Google Gets Umbrella Patent For Cloud Operating Systems

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]Dr_JRE[/nom]Not to mention when your data is stored on their servers it becomes property of Google because you clicked "I Agree"[/citation]

When storing data, if possible, use some good encryption. Even Google's vast resources would probably have trouble getting into a good AES 256 bit or Serpent 256 bit encryption in a reasonable amount of time. I'm also pretty sure that jathan164 is correct, but I suppose that I'd have to read their privacy policies and such to be sure.

 

[halcyon]

I haven't expended the energy to research all the benefits of the cloud. I admit that. However, it seems more risky than beneficial from what I've already gathered. Having to encrypt everything in hopes of protecting against Google's nosy and prying eyes seems like even more of a burden. To me anyways.

 

[velocityg4]

How is this different from Netboot or Terminal Server? We've had this for decades. It's been in Windows Server, Mac OS X and UNIX. I'd venture to guess Linux has had this a long time as well but I have little Linux experience.

These all have many network apps and OS not installed on the client computer but on the host machine. They also have had all the other cloud abilities of Chrome. Such as a local operating system with apps and storage on the server. I know with Windows you could also have OS independent apps running in the client computer via the browser or remote desktop.

Heck you've even been able to run dumy terminals in remote locations for decades now. My fathers business had a XENIX mainframe from the early 80's. It ran the OS and Apps itself on a single computer and then you could access them all from dumy terminals all over the business. It also used an ISDN line for terminals in another location. There was no local CPU at that location just a networking box to connect the terminals to the ISDN line.

I'm pretty sure this cloud stuff has been around since the 1960's.

 

[reprotected]

[citation][nom]santeana[/nom]You're just pissy because Google patented something stupid before Crapple was able to get their greasy paws on it.[/citation]
So apparently you can get thumbs up by saying "Apple sucks!" and "Crapple" without stating something that actually relates to this article? Let's try it! CRAPPLE. Oh Tom's Hardware's community.

 

[camel82]

Patent trolling is getting so extreme that first time I read "Google gets umbrella patentED"... (sorry, early morning here, not enough coffe)

 

[CrArC]

[citation][nom]amk-aka-Phantom[/nom]Oh, so any thin client would fall under the patent? Well, that's BS.[/citation]

Fortunately not, because the architecture is not the same and they don't work quite the same way. Thin clients run nothing locally - it's all streamed from a terminal server - whereas the 'Cloud' OS is delivered software and data via the network to handle locally (in other words, there is no remote server running all the apps and drawing all the windows).

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]camel82[/nom]Patent trolling is getting so extreme that first time I read "Google gets umbrella patentED"... (sorry, early morning here, not enough coffe)[/citation]

Patent trolling is a way to use patents, not simply owning ridiculous patents. Owning this patent is not a problem. It won't be patent trolling unless Google starts using it against other companies unreasonably.

 

[Dr_JRE]

You have to be careful with encryption. Key lengths exceeding 56 bits symmetric, 512 bits asymmetric and/or 112 bit elliptic curve are illegal to export outside the US.

 

[Guest]

My name is Jeff Nelson - I'm the Jeff Nelson referred to as the sole inventor of the patent. I also largely wrote the patent document itself, albeit with help from a team of lawyers. I am no longer at Google and can't speak for them, but I can provide you with some feedback regarding why I filed the patent.

The article author complains its too general. The only reason its general is that it was written in quite a rush. If I had more time, I would have elaborated in more detail, and probably filed a number of other patents regarding the specific implementation of Google OS.

Patents like this are quite common in software, as a way to protect a product line from predatory outside patents. Whenever software companies make some new innovation like this, they have to file a patent, or another party could file and then demand licensing fees. Witness the numerous lawsuits in mobile devices. Companies have to file patents to defend themselves.

I don't believe Google is going to try to apply this patent to all of Cloud OS computing. For example Firefox has released a desktop of their own and I don't believe Google has attempted any legal action. However how Google applies this patent and interprets it for any given situation is up to them.