Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room

Microsoft's Pay-Per-Use PC: ...Worst? Idea? Ever?

(1/6) > >>

zridling:
Microsoft doesn't think so, and has filed a patent on the idea.



Basically the idea is this: Your computer becomes a meter. Deposit money (in some form), it will run. Stop feeding it cash, and you computer becomes a brick. As cloud computing overtakes the traditional idea of local computing, then PC hardware should be much like your cellphone: pay for what you use when you use it. And when you need more computing power or you get another machine and continue paying for its use, with little or no cost for the actual machine. $1.25 to surf the web for an hour? $1 to play a game for an hour? To me, this smells like Microsoft is desperate to return to the days of Compuserve, AOL, and MSN, where you paid a corporation for both access and what content you're allowed to see online.

I VOTE NO.

Shades:
As a company I can understand the reasoning behind this concept...who would say no to a steady (and huge!) customer cash flow while being in control of content  which generates another cash flow.

That whole "cloud computing" thingy will get never any hold of my system(s) in any way...and now this?

zridling, even if you are not happy with it or not...count me in as a member of your NO-voting camp.

Darwin:
+2 for a big, fat NO! Vote  :down: :mad: :o

40hz:
It's just the old "rent clicks on a time-share terminal connected to a mainframe" decked out in Web 2.0 lingerie.

I don't know what's sadder: Microsoft attempting to re-patent the 'pay phone' - or the very real chance that the U.S. Patent Office just might be stupid enough to let them.

app103:
What is the major difference between this business model and an internet cafe, from the end user's perspective?

How about those mobile phone companies that supply the phone and bill you a base price by the month, plus additional fees for usage?

And how do you get a patent for an idea for a business model any way? The patent office only grants patents for inventions...implementations of ideas and not the idea itself.

Just because they filed for the patent doesn't mean it will be granted. Anyone can file for a patent on anything they want, doesn't mean you'll get the patent, and doesn't mean the patent is worth anything even if you do get it. There are plenty of stupid things that are completely worthless that have been patented.

I came pretty close to patenting something I made and used when my daughter was very small, but would likely make me the victim of many lawsuits from irresponsible mothers, if I ever released the product to the public. I still could have wasted my time & money getting a patent on it though, even if I never had any intention of manufacturing & selling the product.

It was an elastic strap with a loop/snap on each end, used to hold baby bottles (or toys) to a stroller (or car seat), so if the child dropped it, it wouldn't hit the ground (or floor) and get lost (or dirty). Some mother would be likely to end up using it in a crib, playpen, or another situation where they aren't watching their child all that closely and then hold me responsible if their kid got strangled and died while they were neglecting them. (baby products need to be completely idiot-proof, not because babies are idiots, but too many of their parents are)

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page