Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Microsoft Agrees To License ActiveSync To Google

kdawson posted more than 5 years ago | from the kitchen-sync dept.

Patents 133

JacobSteelsmith writes "Microsoft agreed today to license ActiveSync to Google. Google is using ActiveSync as part of Google Sync, which enables the synchronization of data between mobile devices and, presumably, Google Calendar and your contacts stored at Google. 'Microsoft's vice president of intellectual property and licensing, Horacio Gutierrez, said in a statement that the Google license is "a great example of Microsoft's openness to generally license our patents under fair and reasonable terms so long as licensees respect Microsoft intellectual property."'"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Horacio Gutierrez is also a pianist (-1, Offtopic)

treeves (963993) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792261)

...a very good one. I'm sure it's a different Horacio Gutierrez.

Re:Horacio Gutierrez is also a pianist (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26792541)

Linux just isn't ready for the desktop yet. It may be ready for the web servers that you nerds use to distribute your TRON fanzines and personal Dungeons and Dragons web-sights across the world wide web, but the average computer user isn't going to spend months learning how to use a CLI and then hours compiling packages so that they can get a workable graphic interface to check their mail with, especially not when they already have a Windows machine that does its job perfectly well and is backed by a major corporation, as opposed to Linux which is only supported by a few unemployed nerds living in their mother's basement somewhere. The last thing I want is a level 5 dwarf (haha) providing me my OS.

Re:Horacio Gutierrez is also a pianist (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26792567)

* This troll written by a perl script running on Linux.

Re:Horacio Gutierrez is also a pianist (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26792581)

Quit with the fucking copypasta. You clearly have not used linux in a long long time if that's what you think it still is.

Re:Horacio Gutierrez is also a pianist (1)

binarylarry (1338699) | more than 5 years ago | (#26793155)

Due to the global downturn, I can no longer afford to distribute and maintain my TRON fanzine on my Dunegons and Dragons web sight, you insensitive clod!

Cue Activesync Connector for Android (2, Funny)

TJ_Phazerhacki (520002) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792269)

Permanent beta in 3...2...1...

Re:Cue Activesync Connector for Android (1)

truthsearch (249536) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792455)

Cue the tiresome overused joke in 3...2... oh, wait, already done...

Re:Cue Activesync Connector for Android (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26792587)

Cue the joke about the poster making the joke in which the n+1 poster is oblivious to the fact that his joke is the same joke as the nth poster.

Re:Cue Activesync Connector for Android (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26793523)

Cue the "Mod Parent Up" in 3...2... oh, wait, already done...

Oops. Hell freezing over? (2, Insightful)

rainer_d (115765) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792279)

OTOH, after AAPL licensing it, they would look stupid if they refused GOOG.
And with this step, it *is* the de-facto standard.
Intersting thought, that the only thing being left of MSFT in a couple of years is a protocol to sync wireless clients to a server...

Re:Oops. Hell freezing over? (1)

Rayeth (1335201) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792297)

I don't know about hell freezing over just yet, but someone is probably keeping their eyes on the dropping thermostat. This particular story is less interesting IMO than when MS licensed ActiveSync to Apple.

Re:Oops. Hell freezing over? (1)

rainer_d (115765) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792409)

In some ways, yes.
But Google has a much wider audience than Apple (which is a niche, though a spacious and comfortable one by now)
Apple, is bigger as a company, but Google is really (in more ways than I like) *the internet*.
Ironic, that if MSFT had started opening up their protocols a couple of years earlier, they would probably be in a much better position than they are now.
Maybe it's too little too late, maybe not.
History (and the stock-market) will tell ;-)

Re:Oops. Hell freezing over? (4, Insightful)

aaarrrgggh (9205) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792899)

Even more at issue is the fact that Google's offering compete directly with Microsoft's server offerings. Apple was just licensing a connector component for handhelds to use MS Servers.

Re:Oops. Hell freezing over? (1)

jonbryce (703250) | more than 5 years ago | (#26795201)

And Laptops / Desktops when Snow Leopard comes out.

Re:Oops. Hell freezing over? (1)

interstellar_donkey (200782) | more than 5 years ago | (#26794135)

It sets a pleasant precedent. If you can't beat 'em, join 'em.

By intermingling bits of software that kind of works with other bits of software that kind of works, rather than keeping everything proprietary working with buggy software that sucks and nobody likes, they've figured out that "hey, we might just profit from this".

Re:Oops. Hell freezing over? (4, Insightful)

jaseuk (217780) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792485)

Actually this is one of the missing pieces in the Google Apps puzzle. They've gained push e-mail and synching on anything that supports ActiveSync which includes Windows Mobile devices & iPhone/iPod Touch.

Once they finish off Google gears for offline gmail, then they have pretty much fixed the problem off offline / mobile access to GMail which makes Google Apps alot more appealing.

Most of the complaints against the use of web services is that you lose out when on the road or internet connection is down.

It's almost the Exchange Alternative everyone has been looking for.

Jason.

Re:Oops. Hell freezing over? (3, Informative)

lusidd (1282590) | more than 5 years ago | (#26794583)

Push e-mail is still not available (at least for a WM phone).

Re:Oops. Hell freezing over? (5, Funny)

sexconker (1179573) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792533)

Do you talk in stock symbols to make yourself look smart? Or did you really not realize that using "Apple", "Google", and "MS" would have used only 1 more character than what you did, would have been much more readable, and would have made you look like far less of a tool? (And that completely ignores your effort on the shift or caps lock key.)

Re:Oops. Hell freezing over? (0)

rainer_d (115765) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792679)

Do you talk in stock symbols to make yourself look smart? Or did you really not realize that using "Apple", "Google", and "MS" would have used only 1 more character than what you did, would have been much more readable, and would have made you look like far less of a tool? (And that completely ignores your effort on the shift or caps lock key.)

I'm sorry if I offended you.
Sorry for the typo in "interesting". I only talk in stock-symbols if I happen to know them.
I call MSFT MSFT because some people don't like it to be called M$. ;-)

Re:Oops. Hell freezing over? (2, Funny)

Ethanol-fueled (1125189) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792839)

As long as you don't mention JAVA. My JAVA stock just fell through the floor after two of their good barristas left.

Re:Oops. Hell freezing over? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26793367)

I don't know anything about stock markets or codes but it appears JAVA is a stock code for Sun [google.com] .

Re:Oops. Hell freezing over? (2, Informative)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792909)

For the record, Microsoft often refers itself as MSFT even outside stock quotes. For example, on public Microsoft newsgroups and forums, whenever a Microsoftie replies to a thread in his official capacity (typically support guys, but devs come there to help as well), his name will be suffixed with "[MSFT]".

Re:Oops. Hell freezing over? (2, Insightful)

quarterbuck (1268694) | more than 5 years ago | (#26793139)

It is the convention to refer to companies by stock quotes in financial forums (yahoo finance for example). Maybe the poster is more familiar with those boards than with slashdot.
We should welcome all outsiders to our board (onboard?) no? With the recent market situation it is a case of "poor, hungry, huddled masses" :-)

Re:Oops. Hell freezing over? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26794479)

I, for one, welcome our new financial-forums-dwelling, stock-symbol-using overlords.

Re:Oops. Hell freezing over? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26792713)

And with this step, it *is* the de-facto standard.

A defacto standard, huh? Are we talking about something implemented by three products now? Out of how many on the market? Can I look up this standard and write my own implementation? What's the RFC number?

Re:Oops. Hell freezing over? (2, Insightful)

pnevin (168332) | more than 5 years ago | (#26793205)

RFC 666

The bottom line... (1)

argent (18001) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792785)

And with this step, it *is* the de-facto standard.

Instead of any open standard, a proprietary protocol controlled by Microsoft is now the standard for syncing.

Thanks a whole hell of a lot, Google and Apple.

Re:The bottom line... (2, Interesting)

gwait (179005) | more than 5 years ago | (#26793231)

It's not clear at all from the article that Google are actually using the "Microsoft Active Sync" software directly. It says they licensed the "technology".

I expect they made their own "two way" sync product for google that does not interoperate with active sync, maybe?

It's an incredibly obvious idea, just another lame patent locked down by big dollars.
You could argue that two way information sync has been going on since the first two people had an agreeable conversation.

Re:The bottom line... (1)

jonbryce (703250) | more than 5 years ago | (#26795215)

On the client side, I would hope you can just put Google's server details into Activesync and have your google mail and calendar appear on your phone.

Re:Oops. Hell freezing over? (1)

superNag (72318) | more than 5 years ago | (#26795519)

Well, they also invented the 'XMLHTTP' which spawned Ajax, but almost nobody would associate them with it now.

Is this news? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26792295)

Hold on a second - one IT company licenses software/protocols to another? That's crazy talk. . .

Re:Is this news? (1)

andy_t_roo (912592) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792941)

when company B is becoming a major competitor to A in several key areas you don't often see A give B a nice advantage in terms of functionality and compatibility.

Oh dear (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26792299)

From one bad company to another. Sigh...

See? (1)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792301)

We're not evil! Honest injun! We licnsed ActiveSync to Google, who is also not evil!

Okay, I can't keep a straight face now for some reason... :-?

Re:See? (1)

pnevin (168332) | more than 5 years ago | (#26793213)

Maybe "do no evil" was meant to read "do know evil"?

Re:See? (3, Funny)

mike_sucks (55259) | more than 5 years ago | (#26793999)

We're not evil! Honest injun!

Fucking racist whiteys.

Buahhhhh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26792311)

"a great example of Microsoft's openness"

Buahhhhhhh

Googletastic (0, Troll)

Reason58 (775044) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792365)

Now Google can sync their deletions [slashdot.org] with your portable device too.

Hah! That's a joke (1, Interesting)

Weaselmancer (533834) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792369)

"a great example of Microsoft's openness to generally license our patents under fair and reasonable terms so long as licensees respect Microsoft intellectual property."

Ha ha yeah, my ass.

What Google has just done is to license PPP from Microsoft. Nice job.

Don't believe me? Read this. [handhelds.org]

All the "Activesync Protocol" is, is good old PPP.

Re:Hah! That's a joke (1)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792499)

P-P-PowerBook [zug.com] ?

Re:Hah! That's a joke (2, Informative)

LiENUS (207736) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792531)

All the "Activesync Protocol" is, is good old PPP.

Umm what? It looks like he's just using ppp to connect the device up to his computer. ActiveSync is as much PPP as email is ethernet.

Re:Hah! That's a joke (2, Interesting)

horza (87255) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792535)

"a great example of Microsoft's openness to generally license our patents under fair and reasonable terms so long as licensees respect Microsoft intellectual property"

I translate this as: "we bought this thing ages ago, we used it to drive somebody we didn't like out of business, it no longer provides us with any competitor advantage, and the code base is a mess anyway."

Isn't industry moving to SyncML? This guy was watching ActivSync creep up 3 years ago [funambol.com] .

Phillip.

Who's using SyncML? (1)

argent (18001) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792821)

Isn't industry moving to SyncML?

With Microsoft, Google, and Apple behind ActiveSync, apparently not. Who's using SyncML?

Re:Who's using SyncML? (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792923)

All Nokia smartphones?

Re:Who's using SyncML? (1)

Talez (468021) | more than 5 years ago | (#26794121)

lolwut? [nokia.com]

Nokia has an Exchange connector for most of its S60 models and has had it for ages. It also has a Blackberry connector for those people with BES as well.

Re:Who's using SyncML? (1)

DiLLeMaN (324946) | more than 5 years ago | (#26795267)

Apart from Nokia (and other handset makers too, no doubt), didn't Google support SyncML in their spiffy new Mobile Sync [google.com] thingy?

At first I was really interested in that, because I'm both a Nokia and a Google user. Unfortunately, for my phone calendar sync isn't supported, kinda making this whole thing useless for me.

Re:Hah! That's a joke (1)

flydpnkrtn (114575) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792557)

I think you're completely misunderstanding what he was setting up there... it looks like he's using PPPD to "bridge" the iPAQ across his Linux box to his Windows box, just so he can sniff the ActiveSync traffic.

From the page you reference:
"You can use your device as if it were *directly* connected to the Windows box, and you can spy the traffic between the Device and the Server !

The protocol seems to be needing a TCP server on the ActiveSync side, on port 5679. "

That, er, doesn't mean ActiveSync is PPP.

Re:Hah! That's a joke (3, Informative)

DaHat (247651) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792583)

I suspect I am not the only one who now feels dumber having read your comment.

Your saying that Active Sync is just PPP is like claiming that... DNS is just ARP... one (can and in the case of Active Sync) may use the other... but is not absolutely required to... and even when such a low level protocol is used, it is the higher level data that matters to applications.

If it was that simple... don't you think there'd be more FOSS implementations of ActiveSync than there is if it was just PPP... oh right, it's not!

To recap... PPP: Layer 2 protocol, Active Sync: (likely) Layer 3-5 protocol

Re:Hah! That's a joke (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26792707)

Point to Point Protocol

Hrmpf (1)

coyote4til7 (189857) | more than 5 years ago | (#26793063)

It can connect over ppp but so can a lot of other things. This is sort of like saying that because Firefox connects over TCP/IP, the html protocol is just TCP/IP or that a Porsche is just old plain asphalt because it gets somewhere by road.

Re:Hah! That's a joke (5, Informative)

nxtw (866177) | more than 5 years ago | (#26793081)

What Google has just done is to license PPP from Microsoft. Nice job.

Don't believe me? Read this. [handhelds.org]

All the "Activesync Protocol" is, is good old PPP.

No. Google licensed Exchange ActiveSync [microsoft.com] , a protocol runs on top of http(s) to provide calendar and contacts synchronization and push email for mobile devices. It only requires an internet connection - unlike BlackBerry, which requires special network support.

On the client side, Exchange ActiveSync is implemented by the iPhone (since firmware 2.0), Windows Mobile devices, and some Sony Ericsson and Nokia devices. Microsoft Exchange is the most popular server, but other closed- (Zimbra) and open-source (Z-Push) implementations exist.

Re:Hah! That's a joke (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26794733)

zimbra is opensource

Re:Hah! That's a joke (1)

nxtw (866177) | more than 5 years ago | (#26795709)

Although the main Zimbra product is open-source, the connector for ActiveSync is not. It requires an additional license.

Re:Hah! That's a joke (1)

alanwj (242317) | more than 5 years ago | (#26795109)

All the "Activesync Protocol" is, is good old PPP.

Not even close to the same universe as correct.
 
ActiveSync is an email synchronization protocol (among other things) built on top of WBXML and HTTP(S). See Microsoft's documentation for it here [google.com] .

Re:Hah! That's a joke (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26795815)

ok,
then, try acessing a windows mobile device with your "good 'n' old PPP".
its hell a lot more than just PPP

woopee (3, Insightful)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792387)

Really this is ...
Okay why can't we have an open standard to sync data with mobile devices?
I mean just how hard would it be? I don't use outlook under windows and I do use Linux. I want some way to sync my phone to all my systems.

Re:woopee (1)

icebike (68054) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792555)

It would be very hard.

1) Devise something (spend 4 years getting to version 1.0)
2) Spend 15 years trying to get any handset makers to use it.
3) Defend handset maker in court after Microsoft sues their pants off
4) rinse repeat..

Re:woopee (3, Informative)

jrumney (197329) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792705)

Alternately, use SyncML, which is already available on a large number of non-Microsoft handsets with plugins available for Windows Mobile, Outlook, Exchange and other non-compliant software.

Re:woopee (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26794555)

I agree SyncML is the best things we have, unfortunately best is just not very good:
* No usable and compliant windows clients/servers
    (you can call your outlook/exchange plugin that, but it does not make it so)
* no usable and compliant linux clients/servers
* the clients on handsets are unimaginably crappy
* syncml itself is idiotic in places
    Example: how on earth did no-one think of standardizing the db names)
* syncml is complex as hell (this is the reason for most above points)

Re:woopee (4, Informative)

Constantine XVI (880691) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792641)

We do. It's called SyncML. Google now supports it as well (though calendar sync isn't 100% together yet)

Re:woopee (3, Informative)

mathfeel (937008) | more than 5 years ago | (#26793245)

I use scheduleworld.com and have pretty much given up of synchronizing with Gmail because every time I do it, Gmail complete mess up the first-name/middle-name/last-name of the contact because gmail assume that the display name is in the form of firstname lastname. Is this a nonissue with English-speaking world? Where I live, I want different display format for different names. F-L for Western names and L-F for Asian names. To me, Gmail contact is pretty feature-limited.

Re:woopee (2, Informative)

bcrowell (177657) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792831)

Okay why can't we have an open standard to sync data with mobile devices?

Because your mobile devices are proprietary systems, and the companies who sold them to you don't want use every possible piece of functionality as a revenue stream.

If you want to synchronize your files between various devices, using open-source software, try unison [upenn.edu] . It's free, it's open source, it's fast, and IMO it's of very high quality. I use it to sync two desktops, a server, and an ARM-based network appliance (NSLU2). The key is that none of these are locked down systems sold to you by a cell phone company.

What'd they license? (2, Interesting)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792395)

Does anyone actually know what was licensed here? Was there even a patent involved or is this journalist just expecting sense to spew out of the mouth of a Microsoft executive when he should know better?

Re:What'd they license? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26792479)

They licensed "intellectual property" and as the SCO case shows, that's specific enough.

Err...

Re:What'd they license? (4, Funny)

_Sprocket_ (42527) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792611)

A chair. With a hand-written note saying "Gonna fucking kill you." All very valuable IP.

Re:What'd they license? (2, Interesting)

Tacvek (948259) | more than 5 years ago | (#26793605)

An above poster suggested that they licensed the Exchange ActiveSync protocol, which would allow Android phones to grow support for syncing contacts/calendar-events with your exchange server, and receiving push email. I have no doubt that a patent is involved, but the licensing also mostly likely included protocol documentation and permission to implement such a system. That makes good sense to me, so I'd put money on this being what was licensed. This has nothing to do with the PCPhone ActiveSync protocol.

Re:What'd they license? (1)

PMuse (320639) | more than 5 years ago | (#26794083)

It seems pretty clear from the MS quote that Google took a license to some patents (ones that cover MS ActiveSync). What's not clear from the announcement is whether Google is actually using any MS-written software in it's product.

Anyone know?

Re:What'd they license? (1)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 5 years ago | (#26794141)

Dude, MS quotes are always exactly the same. "We're leveraging our IP and that makes us still a winner, even though we can't seem to ship a product that anyone actually wants, you should buy our stock." They could have sold Google an air strip and they'd say that.

Re:What'd they license? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26794257)

Don't worry, it's standard issue for Microsoft reps to say "our intellectual property" and "our patents" every other sentence when talking to journalists. What they are actually talking about -- does it matter?

To give you an example, I've written a MSFT spokesperson simulator for you. It works on any Microsoft press release. Just remove the [microsoft.com] that Slashdot adds:

lynx -dump http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2009/feb09/02-09VirtualizationSavingsPR.mspx [microsoft.com] | sed "s/\. /. Thanks to Microsoft's innovative patents. /g" | sed "s/, /, using Microsoft intellectual property, /g"

There, indistinguishable from the real thing.

see?? (0, Redundant)

enter to exit (1049190) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792571)

This is why the current state of patent law is stupid

google could have done this in-house easily (it's basically just PPP with bloat), this is just google mitigating the possibility of future trouble with with a company that has an absurdly general patent.

moar plz (2, Funny)

Eil (82413) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792579)

Horacio Gutierrez, said in a statement that the Google license is "a great example of Microsoft's openness to generally license our patents under fair and reasonable terms

Cool, can you point us to all the other examples?

"Fair and Reasonable" (1)

argent (18001) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792741)

"Fair and Reasonable" means "terms that only a large company like Google can afford". If you're an open source project, you can suck Microsoft's exhaust.

"Fair and Reasonable" is a term Microsoft uses to fight off any responsibility for letting open standards pollute their precious proprietary protocols.

Re:moar plz (5, Informative)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792937)

Cool, can you point us to all the other examples?

Sure. You might want to look at the current list of specs covered by the Open Specification Promise [microsoft.com] (that means no licensing fees, royalty-free, and a patent non-enforecement guarantee) for a start.

He added... (1)

strangeattraction (1058568) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792605)

"Thus begins a new world order. In the past we at MS were more than willing to face protracted legal battles with smaller opponents until their resources were depleted. We now wish to move beyond our past antitrust positions and compete freely and openly in the market of ideas. Primarily because in this case we have no choice. The opponent is too large and the economy is bad and we would probably lose. But smaller less financial able companies beware. Don't take this as a sign of weakness. If you do not have the resources for sustained legal action we will show no mercy."

To hell with ActiveSync (1)

argent (18001) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792711)

After my experience with ActiveSync on my iPaq... to hell with it. I won't use any product that uses ActiveSync, even if it's got Theo, RMS, Linus, Steve Jobs, and the whole FreeBSD core team recommending it.

Let alone mere Google.

Re:To hell with ActiveSync (1)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792869)

I won't use any product that uses ActiveSync, even if it's got Theo, RMS, Linus, Steve Jobs, and the whole FreeBSD core team recommending it.

I wouldn't use anything that has all those people recommending it. Because at that point, you know the aliens have begun employing their mind control devices!

*dons Google Tinfoil Hat Perpetual Beta*

The world is not all black and white (2, Insightful)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792715)

A company as big as Microsoft cannot be completely evil. Likewise, a company as big as Google cannot be completely non-evil. MS does play a big role in driving standards, for better or worse. Heck, MS might even be more diligent in getting Silverlight supported on all platforms, whereas I _still_ can't get Flash 8/9 support for my Wii or Android phone. Despite Ballmer's threats to "kill Google", his primary responsibility is to make money for MS shareholders, not to put Google out of business. Besides which, isn't MS planning on abandoning the Zune and getting out of the MP3 player/PDA market anyway? (I wonder if they will still push their OS for cellphones.)

What does that have to do with this? (1)

argent (18001) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792759)

A company as big as Microsoft cannot be completely evil.

Licensing a suite of proprietary interfaces and protocols lest Google implement their own and promote open source and open systems is not an example of Microsoft not being "ebil".

Re:The world is not all black and white (1)

WNight (23683) | more than 5 years ago | (#26795699)

Ballmer's [...] primary responsibility is to make money for MS shareholders

You know, I don't really care if someone is making my life miserable for fun, or because someone is paying them to. This whole "I was just following the 'more profit' order" thing should have gone out with the Nuremberg trials.

The funny thing is that after suing some little company out of existence over some fake shit like a software patent he'd expect one of their employees to help him if he was having a heart attack or choking. As if anything done in "business" is fine.

Respect needs to be earned... (1, Troll)

Wolfbone (668810) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792767)

...and far from earning respect, Microsoft's thieving, scattergun approach to acquiring patents deserves only disgust and contempt. I know it's really the patent system's fault that Microsoft and others are both motivated and enabled to steal by patenting the trivial, the broad, the already invented etc. in the first place, but if theft and extortion were made legal it wouldn't make calls for respect from professional thieves and racketeers any more palatable, would it?

*yawn* (2)

Ritz_Just_Ritz (883997) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792823)

I just tried it with my windows mobile 6.1 phone (Samsung Blackjack II) and followed the instructions to the letter. No joy. It was good for about 20 minutes of aggravation though. Maybe Google can harness that angst for their next datacenter project. grrrr...

here doggy heres your bone (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26792897)

... wow what a AMAZING show of openness.. really now you shouldn't have ...

I give one month (1)

unity100 (970058) | more than 5 years ago | (#26792951)

before this thing starts to smell bad.

NemusSync? (1)

SleepyHappyDoc (813919) | more than 5 years ago | (#26793051)

Does this have any advantage over NemusSync? It doesn't require jailbreaking, but Nemus lets me maintain a calendar on my iPhone that isn't synced or erased when I sync my Google calendar data, which is a feature I do use. What does Google Sync have going for it?

Re:NemusSync? (1)

nxtw (866177) | more than 5 years ago | (#26793345)

It syncs contacts and should eventually support true push email, unless Google decides for some odd reason not to implement it.

Re:NemusSync? (1)

garcia (6573) | more than 5 years ago | (#26793449)

Does this have any advantage over NemusSync? It doesn't require jailbreaking, but Nemus lets me maintain a calendar on my iPhone that isn't synced or erased when I sync my Google calendar data, which is a feature I do use. What does Google Sync have going for it?

Haven't you answered your own question already? While Jailbreaking is a cool hack and NemusSync works, I honestly don't see how you can think it's a viable application for the iPhone. Back when I was jailbreaking my iPhone, I did so solely for NemusSync, unfortunately the side effects of jailbreaking (applications randomly start crashing on startup one after another until they are all failing and require a reinstall) made it not so worthwhile. That and the fact that in order to have the sync happen automatically required quite a little hack to get going and I never found it to reliably sync on time.

Personally I'm much more comfortable with the Google sync route than I am with the NemusSync/jailbreak route. The only reason you would want to stick with that solution is if you're already using an Exchange setup on your iPhone and you don't want to lose the support for Google Calendar.

I hope ActiveSync shows up on Android now (1)

martyFREEDOM (1289032) | more than 5 years ago | (#26793099)

I have been using TouchDown for Exchange support, but built in activesync that I don't have to buy for $30 would be awesome.

This Benefits Both Companies (4, Interesting)

qazwart (261667) | more than 5 years ago | (#26793295)

Google benefits because they can now easily sync to Exchange servers. Before, Google's Exchange synchronization tool required you to keep Outlook as you default Email account and have it installed on your PC and your PC up and running and logged into your account. Even then, it wasn't too smooth.

By licensing ActiveSync, Google can now synchronize their calendar (and gmail) to people's MS Exchange server calenders (and email).

For Microsoft, it takes a bit of pressure off of businesses who are finding Exchange's proprietary technology confining.

Microsoft's Exchange Server is one of the major components that tie businesses to Microsoft based solutions. This monopoly is beginning to fray. Non-Windows portable devices keep on multiplying, and employees are demanding to be serviced by the IT department. In order to prevent companies from abandoning Exchange Server, Microsoft is allowing non-Windows devices some access.

By allowing non-Windows devices access to Exchange, Microsoft hopes to keep their Exchange monopoly alive. Windows systems are still first class Exchange citizens, but by allowing basic synchronization with non-Windows devices, Microsoft has relieved the pressure on companies to abandon Exchange.

Re:This Benefits Both Companies (1)

jonbryce (703250) | more than 5 years ago | (#26795249)

I don't think Microsoft's monopoly is beginning to fray. They have never had a monopoly in mobile devices, and what they are doing is entrenching Exchange as the monopoly standard for email servers.

its a great example all right... (1)

pjr.cc (760528) | more than 5 years ago | (#26793809)

A great example of making a proprietary method of syncing mobile devices even more important when there are open standards already available...

nice one google, lets add to your monopolistic competitor's ability to make the market even less free then it should be.

There are many things that should be forced open and active sync is a good example. Im sure people could list a tonne of others.

Why? (0)

LuYu (519260) | more than 5 years ago | (#26794071)

Why would Google want to license the most broken piece of software that MS has ever produced? ActiveSync is quite possibly the worst software that I have ever had to deal with. It is slow, unstable, and unreliable. It often has to be reinstalled. It fails for no reason. Why would Google want to be within a mile of this twisted mess?

Even a broken app that worked half the time would probably perform better over all than ActiveSync. Using ActiveSync was so painful, I just bought a CF card reader/writer for my HP PDA (compare 15 minutes to transfer an mp3 with ActiveSync to 10 seconds directly).

Not only that, but OpenSync is probably already better already -- and that is saying a lot. That money would be a lot better spent improving OpenSync.

I can honestly understand paying for really good apps -- but broken ones? Where is the value in that? It is like paying full price for a car that does not drive.

Re:Why? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26794477)

They didn't license the software, they licensed the protocol for emails, contacts, calendar to be pushed to devices. MUCH different than the software you are complaining about.

Re:Why? (2, Informative)

dhavleak (912889) | more than 5 years ago | (#26794979)

...It often has to be reinstalled...

...I just bought a CF card reader/writer for my HP PDA (compare 15 minutes to transfer an mp3 with ActiveSync to 10 seconds directly)...

It sounds like you're mistaking the Desktop ActiveSync program (now called WMDC) with Exchange Server ActiveSync (the protocol) that Google licensed. The ActiveSync protocol is one of the few things about Windows Mobile that Just Works.

Unfortunately, only for contacts and calendar (1)

Pascal Sartoretti (454385) | more than 5 years ago | (#26794321)

the synchronization of data between mobile devices

To be precise, the synchronization of some data between mobile devices: it still doesn't support tasks and notes.

It is a pity, but I had a better sync 10 years ago on my palm. The concept of custom conduits allowed for a very smooth synchronization of many different types of information: not only the big four (calendar, contacts, tasks and notes), but also e-books, passwords, etc. I love my iPhone, but I need 5 different ways to sync its data.

Re:Unfortunately, only for contacts and calendar (1)

jonbryce (703250) | more than 5 years ago | (#26795263)

Tasks work fine on Activesync, at least on Windows Mobile Devices. Notes will sync with the desktop Activesync, but not over the air using Exchange Activesync.

Surrender! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26794847)

All your dates are belong to us

respect your kidding (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26795231)

the Google license is "a great example of Microsoft's openness to generally license our patents under fair and reasonable terms so long as licensees respect Microsoft intellectual property."'

Thats me out, license is one thing but respect for Microsoft intellectual property impossible.

Nooooo!!!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26795269)

Why Act%$/#"%(!! [connection reset by peer]

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?