Microsoft's Patent On Fast Shutdowns Shows Why Windows Is So Slow To Shut Down
from the you-need-a-patent-for-that dept
A bunch of folks have sent over the story of how Microsoft recently patented its method of shutting down Windows (7,788,474), which plenty of people are mocking for all sorts of reasons. Reader Prashanth points out the fact that the patent actually helps demonstrate why Microsoft's shut down process is so slow. The whole thing just highlights how companies these days file for completely ridiculous patents just to pad their patent portfolio, and potentially to block others from doing pretty obvious things.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: operating system, patents, shutdown, windows
Companies: microsoft
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
my own patent for instant Windows shutdown
We are proud to announce that after a decade in development.
An instantaneous shutdown methodology for Windows that rivals and out performs anything Micro$oft can release.
It is called
'Instantaneous Preemption of Further Computing via Immediate Termination of Power Source via Extraction of Energy Conductor'
Just rolls of the tongue, doesn't it!
Be forewarned it is being developed for all other computing systems.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: my own patent for instant Windows shutdown
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: my own patent for instant Windows shutdown
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
There, fixed that for you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Microsoft Patents Ones, Zeroes
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
grr
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: grr
(turns up volume on AM talk radio)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: grr
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Does anyone really believe this patent is for any other purpose, and if so...why?
Patents are sought for any number or reasons, but in the case of established products released to the consumer market it is not at all unusual to secure a patent for the sole purpose of mitigating the possibility that a third party may later attempt to secure rights in an "improvement" that can easily interfere with long planned product improvements.
It is called "heading off a potential headache before it comes to pass and becomes a real headache".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
: P
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Patents are not products,, but you should know that right !!!
You dont take out a patent on something, that you have allready fully developed to a commercial product.
You patent your idea, then you develop that idea, with the protection of the patent for that development.
You can sell the license of that patent to someone else if they want to use your idea.
Or you can just hold onto it, its up to them, after all they came up with the idea..
If it was so obvious, why didnt YOU come up with it ? Or the OIN patent it ?
Often things are "obvious" once you've seen them, but that makes NO difference. Its still an original invention, just because you could not work it out until you saw someone else do it. does not make it obvious...
The only person it was obvious too was the person who invented it, all the rest of the plebs are all shocked.
"Oh right,, ofcourse, why didnt I see that".
Why, you are not a creative inventor, you did not see a problem and think of an effective method to help that problem.
BTW: My MS windows, shuts down just fine, and fast.. that is the problem again ?
*boots up damn fast too !!*.
But its usually weeks or months between shutdowns and restarts, so fast shutdown or startup ,,, who cares !!!.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Patents are not products,, but you should know that right !!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Patents are not products,, but you should know that right !!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Patents are not products,, but you should know that right !!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Patents are not products,, but you should know that right !!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Patents are not products,, but you should know that right !!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Patents are not products,, but you should know that right !!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Patents are not products,, but you should know that right !!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Patents are not products,, but you should know that right !!!
Anonymous Coward - "Months between shutdowns? Are you saying you don't install the numerous security patches every month?"
WTF? The reading comprehension fail makes my brain hurt.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Patents are not products,, but you should know that right !!!
That's right - instead, you patent something that someone else has developed into a successful commercial product and then sue them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You dont patent ideas, you patents things or methods.
And they are not patenting a finished commercial product, they are pantenting a method or technique or system that is new or unique that is able to be patented.
I can have an idea, but there is no way you can go to the patent office and say "I have this great idea".
So, NO you dont patent idea's, you patent the product of a new and inovative 'thing'.
So ofcourse, im sure you could go to the patent office and say "I have an idea for a new mouse trap" patent my idea.
They will laugh at you, they will say, "SO WHAT", or more probably "your an idiot".
Here is how it works,
You have an idea, (you think), during that thinking process you get the idea for a new mouse trap.
THAT IS THE IDEA,
But you dont patent the idea, you turn your idea into something that is functional, or show how it can be done physically by drawings and plans.
That is what you patent, the PHYSICAL manifestation of your idea, not the idea itself.
And when you get the patent you will have a patent for a new method of catching mice. You do not have the patent on the idea, you allready had that.
But accuracy and correct terminology or even simple logic are not strong points on this site..
Mabey you have never read a patent ?? certain it appears you have little understanding of the concepts.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: You dont patent ideas, you patents things or methods.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: You dont patent ideas, you patents things or methods.
Software processes are physical now? Who knew?
"when you get the patent you will have a patent for a new method of catching mice. You do not have the patent on the idea, you allready had that."
Not really. The problems have been described here many times, and if you spent as much time reading and understanding the arguments instead of typing pointless reams of text then you'd understand this.
The arguments that you've failed to address are that:
1. With software patents there is no physical manifestations, and often only one way to implement the idea. If the idea is relatively obvious (e.g. the 1 click patent), this allows a company to monopolise a particular idea. Given that patents can be valid even if the company who owns it has not implemented the patented item, this leads to patent trolling - companies who simply sue people who actually implement obvious ideas.
2. There is an obviousness test that's meant to counteract this by not allowing patents that are obvious to those skilled in the field. The patent office has done a pitifully poor job so far of enforcing this.
3. These facts combined have created an environment where actually innovating is difficult or expensive, and the reward for creating a successful product is to be sued by patent holders who have not successfully implemented the idea (that the successful company often came up with independently). This is the exact opposite of what the patent system is meant to encourage, so it's criticised.
Please, try addressing those actual arguments being made and not depending on strawmen and ignoring major parts of the arguments presented.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: You dont patent ideas, you patents things or methods.
'You dont take out a patent on something, that you have allready fully developed to a commercial product.
You patent your idea, then you develop that idea, with the protection of the patent for that development.
You can sell the license of that patent to someone else if they want to use your idea.'
That was YOU saying that in this very thread... buuut, you know... as long as you don't respond.. you can pretend you scored a point :D
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Let Them Have Their Stupid Patent
a) doesn’t apply to any sanely-designed OSes, and
b) will stifle any third party that attempts to bring out a tool for speeding up Windows’ shutdown.
This isn’t a case of killing two birds with one stone, it’s more like Microsoft shooting itself in both feet with one bullet!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I shouldn't feed the Darryl troll, but...
b) we have a chart at work of the machines up longest: Macs and linux boxes are atop with months 'tween shutdowns, most winboxes restart daily, at least (especially those whose users insist on using docks); and
c) the astonishing thing about Windows machines is that they shutdown slowly even when they crash.
What a doof.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I'm guessing the 'HP' is your server? If so then that sounds like an apple to oranges comparison. Servers generally have lots of services running in the background, which need to do more work to shut down gracefully.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
SLOW?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: SLOW?
Your windows pc isn't reliable in this timing. If you want to leave your workspace, and have to store your laptop in a locker, and are forced by company policies to download-and-install updates, you're late at home quite often.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Simply known as...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This is one example why patents are good, we can use this patent to learn why Microsoft shuts down so slowly so that teachers can teach new students how to avoid making similar mistakes in the future. Patents offer additional transparency for universities to use when they teach their students how to program.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]