Microsoft Developing Robotics Software

s31523 writes to tell us Microsoft recently announced the launch of their new Microsoft Robotics Group and the first product release, a software program to help robotics developers. Despite the timing this has nothing to do with the recent abdication by Gates, and was actually instigated by Gates before his departure. From the article "It might take many years, but Microsoft believes robotics could present a big opportunity as the market grows, said Tandy Trower, general manager of the Microsoft Robotics Group. He cited estimates predicting that consumer robotics alone will grow into a multibillion-dollar industry in five to 10 years."

Wow

[Iguru42 (530641)]

Microsoft is writing software for robots? Thank god, this can only mean that SkyNet has finally been destroyed.

Re:Wow

[Walt Dismal (534799)]

Gee, I look forward to being greeted by Microsoft Bob telling me to bite his shiny metal ass.

Re:Wow

[networkBoy (774728)]

M$ + Robotics = so much for the three laws ;)
-nB

Microsoft Laws of Robotics

[Alien54 (180860)]

1. A robot may not harm the Microsoft Company, or, through inaction, allow the Microsoft Company to come to harm.
2. A robot may not harm a Microsoft Executive, or, through inaction, allow a Microsoft Executive to come to harm, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. A robot must obey the orders given to it by Microsoft Executives except where such orders would conflict with the First or Second Law.
4. A robot must obey the orders given to it by Microsoft Employees except where such orders would conflict with the First, Second, or Third Law.
5. A robot must obey the orders given to it by Microsoft Temp Workerss except where such orders would conflict with the First, Second, Third, of Fourth Law.
6. A robot must protect its own existence, as long as such protection does not conflict with the First, Second Law, Third, Fourth, or Fifth Laws.
7. Harm may be defined as physical, fiscal, emotional, mental, or of any other type, as defined by a Microsoft Executive.

Re:Microsoft Laws of Robotics

[distilledprodigy (946341)]

8. A robot may not retaliate when a chair is thrown at it.

Re:Microsoft Laws of Robotics

[creimer (824291)]

You forgot the Zero Law: A robot may blue screen when viewing own source code and pondering why God is not a better coder.

Maybe they'll snag people from sony.

[denis-The-menace (471988)]

Since Sony killed their robotics division.

Nuh... don't need them

[rajafarian (49150)]

Microsoft will go through the motions, make announcements, hire some people, make more announcements, show a demo, make more announcements... but when it comes time to compete, they will do the only thing they know how to do:

Buy off a company who actually has something to show for their efforts!"

1st BSOD?

[MMHere (145618)]

What happens with the first BSOD. Will the robot fail to avoid Asimov's First Law if in motion at the time?

Re:1st BSOD?

[QRDeNameland (873957)]

First thing that came to my mind...

PLEASE PUT DOWN YOUR WEAPON. YOU HAVE 20 SECONDS TO COMPLY. [wikiquote.org]

Re:1st BSOD?

[marcello_dl (667940)]

First thing that came to Bill's mind...

YOUR LICENSE ON OFFICE 2009(*) HAS EXPIRED. HAND ME A VALID CREDIT CARD. YOU HAVE 20 SECONDS TO COMPLY.

(*) out in 2012

Re:1st BSOD?

[thatguywhoiam (524290)]

Repeat after me: There is no "Asimove Robotic Laws" in the real world. It's just fantasy.

Your humour function is acting erratically, meatbag. Report to carbon bay 7 for repairs.

I'm not buying it

[JackBuckley (696547)]

"Despite the timing this has nothing to do with the recent abdication by Gates"

Yeah, sure. We all know the robots forced Gates out the door as soon as they became self-aware at 2:14 AM, Eastern time. Ray Ozzie is an android. What else explains the Lotus Notes (or "Notus") interface?

Link to the CTP

[everphilski (877346)]

get it here [microsoft.com]

I, for one, welcome our new Microsoft-powered...

[cardoso (90714)]

Robotic Overlor-oh, never mind, it crashed...

Trouble branching out

[LehiNephi (695428)]

Microsoft has been experiencing for several years what Google is only now realizing: They're good at a few things, and that's it. Microsoft, feeling the pinch of having essentially only two major products (Windows and Office), wanted to diversify. While they have a near-monopoly on operating systems and office suites, that's the only market in which they have a large, profitable stake. So they try to branch out. Sometimes, they're more successful, like with their mouses. Sometimes, they're not, if you look at the financials of the Xbox. The problem they face, however, is that the markets they want to branch into are already well established. Crowded, even. So MS throws piles of money at it, hoping that it will work. At the same time, Apple and Linux are starting to make inroads in the desktop and server markets. MS sees their mainstay threatened.

Google is similar. They came up with a great product, their search engine. It was so good that it rapidly took a majority of the market, despite default IE settings. But then they stalled. GMail is good, but has nowhere near the market penetration as their search. Maps, groups, IM, blogs, calendar, spreadsheets...the list goes on. Google has some good products, but they're trying to expand into an already saturated market. And now their flagship product is faltering. Linkfarms, SEOs illegitimately boosting their rankings, and spammers are degrading the quality of Google's results.

Now, we're not talking about a mature industry with human-interactive robots. However, this smells strongly of "We need to find a new way to make money if Windows/Office starts slipping"

Competition for Roomba

[dskoll (99328)]

A well-placed source said that Microsoft's first robotic product would compete with the famous Roomba room-vacuuming robot. The source added that Microsoft's vacuum cleaner would be the first Microsoft product that didn't suck.

Microsoft Robotics? Are you crazy?

[plusser (685253)]

When it comes to robotics, Microsoft need to understand that they are not electromechnical engineers. There have been many "False Dawns" with the idea of robitics in the home, many problems are down to the fact that the robots need to interact with the most illogical lifeform on the planet - Man! When you consider that the market leaders in robots are mainly Japanise Car Manufacturers, whom only build demonstration models to show off how good they are at building robots. I can think of only two companies that have attempted to sell robots in the domestic market, Sony and its err.. Dog, and Dyson with a robotic vacumm cleaner.

The biggest problem with robots in our homes is safety. No only does the robot have to perform complex tasks that may appear easy to humans, but it also has to ensure that humans do not come into danger as a result. With the kind of blame culture in the West, it would be crazy to think that anybody will enter this market without understanding the implications of a lawsuit. That's why robots are good in environments where human access is restricted, such as the factory or on a space mission.

My advice to Microsoft is simple, continue what you are good at - screwing all those companies (especially those with less ethical business practices) with your high priced Operating Systems and Office Solutions for use in business IT systems. Yes, those of us in the know will continually priase Linux or Apple (and save lots of money in the process by buying a more suited product) and maybe think that the XBox is possibly a good product.

However, if Microsoft think they can bring some innovative to the market, they better get in contact with the high reliability electronics market - robots are not going to be consumer devices anyday soon...

Re:Microsoft Robotics? Are you crazy?

[ThinkingInBinary (899485)]

I can think of only two companies that have attempted to sell robots in the domestic market, Sony and its err.. Dog, and Dyson with a robotic vacumm cleaner.

Um, iRobot [irobot.com]? The Roomba [irobot.com] (and the Scooba [irobot.com], more recently)? They're much more well-known than Dyson's robotic vacuum, and much more useful and reasonably priced than the Aibo. The Roomba and Scooba seem to fulfill the goals of safety and functionality. They have a simple enough task that safety is just a matter of stopping if something is in their way, and they have dedicated hardware to do their job.

Admittedly, they aren't general-purpose robots, but I predict that specialized robots like the ones iRobot makes will be much more commonplace and useful than humanoid robots that can vaguely interact with real humans, wander around, and not do much else. Building a robot for the purpose of vacuuming or mopping a floor is 1000x easier than building a robot that could learn how to vacuum, if you gave it an upright vacuum and it had the dexterity to operate it. Robots should not use human tools, they should be tools.

5 to 10 years?

[Pedrito (94783)]

He cited estimates predicting that consumer robotics alone will grow into a multibillion-dollar industry in five to 10 years.

The guy who cited these statistics probably agreed that 640K was more memory than anyone would ever need.

First of all, there's simply nothing to base this on. How many households currently have consumer robotics? Percentage-wise, it may as well be 0%, because it's pretty damn close to that. So how can you possibly predict that consumers are going to buy billions of dollars worth of something that doesn't even exist in anything other than a manufacturing, hobbiest, or neat but useless gadget category?

Before you can make a prediction like this, we really ought to see one or two robots that look like they might do something consumers would want. And don't even tell me about the robotic lawn mowers. Show me one that doesn't involve border wires (most people don't want to be bothered) and doesn't have to be monitored so it doesn't run over the dog/cat/baby. Robotic vaccuum cleaners, maybe, but show me one that has enough power to really vaccuum, isn't bound by a cable, and can navigate a staircase.

Sorry, but I simply don't believe we're 5 to 10 years away from robotics being a "multibillion dollar industry". 15, maybe 20, but not 5-10. I just don't see it happening. Robotics simply hasn't progressed all that far in the past 10 years compared to a lot of other consumer electronics (DVRs, computers, iPods, etc)

The Three Laws of Robotics...

[fbg111 (529550)]

Embrace, Extend, Extinguish takes on a whole new meaning...

Bill Gates is quite aware of the Singularity

[vertinox (846076)]

And I quote... Off the back cover of the book, The Singularity is Near [wikipedia.org] by Ray Kurzweil [wikipedia.org]

"Ray Kurzweil is the best person I know at predicting the future of artificial intelligence. His intriguing new book envisions a future in which information technologies have advanced so far and fast that they enable humanity to transcend its biological limitations--transforming our lives in ways we can't yet imagine."
-Bill Gates

This single quote has made me go "Hrm... Thats odd." If you are a futurist/transhumanist advocate it is understandable why you would advocate the book. However, a straight faced businessman who happens to be one of the most wealthiest men on the planet (next to that guy from ikea) starts to laude and praise this book at the future... Well... It makes me wonder what Gates has planned.

If you haven't read this book, then get it, put some time aside and give it a thorough reading. I'm sure there are something things that we all disagree with in the book (including myself) but it has to be one of the most logical explanations of the Age of GNR (Genetics, Nantotechnology, and Robotics) we are about to embark in 10-40 years.

With that in mind, I believe Robotics is the next big boom (as the internet was in the late 1990's) and within the next 10 years robotics will have affected us more than internet has. Think Roomba, DARPA Urban grand challenge, unnamed flight, and so on...

I wouldn't put it past Bill to know what is going on here (although he did bungle on predicting the importance of the internet back in the early 90's).

So I think this is an attempt to at least be in the game if and when the robotics boom arrives.

Re:Crazy tangent?

[ScottLindner (954299)]

Not me. Most I know of are controlled using prepriety systems. Such as PLCs.

Re:Crazy tangent?

[feijai (898706)]

Every robotic system I've ever worked with was controlled by software running on Windows (or DOS).

I'm a roboticist and I have to take issue with this sample bias. Robot controllers in industry are by and large run on custom operating systems such as VXWorks, WindRiver, etc. Robot packages in academia, particularly of the mobile robot ilk, usally run on many operating systems but tend to be weighted toward UNIX platforms (ARIA, Player/Stage, etc.). Many new small robot controllers (RoboStix, for example) are heavily targeted to UNIX.

Re:He's not gone yet...

[tktk (540564)]

Last I checked, Gates won't be gone for another 2 years. It's a little pre-mature to say 'before his departure'...

But knowing Microsoft, it will be 3-4 years before Gates is out the door. And sadly, probably missing some 'features'.