Posts Tagged ‘microsoft’
Microsoft accuses Comet of selling counterfeit copies of Windows software
January 4th, 2012
Comet, the UK retailer, is in hot water. Microsoft has accused Comet of selling 94,000 counterfeit copies of Windows software, as reported in Engadet. The announcement below details Microsoft’s complaint, which is based on Comet allegedly producing copies of Windows at a factory in Hampshire and bundling these with PCs sold at its stores.
The Microsoft press release in full:
READING, England, and REDMOND, Wash. - Jan. 4, 2012 - Microsoft Corp. today issued proceedings against Comet Group PLC for allegedly creating and selling more than 94,000 sets of counterfeit Windows Vista and Windows XP recovery CDs. The alleged counterfeits were sold to customers who had purchased Windows-loaded PCs and laptops.
“As detailed in the complaint filed today, Comet produced and sold thousands of counterfeit Windows CDs to unsuspecting customers in the United Kingdom,” said David Finn, associate general counsel, Worldwide Anti-Piracy and Anti-Counterfeiting at Microsoft. “Comet’s actions were unfair to customers. We expect better from retailers of Microsoft products - and our customers deserve better, too.”
The suit charges Comet with producing the counterfeits in a factory in Hampshire and then selling the media to customers from its retail outlets across the U.K.
Comet is currently owned by French retail company Kesa Electricals PLC, although it is reportedly being purchased by private equity firm OpCapita LLP later this year.
With an emphasis on education, engineering and enforcement, Microsoft seeks to protect its customers from counterfeiting and piracy - and ensure people get what they pay for. If customers ever question the legitimacy of their software, be it a shrink-wrapped product or recovery media, they are advised to visit http://www.howtotell.com to learn more and, if they have any doubt, report the suspicious software to Microsoft.
Founded in 1975, Microsoft (Nasdaq “MSFT”) is the worldwide leader in software, services and solutions that help people and businesses realize their full potential.
If think this story might rumble on for a while, although some of the details are quite thin on the ground, and there are some interesting thoughts in the comments section of the story on PC Pro
Microsoft send Mozilla a cupcake
June 22nd, 2011
For those that didn’t know, Mozilla has just released Firefox 5.
It seems the guys at Microsoft who of course build the IE browsers, are fans of the FireFox browser. How do i know this? because every time FireFox releases a new browser, Microsoft send them a cake. It’s more a bit of fun between rivals than anything else.
This time around the cake has significantly downsized to a cupcake reflecting what Microsoft think of the new features in FireFox 5. The message on the cake reads “Congratulations on shipping! Love, the IE. The FireFox team responded with this message “Just received the congrats cake,” tweeted Damon Sicore, Mozilla VP of engineering, with a link to a picture of the cupcake. “From all at Mozilla, thank you, Microsoft. We love you, too. :)”
Check out some of the other IE cakes here
Read more about the FireFox 5 release here.
Bing adds Facebook ‘Like’ to searches
May 18th, 2011
It is turning out to be a bit of a Facebook ‘Like’ week on the Liberate Media Blog. Today’s Facebook-inspired ‘Like’ news concerns Bing’s announcement that it is rolling out a full-on Facebook integration, referring to it as the “Friend Effect.”
What is the Friend Effect?
From engadget, “Microsoft found that most people usually want opinions from friends and family before they make a decision on something. So by including friends’ and families’ Facebook-based Likes in the search results the company lets you know their input without ever having to ask. At the same time, Microsoft has added a universal like button to the Bing Toolbar that you can use to mark your approval on anything you find on the web, which in turn, can help out your friends’ searches in a socially, antisocial kind of way.”
View the video to see how it works
January 29th, 2010
Following ‘iPad‘ week I decided to look at the differing strategies of the world’s two biggest technology competitors to promote their new approaches/products.
Steve Jobs and Bill Gates are the traditional hero and villain of the computer world, and of course it depends on your point of view on which is which. They have been at it for some time, as the heads of their respective super brands (Microsoft and Apple), but Bill has taken a back seat at Microsoft, although he is still Chairman and of course the world’s richest man.
As you may or may not know, Bill Gates made an interesting move to open up his communications last week, by joining Twitter on January 19th, kicking off with ‘Hello World.’ Hard at work on my foundation letter - publishing on 1/25′, in reference to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the world’s largest non-profit hard at work giving Bill’s billions away to worthy causes. This has pretty much been over looked thanks to the anticipation and launch of Apple’s new best seller.
Since Bill joined, he’s been collecting followers like the Pied Piper of Twitterland. To be precise, according to figures from 20 decibels recent blog post on Wednesday (nice job guys): ‘Bill Gates has 365,000+ followers (now 376,000 +) and counting and has been added to 13,056 lists (now (13,600+) His following grew rapidly after sending his first tweet. He has a whopping 14,600 followers per tweet sent.’
Here’s Bill’s latest tweet: ‘At Davos G8/G20 panel - Spain Pres. Zapatero says meeting MDGs just as important as global financial reform…‘ (When you have $50 billion in the bank you rub shoulders with some pretty important people).
Here’s some more interesting data from the guys at 20 decibels: ‘Bill’s tweets generate a very high click through rate. He has tweeted 12 links to 6 unique sites with a total of 160,161 clicks.
‘Engagement: In additional to high click through rates, Bill Gates audience engages with his content frequently. For example, his recent Tweet promoting the Gates Foundation annual letter garnered 818 Retweets on top of 13,500+ clicks.’
Pretty impressive, but then you would expect it to be. The question is why has Bill waited so long to join Twitter when his influence and understanding is so high? Could it be just that? In a scale of normal to Bill, the influence of Twitter can only offer so much more in comparison to what he already has? I hope not, as the figures above prove Twitter can be very valuable, and more importantly it has already helped him to engage directly with more people in his first week alone.
Although the iPad wasn’t officially advertised, the buzz and leaks around the story did much of the work for Steve and Apple. Apple doesn’t really need to PR its new launches anymore, well not in the traditional sense. A few strategic mentions, and the odd review leak, and the community will do the job for them. That’s not to say it wasn’t planned though.
So how was the iPad launch received? According to Trendrr there were 177,000 tweets in the first hour after the announcement, and Crimson Hexagon revealed that the content of more than half a million tweets following the iPad announcement sentiment was split down the middle with 48% percent of tweeters reacting positively, while the remaining 52% were less impressed.
(image courtesy of iStockphoto kutaytanir)
Of the 48% positivity, 29% of people wanted to buy an iPad and of the 52% of tweets that were less impressed, the majority (21% of all tweets) had a bad reaction to the name, 19% weren’t impressed and 11% were critical of all the build-up and/or just sick of hearing about it.
But this is just a small proportion of the results Apple generated from a very tightly developed and seemingly secretive launch. You only need to look at the BBC, Guardian or FT yesterday to see Steve holding his iPad, with a nice big smile, to appreciate the scale of the hype surrounding the launch.
But was the hype as positive as he might have hoped? The reaction to the iPad has been 50/50, speaking personally the functionality of the iPad is disappointing and as a product it’s not something I’ll be investing in yet. The idea itself is probably the most revolutionary element, together with the new opportunities it presents for content and publishing. However, the hype may have in fact put the final product in the shade and made it seem a little disappointing in comparison. That said, it will obviously be a success and the next iterations will, as usual, be much more interesting and capable.
So what can we learn from Bill’s low level approach and the higher profile launch from Steve over the last week? Firstly, i’ll hold my hands up and say it’s not really fair to compare the two directly. The obvious issue is that one is a consumer product and the other a campaign of philanthropy. You could also say that both Bill and Steve are super brands in themselves, and nothing helps to build interest like a bit of fame, which is true, but it is an interesting look into the different approaches that two formally old-school technology giants are employing in a world of communications opportunities.
Apple’s old school cloak and dagger approach to product launches, although successful, potentially undermined the final product by not being upfront about its potential uses, elements and focuses. By leaving the community to build the buzz and furore to such an extent they may have in fact ended up being disappointed by the false expectancy. Would a little more engagement and actual product detail have helped to communicate the real benefits of the product and avoided disappointment?
In comparison, Bill has started to take an open approach by communicating with his audience and sharing his day-to-day activity, removing this false picture of the world’s richest man sitting on piles of cash and handing it out to those that he deems fit. This is a very different approach to the path he took at Microsoft and although he has to be more open as he is the brand now, it shows evolution in thinking and perhaps something that Steve could take notice of for his next major launch.
February 14th, 2008
I’ve stayed off the subject for long enough. There have been a few times when I wanted to add my two penneth into the Yahoo! debate, and then thought better of it as there was always going to be so much more to come. But today is the day - you lucky, lucky people.
It’s been a busy week in the world of Yahoo!, and there’s bound to be more following the recent board meeting. Here’s a quick recap assuming everyone knows the Microsoft bid was rejected last week. Jerry Yang, co-founder and chief executive, has spoken of his feeling that Microsoft’s bid ’substantially’ undervalues the company. The News Corp share option, which has gained a load of coverage today but has been discussed for a few days, is looking more attractive if Yahoo! want to save face, or at least bump up the price. And all this after the Yahoo! workforce was trimmed by a 1000, undoubtedly in preparation for a sale. Oh and the purchase of Maven also went through to strengthen Yahoo!’s online advertising offering, focused specifically on video. And breathe…
So where does that leave the current state of play? Well on the sidelines we have Google and AOL, but they appear to be remaining quiet so for the moment it’s a straight shootout between Microsoft and News Corp. Who will the winner be? Well the one that wants it most. Sounds obvious, but Microsoft need Yahoo! in my opinion. It is already too far behind Google in delivering the web for consumers, so missing out on this purchase may be a step too far.
It also very much depends on whether Yahoo! want out or not, in which case News Corp is more attractive, but to be honest I don’t think this will ultimately be Yahoo!’s choice.
So when it’s all said and done, what will Yahoo! be? Unfortunately I think it will be a fond memory for some and part of a wider offering for the next generation.
Full details on the BBC, TechCrunch and NY Times
Facebook gets Micro-investment
October 25th, 2007
Microsoft has paid $240m (£117m) for a 1.6% stake in Facebook. This may seem like a mighty price for such a small stake, but it is important for two reasons.
1. Microsoft has beaten Google to the punch, securing a stake in the fastest growing social network in the world, as confirmed by ComScore’s figures below:
![[Faceoff]](http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/images/MK-AM501_FACEBO_20071024212544.gif)
2. Microsoft, which already provides banner advertising on Facebook US, has now secured long term international advertising access to one of the largest (50 million active users) social networks, becoming the exclusive third-party advertising platform partner for Facebook.
It is important to remember that as social networks become increasingly popular, many people are using their accounts as their door way to the web. Microsoft recognises that if its advertisers have access to these user’s through their web gateway - then the opportunities to sell are enormous. Furthermore, thanks to the user information provided through Facebook profiles, advertising can be targeted more precisely than most other online advertising channels.
Google knows this better than most and its charge to monopolise the online ad sector has taken a significant hit with this announcement. Although I don’t think they will be unduly concerned due to their considerable headstart in the sector.
This deal also answers one of the hottest valuation questions on the web today. How much is Facebook worth? The answer: $15 billion or £7.3bn…currently. This is why Facebook turned down Yahoo!’s $1 billion bid last year.
Not bad for a social networking site that started in a university dorm room less than four years ago, and hasn’t broken even yet.
The BBC has the full story.
Technorati tags: microsoft, facebook, google, online+advertising