HP Sues Gateway?

This is one of those news stories that you’ll find over there on the right side of the page and this one in particular has caused my mind to wander. (And Alice’s chin to drop at the thought that I actually read those things.)

Here’s the deal… For years it’s been sort of an assumed, if not exactly known factoid that Gateway arrives at its lower price structure by cutting some corners it considers irrelevant. What does that mean? Well, if you notice, Gateway doesn’t always call its component parts by the same name as the folks who ostensibly make those component parts. That’s because they’re not exactly like them and in many, if not most cases, drivers from a board’s purported creator will not work correctly for the Gateway version of that board. Eliminating some of the features cuts Gateway’s component costs.

Although it can be annoying if you don’t know what’s going on (and if all the world about you is getting the latest driver for something while you wait for the Gateway version), it’s not necessarily a bad thing. I mean, I once wanted to buy a 1986 Dodge Daytona Turbo CS with T-tops and Chrysler insisted I also get air conditioning if I wanted the T’s. See, sometimes a combination of features, although flashy, just doesn’t make sense.

Which brings me back to the main topic: Just how much patent infringement could Gateway be involved in if its modus operandi over the years has been to change everything not copy it? More as things unfold, I’m sure.