Microsoft said Monday that it is adding a new licensing option, this one dubbed Select Plus and targeted largely at midsize firms.
The program's two main attractions are the fact that it is not tied to a specific term and it makes it easier for different subsidiaries of a company to take advantage of their combined purchasing power.
The additional option runs counter to the trend at Microsoft, which has been working to scale back the number of different licensing plans. The company had managed to shrink its number of options--from 107 programs in 2006 to 23 as of last year. With Select Plus, the number of Microsoft licensing programs has crept back up to 26.
Although it adds yet another option, Joe Matz, corporate vice president at Microsoft, said that Select Plus fills a need.
"Many customers end up with multiple agreements because Select is not as flexible as customers would like," he said. Microsoft isn't getting rid of Select, but expects that over time, customers will choose the new option.
The software maker has come under criticism from some customers and analysts for both the cost and the complexity of its licensing programs.
In a recent report, Forrester advised its clients to plan months ahead to figure out which Microsoft licensing option made the most financial sense. The analysis firm also said that Microsoft's Software Assurance support program is more expensive compared with rivals.
"Microsoft's software maintenance agreement is among the industry's most expensive--25 percent for server products and 29 percent for desktop products," Forrester said in the report. "In terms of upgrade rights--the major element--this is only cost-justified by a three- to four-year upgrade cycle, but Microsoft has undermined Software Assurance's value proposition by missing delivery dates for new versions."
Software licensing drove a healthy increase in revenue for Oracle during its fourth quarter.
For the quarter, which ended May 31, the enterprise software giant reported revenue of $7.24 billion, up 24 percent from the same period a year earlier. During that three-month period, revenue from new software licenses rose 27 percent to $3.14 billion, and revenue from software license updates and product support rose 25 percent to $2.83 billion.
Revenue from services also was on the increase, though not by quite as much. It was up 18 percent, to $1.26 billion.
Oracle said that its net income for May quarter was $2.04 billion, or 39 cents per diluted share, a jump of 27 percent.
In April, Oracle completed its $6.7 billion acquisition of BEA Systems.
In May, Forbes reported that Oracle CEO Larry Ellison was the best-remunerated executive in the tech sector--and overall--with a total 2007 compensation package valued at $192.9 million.
It comes as no surprise that a healthy percentage of Apple consumers buy the products for the way they look. But for those of you less interested in the sleek white boxes and black rectangles, and more interested in the software, then perhaps the Psystar Open Computer is the way to go.
The Psystar computer (which looks like a pretty generic tower) comes installed with Apple's Mac OS X Leopard and functions exactly how you'd expect an Apple to function, but for hundreds of dollars less. In Monday's Daily Debrief, my first question for CNET News.com reporter Tom Krazit was how has Apple not caught on to the small, Florida-based company that's finding ways to get around the licensing agreements. And that's exactly why. They're small and they haven't sold enough machines to waken the sleeping giant. Not yet, at least!
The U.S. Supreme Court handed a big victory to Quanta Computer on Monday when it held that the doctrine of patent exhaustion barred LG Electronics' claims against it.
In doing so, the Supreme Court reversed the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's previous decision that patent exhaustion did not apply to method claims and extended that doctrine to licenses for products that "substantially embod[y] a patent." This case is likely to substantially change the playing field for patentees seeking to monetize their patents in a vertical industry value chain. ... Read more
Six technology titans are banding together to jointly license patents that cover WiMax in an effort to prevent costly royalty rates that might deter adoption of the wireless technology, according to a report Sunday on the Wall Street Journal 's Web site.
Cisco Systems, Intel Corp., Samsung, Sprint Nextel, Alcatel-Lucent, and Clearwire, plan Monday to announce the creation of the organization--to be called the Open Patent Alliance--the newspaper reported, citing people familiar with the groups plans.
WiMax is a wireless broadband standard that has been touted as a breakthrough for cheap high-speed Internet access. Its backers claim that WiMax can transmit data up to 30 miles between broadcast towers and can blanket areas more than a mile in radius with bandwidth that exceeds current DSL and cable broadband capabilities.
After years of heated debate and lobbying, the Patent Reform Act of 2007, which passed in the U.S. House of Representatives and was scheduled for a Senate vote this session, has been taken off the Senate's calendar. It can be revived, but its momentum has effectively fizzled.
Apparently, the Senate has better things to do with its time.
At this point, I don't wish to rehash the issues of, or my viewpoint on, the Patent Reform Act. Besides, as I've said, both sides in the debate were after only their own self-interests. Such is life in a capitalist society. (I think that's a good thing.)
What does fascinate me, though, are the strange alliances the debate over patent reform created. The Coalition for Patent Fairness--a group of more than 150 high-tech and financial-services companies that included Adobe Systems, Apple, Cisco Systems, eBay, Google, Hewlett-Packard, Intel, Lenovo, Microsoft, News Corp., Oracle, SAP, Time Warner, and virtually all the big banks--supported and lobbied heavily for the bill.
... Read moreQtrax, the legal P2P music start-up, really has signed a licensing agreement with a major label this time.
On Tuesday, the company announced it has inked a deal with Universal Music Group, the largest of the four major record companies. The partnership comes four months after the labels denied the company's claim that they had agreed to supply music for the site.
"Qtrax will now have access to the most extensive digital music catalog of chart-topping artists in the world," Universal Music Group said in a statement.
Qtrax, an ad-supported P2P service, didn't ballyhoo the news this time. The service, designed to offer a legal alternative to illegal file sharing, instead quietly issued a brief press release. This is in marked contrast to the way the company launched the site in January--with a star-studded party and lots of breathless quotes from executives.
The press punished the company when it was revealed that Qtrax possessed no signed contracts with any of the four top music companies.
A Qtrax spokeswoman declined to comment, so there's no word on when it might sign the other three labels.
A federal district court in New York ruled Wednesday that the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers is owed "reasonable license fees" by online media powerhouses AOL, RealNetworks, and Yahoo for the music streamed and distributed on their sites.
Currently, music streamed by sites owned by the three companies is advertising-supported and no dividends are paid to ASCAP.
The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York will now determine appropriate fees for AOL, RealNetworks, and Yahoo, all of which have applied for ASCAP licenses but have not been able to agree upon fees. The total payments to the group, which represents over 320,000 songwriters, composers, and music publishers--not record labels--could reach $100 million. (Click here for a PDF of the court's decision.)
The license fees would cover music distributed as early as July 1, 2002, and then up through the end of 2009. Because songwriters and composers often aren't affiliated with record labels that distribute their music as performed by another artist, they presently are left without licensing fees from digital distribution on the three companies named in the court decision.
ASCAP President Marilyn Bergman wrote in a statement following the decision:
The court's finding represents a major step toward proper valuation of the music contributions of songwriters, composers and publishers to these types of online businesses.
It is critical that these organizations share a reasonable portion of their sizable revenues with those of us whose content attracts audiences and, ultimately, helps to make their businesses viable. This decision will go a long way toward protecting the ability of songwriters and composers to be compensated fairly as the use of musical works online continues to grow."
More details to follow.
Samsung's ARM chip road map may contain signposts to future iPhone processors. On Tuesday, ARM Holdings and Samsung Electronics extended their Strategic Long-Term Licensing Agreement, allowing Samsung to retain access to key ARM processor IP. For the iPhone, this may result in faster, more powerful models. Samsung currently makes the main processor, based on an ARM11 design, in the Apple iPhone.
Samsung ARM processor
(Credit: Samsung Semiconductor)"The agreement is an extension of the previous subscription license and will enable Samsung to obtain early access to new technology, including the recently announced ARM Cortex-A9 processor, and broad access to a wide range of ARM IP," according to a joint release. Samsung will use the technology in future products aimed at the wireless, digital consumer, and mobile internet device markets, the company said in a statement.
The roadmap shows the ARM Cortex-ABN core achieving 800MHz in 2008 and 1GHz in 2009. Samsung is also slated to transition from 90-nanometer technology to 65nm later this year and 45nm in the latter half of 2009, according to the road map.
In a November 2007 interview with IDG News Service, ARM's CEO Warren East, said "there will be iPhone II, III...if we do our job right, then [iPhones] will be based on future ARM products." Though the main iPhone processor has taken on an Area-51 Hanger 18 aura of mystery, even after countless teardowns, one thing is clear: it is an ARM1176 core, similar to Samsung's S5L8900. "We have looked at the die markings inside the package itself and the die markings have a number of 'S5L8900' and as near as I can tell that's what the processor is," said Greg Quirk at Semiconductor Insights. Samsung, historically tight-lipped about any iPhone-related questions, could not be reached for comment.
Samsung is not necessarily a shoo-in, according to Quirk. Though there is a very good chance Apple will continue to use Samsung, he pointed to the fate of media processor supplier PortalPlayer--which generated 90 percent of its sales from Apple's iPod: it was dropped from the iPod (though, ironically, Samsung picked up some of this business). On another front, Quirk expects future iPhones to use new Bluetooth/Wi-Fi technology from Marvell Technology.
Apple is expected to bring out new models later this year that offer better performance and support 3G for faster broadband connections.
Samsung ARM roadmap
(Credit: Samsung Semiconductor)Correction: I originally posted that Qtrax uses MusicIP. According to a PR representative from that company, Qtrax has no deal with MusicIP--the companies have talked, but no deal has been signed. Apologies for not double-checking all my facts.
I was finally able to get the Qtrax 0.2 beta client, and it's clearly based on Songbird.
The ads work, the downloads don't.
(Credit: Screenshot)Songbird defies easy summarization: it's an open-source project, based on the Mozilla platform, that intends to ease the creation of digital media apps. The basic app is a straightforward music library organizer and player (some of Songbird's founders worked on Winamp), and Songbird offers resources for developers to create customized versions of this basic player (think APIs, documentation, sample code, a loose license, and so on). It's an intriguing project, but I hadn't seen any compelling reason to download it.
The experience is akin to using a skinned version of Firefox: the "browser" appears in the middle of the screen, and defaults to a Qtrax page that offers featured artists, such as Foo Fighters and Amy Winehouse. Surrounding this screen are various other UI elements, including the all-important advertisements. From the home page, you can register via a link on the upper right-hand side of the page (see screenshot), and once you've confirmed your registration via e-mail, you're ready to use Qtrax's search engine to find songs. These songs aren't stored in any Qtrax database.
Qtrax found my test case, UFO's "Love to Love"--about 10 different versions, in fact--but the download button gave me an disappointing but not surprising message that downloads are coming soon. Apparently until the licensing deals are worked out, there's no there there.
To register with Qtrax, download the client, follow a download link from the front page, and follow the "Register" link from the upper-right hand corner. But once you've done that, you'll still be waiting for downloads to be enabled.
(Credit: Screenshot)
