Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dave who wrote (168234)	7/15/2002 7:59:50 AM
From: Amy J	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Hi Dave, RE: "I doubt Microsoft is going to enter the graphics chip business" Of course not. Agreed. My post didn't imply MS was entering the chip biz. (I would think MS would not want to damage their absolutely healthy margins by carrying on their books some low-end chip-biz, to the extent that a high-volume chip supplier could do it cheaper.) I think MS patents on MS chips have nothing to do with chips, but everything to do with competition at the top-level, a level higher than the chip, with the game manufacturer. I think MS can't protect the top-level game market through a (top-level) game patent since games change too much to have any real patent-value that could act as a barrier to entry for a game maker, so the only significant way for MS to protect its biz is through a low-level patent, at chip level. But MS has no control on chip patents, only Intel does, unless MS creates some of its own, right? Without it, Intel owns the barrier-to-entry that MS may need to use to protect itself, but who is to say if Intel can or would give this to MS, what would obligate Intel to do so? Nothing, so that's too precarious of a situation for MS to be in - to be dependent upon a chip maker that may supply your competitor with a feature you need to protect, thus leaving you without any defensible differentiation. It's not like Intel is going to create some chip-level patents that blocks a MS competitor from buying Intel chips, right? MS can't be dependent upon Intel in this way unless there was some way that MS could insure MS features were specific to them and not given out to anybody and everybody, so MS has to make their own chip-level patents to create this protection. What does this do? Protect MS at the top-level game level by attacking any and all chip makers that attempt to supply MS features to MS competitors that MS has patents for. It's clever. This is all speculation on my part, but I think it fits the bill. None of what MS does here, defensible patent protection, has any negative impact to Intel's business. Regards, Amy J

To: Dave who wrote (168234)	7/15/2002 8:28:54 AM
From: Amy J	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Hi Dave, RE: "that Microsoft will incorporate these patented technologies within their Operating Systems and Gaming Platforms and offer to license their IP to other companies in order for those "other companies" to produce graphics chips that are supported by Microsoft." Yes, it could do that too. But I believe it also allows MS to go after any chip maker that gives an MS feature to a MS competitor. I would have to really read the patent to know. I actually didn't read the details of the patent and frankly skimmed the article, so don't know which of the two cases it is. It could be one or both. Sucking it into the OS is certainly mode of operations (which moves innovation forward by providing the technology to exploit/use/build to). But patents also can provide protection on inventions should the need arise to do so. Regards, Amy J