a veritable hotbed of cutting-edge innovation. Indeed, the company doesn't just loosen its purse strings when it comes to research and development. No, it practically throws money at really big thinkers to build a more wondrous, fantastical future. In 2011 alone, Microsoft's R&D budget reached a record high of $9.6 billion (yes, with a "B"). That’s a lot of Benjamins, and they’re being spent on some decidedly awesome projects.

The story is too old to be commented.
aviator1891303d ago

I really dig the tech and ideas the r&d department comes up with, but I just wish that they would do a better job of putting more of them to use in the real world.

vishant1011302d ago

Yea like it takes a very long time for the technology to become affordable and mainstream.

MikeMyers1302d ago (Edited 1302d ago )

Not only that but as the original poster alluded to, having those ideas brought forth in an interesting way. When people saw the Milo demo with Kinect they immediately thought of the possibilities. Only to have years later basically dance games taking advantage of the camera while most others had to be on rails. Then on top of that the guy who brought us the demo left Microsoft.

Technology is great and all but only if it's applied in interesting ways. There are lots of rumors about the next Xbox but I want real games that take advantage of the new hardware and possibly new gameplay elemnets, not demonstrations of what it can do.

chukamachine1302d ago

Tech is held back, so companies can bring it out at a slow rate and make $$$.

KidBroSweets21302d ago

I don't care who you are, that demonstration video was awesome. Just not sure anybody would wear that device on their back in public

CommonSense1302d ago (Edited 1302d ago )

Right..........

So when Sony comes up with a ground breaking concept for televisions that is similar to a ground breaking concept from Samsung, one company goes to the other and says, "hey, do you think you can sit on this for a few years so we can make money on our current TVs?"

I don't think so. Technology is held back by cost. 4k resolution, for example, has been around for a while, it just hasn't come out in the mainstream because the cost of production is so high that there's no profitability in mass-production yet.

Do you honestly think that a company is going to hold back its tech when there's a chance the competitors will outshine them? not a chance. Like Apple is sitting on some amazing cell phone that would destroy the competition and make them a bazillion dollars, but they'd rather give up a large % of the market to competitors so they can hold it back for several years. Lets use some common sense here, people. The only entity that deliberately holds back technology is government.

I hear Ford has a hover car that gets 500 mpg and can be produced for the cost of a Toyota Camry, but they don't want to release it cuz they're still milking the Focus.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1302d ago
BanBrother1302d ago

"...but I just wish that they would do a better job of putting more of them to use in the real world..."

Like sharks with laser-beams attached to their heads?

UnholyLight1302d ago

***Fricken Sharks with Fricken laser beams attached to their fricken heads***

Knight_Crawler1302d ago (Edited 1302d ago )

The truth is that sometimes the USA government is at fault for this.

Did you know that NASA has created a tire that will never get a flat and would last you almost a life time.

Did you know that the government was using color TV's in the 60's and flat PLASMA TV's in the 80's

Someone has a created a machine that will give you electrical power for free but the government has ceased it.

The cure for cancer and other life treating illness were discovered years ago.

The government has to control technology for the economy and sometimes for national security - they control when we get certain tech.

Can you imagine how many tire companies would go out of business if we only needed to buy a tire once and how many jobs would be lost.

Can you imagine if we all had a machine that would give free clean energy - oil would be useless.

Do you know how much money the health industry would lose if they had no more cancer patients or research money.

Moentjers1302d ago

Who killed the electric car ?

TekoIie1302d ago (Edited 1302d ago )

I wouldnt say governments killed off all those. For example! Your everyday Joe creates a tire which doesnt wear out over time. Tire companies all pitch together to buy him out and stop what hes doing.

Why do they do this? Because they lose money BIG time if they dont :/

Same goes for cars which wont run on gas. Cars were invented ages ago which use a different source of fuel and their inventors were bought out by oil companies.

I dont know whether to take you seriously on the cancer part though. In all seriousness a company OR GOVERNMENT going to doctors and saying "Hey guys. You see that cancer thing? Yeh we need it to stay around for the long run so do you mind trashing the cure?" Im sorry but when something like that is publicized you cant hide it after that.

Not to mention what would happen were people to find out you payed someone to prevent saving peoples lives. You would effectively be compared to Hitler for the rest of you life...

FunAndGun1302d ago

Just like the Government protected the textile and petroleum industry from hemp and its uses for fabric, fuel, paper and plastics. The REAL reason marijuana became illegal.

Hemp For War!

profgerbik1302d ago (Edited 1302d ago )

No idea why people disagree with this, my dad worked in the Air Force most of his life. He told me the technology they were keeping from the public and this was what 15 years ago, he said it could change the world for the better as we know it.

That is why he became so depressed, lost his mind practically and eventually ended up leaving the Air Force. He felt it was absolutely disturbing they were keeping these technologies from people.

People also don't understand that free energy has existed for probably almost 50 years. Yes free energy, meaning we would never have to pay for electricity, pay for gas or pay for anything really. No need for dangerous nuclear power plants, no need to rob the earth of every resource it has.. All of that..

What is moronic and sadistic is money is technically meaningless, we create it, it's only paper yet we hold such meaning to it for nothing other than greed and a guaranteed position with power.

As always though people are too stupid to care. They go about their lives never questioning why we still using the same things we always have been without any real improvements to society, only improvements to these companies revenues.

Don't believe me? You can get on youtube and there are people who will teach you how to create your own "Free Energy" Generator that can literally power your entire house forever for free other than the cost it took to build it. You'll be amazed at how simple and easy it is.

I hate the world, what I hate most is that people choose to live this way when they know damn well we don't have to.

Same goes for medicine, most people don't know even if someone did find a cure for cancer, AIDS or diseases in general. It has to be processed through the FDA, it can take literally two years for them just to examine it just to most likely refuse it's existence because they see it making no profit.

Why cure diseases when you can simply keep making money off them? Why use free energy when we can charge people for it? We live in a sick society... It isn't some conspiracy, this is the world we have created for ourselves. I would like to think in my lifetime this would change but I know when I die people will probably be dumber than they are now is the sad reality.

It's gotten even worse.. Companies are allowed to lie to sell products, they are allowed to make up imaginary fee's just to cash in on yet no one seems to care enough.

I do and clearly you do but obviously there aren't enough in the world that do is the problem.

Qrphe1302d ago

@Pekolie

Yes, companies ultimately make these decisions but they're the ones lobbying government to get these ideas working. And the governnment usually goes eith them, do you know why? Because most of the individuals we picked for office get A LOT of donation money from many companies.gy

rpd1231302d ago (Edited 1302d ago )

I guarantee you that if the government had a way to give free clean energy that they wouldn't suppress it. It would end our dependence on foreign oil, create jobs because everything would need to be adapted, and they could have a monopoly over the rest of the world.

The tire that will never go flat is designed for use in space...it's NASA. It's not made for here. It was also developed by Goodyear, so it wouldn't even be the government holding it back, it'd be corporations.

If the cure for cancer was found years ago, I don't think the government would suppress it. They could make a lot of money off of it. It's not as if it would prevent cancer from ever developing in people, it'd still need to be treated. The health industry would also become less expensive because there would be less demand being placed on it, thereby making medical care more affordable for people in the country.

You make it sound as if the government had modern day plasma screens in the 80s. They looked like this

DasTier1302d ago

I hate the world too, full of too many liberals and faggots

Armyntt1302d ago

Im not saying what you say is false but ive heard these lines a million times before. Such as, there was cures for all diseases but its more profitable to sell fixes for the symptoms than a cure for the disease. Its borderline tinfoil hat conspiracy stuff. Wheres the proof these things were created? A reliable link or something. A RELIABLE LINK!

akaakaaka1302d ago

Glad that some of you arr interested on been aware of the truth ..

Check todoslibres dot com for a lot of amazing information and be aware.
also sear for everything is relative on facebook and like the page

ItsTrue1302d ago

To rpd123:

You do realise that Nikola Tesla developed a machine that generated wireless electricity but all the information and technology was suppressed.

Same with electric cars, they're not around because of the oil companies, they've got all the power. They will lose all their money if electric cars take over and so they have to suppress them by buying them out.

You have to realise that not everyone wants to better society. Some just want power and money.

DragonKnight1302d ago

Some of you don't seem to understand.

Why would the government hide a cure for cancer? Simply because the prolonged cost of treating the symptoms of cancer trumps any cost of an outright cure. People paying a one time fee for the cure is not the same as people paying a continuous fee just to feel alright. Then there's the population control agendas. If you don't think each government has plans for population control, you're naive.

Free energy would create temporary jobs, once everything is adapted, all those jobs would be gone and no revenue from energy will be coming in. Charging for energy is a continuous revenue stream.

Everything the government does is about continuous revenue stream and maintaining power. Cellular phones existed before land lines. Nikola Tesla had inventions that would have changed the world, but he was suppressed by Edison and the U.S. government because of his free energy, and wireless energy transfer plans.

There is all kinds of "right in front of you" evidence that proves all this stuff and as we all know, the best way to hide is in plain sight.

rainslacker1302d ago

Unless they found a way to cure all types of cancer it seems silly for them to suppress it. There are 100's of types of cancer, and I don't mean just attacking different parts of the body, but different ways in which they attack the body.

Research of this nature is usually academic. It isn't "pitched" to the pharmaceutical companies for production. It is published in papers, at which time pharmaceutical companies may take an interest in developing it. Any company that came up with a cure for cancer would be rich beyond belief. While they may have to put up with the FDA in the US, the rest of the world may not be so stringent. You think that it would go unnoticed if it were in another country?

The electric car is already in production. It's just expensive because of what it takes to run one. Whether that energy comes from fuel or the electric company, it doesn't change the fact that energy isn't just created out of nowhere.

Instead of telling us to go search youtube how about posting a link so we know what your talking about. I'm sure whatever they propose has drawbacks, and honestly, most people don't have the technical knowledge to wire up anything that generates current to their home. Doing so is dangerous and possibly fatal. If this existed, someone would market it, electric company be damned. There are plenty of people who wouldn't care about the money from a buy-out. If what you say is true however, that it is relatively free and easy, then it would have had a lot more momentum than some guy claiming it's so on the internet.

Many companies have always lied when selling products. That has nothing to do with the government, just peoples blind acceptance of what they are told.

rpd1231302d ago

@itstrue

Yeah I do know that. It's also not safe to use around humans, so there's that.

onyoursistersback1302d ago

i hear what you say, the same thing happen with the car that ran with tap water. there where 2 people that invented it. One was a Mexican, and the other i dont know, point is.
there ideas where held back, and no....they where not bot out. they ended up missing im not saying the government had something to do with it, but big oil company's have enough money to may any one diaper.

rainslacker1301d ago

A few of you would do well for yourselves by looking up a term referred to as "Occam's Razor"

+ Show (12) more repliesLast reply 1301d ago
shutUpAndTakeMyMoney1302d ago (Edited 1302d ago )

Also makes me wonder what Valve is up to..

" I’ve signed an NDA so I can’t reveal much more. I’ll just say that I really saw the future. (it’s not a small deal to see a virtual but highly realistic alien stand beside a real human in the same room with you, walk around the room and wink at you. And all that without a screen, a projector or even a computer near you"
http://www.kotaku.com.au/20...

O_o

TBONEJF1302d ago

All they doing is suing some other manufactures in the mobile industry with their millions. Haven't seen anything new except their SURFACE tablet

aviator1891302d ago

I'm not going to openly bash you with a list of all of the tech ms's r&d comes out with, but you really should look into it more if all you think that ms does is sue and has the surface.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 1301d ago
abzdine1302d ago

as unprecise as kinect! they dont look stupid with a camera on their shoulder

Sp1d3ynut1302d ago

Um..."unprecise" isn't a word.

Sp1d3ynut1302d ago

Yeah...I get the idea that you're immature and/or uneducated.

RandomDude6551302d ago

I don't understand. If MS spends all this money on R&D, why do they usually move last into an already crowded market? Why don't they move first? Apple for example spends 1 to 4 billion in R&D and revolutionized two markets ( http://techcrunch.com/2012/... Also why is this on n4g and not the tech website n4g has?

vishant1011302d ago

microsoft are usually first to do things except they don't do it practical and affordable. i.e they had tablets in 2000 but they were expensive and the os was not engineered for tablets. apple is just good at taking other peoples tech and making it mainstream. i assume that this is on N4G because a lot of the tech will eventually find its way into gaming.

nukeitall1302d ago

@cchum:

Because repackaging other peoples technology in a super spiffy design doesn't cost Apple as much. Almost nothing of what Apple does is tecnical demanding. It's more of a fresh coat of paint on existing technology and unfortunately people love that.

What is innovative about Apple is their marketing and how they can get seemingly simple products to be desireable. I have never seen a device more desireable in almost all parts of the world than the iPhone. It is now the Mercedes/BMW of the phone world.

MS on the other was in the smart phone and tablet business way before Apple, but they are a typical tech company that doesn't know how to design sexy products. I can count on one hand the number of products I thought was sexy, but they are changing their ways.

The_Infected1302d ago (Edited 1302d ago )

Wow almost 9.6 billion goes into cloud computing? Move over Gaikai! Lol

"All of the projects we’ve touched on so far are real, concrete research that has produced real, concrete results in the lab. That kind of research isn’t cheap… which is why it’s surprising to learn that projects like these take up only 10% of Microsoft’s R&D budget. The rest the $9.6 billion dollar tab is being rung up by the cloud computing division."

Very interesting. It seems they would offload physics and other complex things in the games to the cloud instead of streaming the entire game. Amazing idea since latency wouldn't matter and neither a loss in picture quality while still yet taking care of the demanding parts of the game.

"The leaked Xbox document provided another example of how this research will let Microsoft offer new capabilities. It referred to the use of cloud computing to create a console with becomes more powerful over time. This would be accomplished by off-loading some compute tasks to remote servers. A feature like that, if it worked as advertised, would give the company a huge edge in the ongoing console wars."

Irishguy951302d ago

Well what would you expect? If Cloud computing is coming Next gen Microsoft will throw more money than the other two can handle at it. in this case, MS are throwing Sony's entire worth at it.

DeadlyFire1302d ago

Well with any cloud tech in a console. The console can be more powerful over time due to one simple fact. Cloud computing can exceed the graphics capabilities of a console easy. When console limits are reached Cloud should be utilized at some point for games. Only demand would be bandwidth.

As far as what you are saying goes with offloading compute tasks to remote servers. Its a nice idea, but Bandwidth has to be lighting fast to use it. Right now that is not possible. It would lag the hell out of any game and crash it. Even Minecraft.

nukeitall1302d ago

@DeadlyFire:

Cloud might have vast processing power, but it still has enemy number one which nobody has overcome yet, latency!

No matter how fast you can do the computation, but if you can't get the result fast enough it still means nil. That is why I don't think cloud computing will take off in gaming any time soon.

With the internet, there is still no guarantee you will get a package at a certain time even with the best internet connection. Packets on the internet aren't guaranteed a path from point A to point B.

Neko_Mega1302d ago

Give me a computer that works like the one in the Iron Man movies and I'll be happy.

Elwenil1302d ago

I'd be happy with an operating system that was worth a damn.

Show all comments (52)
The story is too old to be commented.