Microsoft pay-as-you-go patent application rejected

Engadget: "Sorry folks -- we know that you were looking forward to a future of "pay to play" computing, but it seems that Microsoft's application has been soundly dissed by the patent office. Reasons for the decision include the company's "occasional use of fuzzy terminology" and the fact that much of this stuff has already been patented. Of course, the decision can be appealed -- but for the time being, if you still want to pay monthly for a computer AT&T has a netbook for you."

[BRACHATTACK]

lulz

[Proxy]

The articles speaks as though MS can't charge per use. Just because the patent fails doesn't mean they can't still do it. It just means that other companies can do it too.

[meepmoopmeep]

man, i just don't like the idea of this patent

soon some crazy corporation will charge us to breathe
o_O

[BrianC6234]

Isn't that what happened in Ahnold's movie Total Recall?

What I'd like to know is was this patent rejected because someone else got it first? It looks like they said it's too general so no way but our patent office is always giving out silly patents that are too general so why change now?

[SaiyanFury]

As I said before, who the hell wants a pay-per-use computer? Lord knows I'd never look at something like that.

[xwabbit]

This is old. Some 1 had already posted this article
For the the person who gave me disagree http://www.n4g.com/tech/New...

[BRACHATTACK]

No, the idea was posted, but now we know how Microsoft failed... EPICALLY

[The Lazy One]

The rejection was also posted... in the same article he gave you...

FAIL...

"Microsoft poses (and U.S. patent office rejects) a plan for pay-as-you-go PCs"

It's pretty much just a way to lease PCs.

[meepmoopmeep]

edit: nvm

[kavkazip]

LOL microsoft fails at everything this is not new

[kavkazip]

MICROSOFT =
░█▀▀ ░█▀█ ░█ ░█▀▀ ░░█▀▀ ░█▀█ ░█ ░█ ░░░
░█▀▀ ░█▀▀ ░█ ░█ ░░░░█▀▀ ░█▀█ ░█ ░█ ░░░
░▀▀▀ ░▀ ░░░▀ ░▀▀▀ ░░▀ ░░░▀░▀ ░▀ ░▀▀▀ ░

[rmedtx888]

I'm sure they were planning to expand this to their consoles too.

[rockleex]

..

[infekt]

LOL. Goood.. Goood.

MS is joke.

[labwarrior]

Otherwise we would all be skrewed

[CryofSilence]

Wtfbbqsaucepwned.

[ACEMANWISE]

Believe it or not but console gaming is being pushed in this direction. People don't realize that 360 owners are paying a subscription fee to play the online portion of their games. What bothers me is the blatent attack on the disc format.

Prior to online, discs were reliable and complete off the shelf. They had to be because there was no online available. But now, people are touting online as a solution to bugged disks, when online caused this problem to begin with. In reality, it's sabotage to the disk format. In reality, they are using that excuse to make digital downloads appear more convienant and reliable. In the end, convienance is replaced by control. Control over your software as online will be required to play single player games as well. At that point, what's to stop them from pulling a stunt with your hardware just like this?

Will they charge double the subscription fees to access both online and single player games? Will there even be ownership anymore? Will they ultimately charge you on an hourly basis too? My opinion is that gaming will be like cable, where they charge you to play software. Then they will charge hourly for the hardware usage as well. These, quite simply, are called software and hardware control methods. And Microsoft is leading the charge to adapt this business model. This is why I never wanted Microsoft in the console gaming business.

[power of Green]

Better just ignor this.

[Graphics Whore]

Lol when you don't like the truth, you ignore it, how many people do you have on your ignore list Poggo? 50-100? I'm not surprised if you rock back and fourth in your chair chanting to yourself 'microsoft is #1"

[fossilfern]

good it was a stupid idea anyway

[Strikepackage Bravo]

The reason it was rejected is because patents already exist like this.

MS just tried to reword it in a way that would allow them to benefit and claim the patent was theirs.

This would mostly be good for large and small businesses, this would allow them to buy higher end components for less cash upfront, and they would be charged based on application usage over a period of time. Many companies already do something similar with hardware alone, (Dell, IBM, HP) this would just include software.

It has nothing to do with some evil MS plot to destroy the world, you guys are so naive.

[Yo Mama]

"It has nothing to do with some evil MS plot to destroy the world"

No, just some evil MS plot to line their pockets off of an idea that wasn't originally theirs to begin with.

[Graphics Whore]

""It has nothing to do with some evil MS plot to destroy the world"

Business has no ethics or morals, theoretically they already are. Of course it's not just one company, it's capitalism in general.

[y0haN]

Thank god. This was a terrible monopolistic idea.

[man0fsteel]

There you go again Microsoft...

http://farm3.static.flickr....

[darkjanus]

i doubt the isea would work. People may be sheep, but they're not lemmings. Companies will try this but i doubt they'll get it as far as hardware. Software maybe, but people will simply switch to free apps.

MS has already started down this path. Take a look at xbox live, they found a way to charge for something that has always been free. Anyoe willing to pay for LIVE is fool. And before the 360 fanboys try to kill me i dont hate the 360, i just refuse to pay for somethin gwhich should be free.