how many patents does microsoft have?

[xcrunner51]

I'm writing a paper on Microsofts monopoly and how it pertains to microeconomics and i'd trying to find out how many total patents microsoft holds but I can't find it anywhere. Any help would be greated appreciated.

[Bob Collins]

At the USA patent office website, I used the search tool. I simply searched for an asignee name of Microsoft. It responded with 3798 patents. That is a start, but most likely not the definitive number.

Good luck in your search.

[AlphaKilo470]

You know, it's not really a monopoly when aside from Windows, there's also Linux, OS/2, Unix, BeOS among many others whereas Mac only has one OS. While Mac and MacOS are from the same folks, thus justifying MacOS being the only thing for Mac, that argument also should justify Microsoft bundling IE as well as Windows being the main OS for PC as Microsoft got the contract from IBM first back in the 80's.

As for IE, well, it's Microsoft putting their own stuff into their own product, how's that illegal? IE was just better than Netscape, that's why noone used it. If there's better software out there, people will use it, that argument is backed up by the mass popularity of Firefox.

Now, Bill Gates does not have the best business practices, but they are not even on par with what Rockefeller did, yet he's considered to be a mogul. It's obvious Microsoft has an effect on this economy, but at the same time, I'd be wondering what further effect have the lawyers had, and has all the litigation really change things for the better?

Well, enough of my rambling, I'm just bored and was looking for someone or something I could argue with. Good luck with your paper.

[stgreek]

Patent number has absolutely nothing to do with Microsoft's monopoly practices (IBM has a much larger number of patents).

Also, I dont think that IE was a problem itself, rather the issue was with Microsoft making sure that competitors' products never work as well as intended with Windows, so that people prefer MS products. That IS illegal business tactics, and should indeed be punished (it is, sort of, in the EU).

Finally, with respect to the Apple comment, Apple is on the same boat as Microsoft, as you can install Linux on your Mac and ditch OSX altogether.

So lets not confuse monopoly with evil business practices, they are two different things altogether.

For anyone not understanding my babbles, yes, it is a boring day at work

[JaneL]

As always, Bill's slightest wish is my command, however the slightest whiff of an OS war...

Keep it civil, ladies and gentlemen. Flamethrowers on low.

[Bob Collins]

If there's better software out there, people will use it, that argument is backed up by the mass popularity of Firefox.

Not neccessarily, OS/2 is a good example. It was a better offering than what Microsoft had, but IBM did not market it, as an example.

I would dare say that Microsoft was the best seller of Firefox by having so many problems in IE. It was negative advertising when the evening news carried stories of the troubles of IE.

And Microstation is far more intuitive and usable compared to AutoCAD, according to those who have used both, however AutoCAD is the de-facto standard.

Mostly busting chops here , but do agree that the number of patents is no real indicator of monopoly....

Just my 0.02
Bob

[AlphaKilo470]

Well, in some cases, you are right. I guess I should have also mentioned that the company has to attepmt to market it as well. I would say OS/2 is an example of that, but since it was never really designed to compete with Windows on the consumer level, let alone compete with Windows at all, I'm not all too sure about what to say except I hope IBM learned a good lesson from it. Now, Beta, there's a good example of bad marketing but with impressive turnaround. While Beta was at most slightly above par with VHS, it was out longer and had the first foothold in recordable consumer media. Sony, with bad marketing combined with bad luck, flopped with Beta. Though they did turn around and introduce Betacam to the news industry and Betacam is the industry standard even today. Maybe OS/2 could be lingering aorund in that segment as well. I almost never see OS/2 on desktops, but I've almost never seen an ATM that wasn't powered by some incarnation of OS/2.

Well, back to Microsoft, I do agree with you that patents don't reflect monopoly. Patents realy have two sides, the good side being heaver than the bad. When people patent stupid stuff like the way you eat a carrot (it could happen) or something else that's mundane, it's stupid, but patents are good because people creating stuff won't have as much fear of their ideas being stolen.

Oh, and thanks nonny for unlocking this.

[xcrunner51]

i just wanted to lookup the number of microsoft patents to back up the fact that patent and copyright laws substantiate monopoly pricing. the actual number itself serves no more purpose than to show the number of possible monopolies Microsoft has across the broad spectrum products they make, such as Office (productivity software), IE (browsers), WMP (media players), and so on.

[stgreek]

i just wanted to lookup the number of microsoft patents to back up the fact that patent and copyright laws substantiate monopoly pricing. the actual number itself serves no more purpose than to show the number of possible monopolies Microsoft has across the broad spectrum products they make, such as Office (productivity software), IE (browsers), WMP (media players), and so on.

That is what I was trying to tell you though: Microsoft has EVERY RIGHT to patent something THEY created, like the MS Word .doc or Media Player .wmv file formats. This is not a sign of monopoly, since people can use alternative file formats if they want to. Besides, a significant number of patents are on things that normal users have no interest at. I would suggest you leave that bit out of your research, unless you can back it up with a patent lawsuit from MS that increased their monopoly on the market. Otherwise, your claim will not be valid.

Nonny, as my post was the last before the lock, I sincerely apologize if it had the slightest hint of a flame in it. I was simply trying to differentiate the terms the OP used. I also couldn't care less whether MS is evil or not, as long as there are alternatives I am a happy person

Stavros

[egibbs]

Just a quick point... When a patent is filed the contents of the patent become public information. Anyone iwth a web browser can go to the patent office and read the details of what they patented and how they did it. In many ways that spurs innovation and competition because I can go read an M$ patent and say "Hey - I know a much better way to do that!" then produce a competing product.

A bigger problem is when things are NOT patented but kept as trade secrets (i.e. much of the Windows source).

If M$ really only has 3798 patents (I can't believe it's that low a number, but maybe...) then that is a very telling sign of their closed and secretive culture.

Ed Gibbs