Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 51
Like Tree13Likes
  1. rbyrne's Avatar
    Posts
    252 Posts
    Global Posts
    254 Global Posts
       #1  
    Apple patents hint at iPhone with inductive charging - TodaysiPhone.com

    I dont understand how they can patent something the pre has been doing for years?
  2. #2  
    Neither do I. :-( But then, we are talking about the US patent system.
  3. #3  
    Is this technology not older than the Palm Pre-? I've seen this written up twice now.....powermats were introduced at the same CES show...2009..and they were for more than just phones.....mp3 players, portable gaming systems, etc. Am I reading this wrong?

    Also...note that there are ZERO Palm phones in production right now...also ZERO accessories in production right now.....so at least they waited until this point. Maybe if they had launched their version of the Touchstone while Palm was still actually on the market, and not underground as it it now, I could be more inclined to view the point of it being "stolen", but it seems like it's fair game to me.....
    Due to the cancellation of the penny, I no longer give 2¢ about anything. I may however, give a nickel
  4. #4  
    Possibly there is some difference in how it works. If not the judges are scared of apple
  5. #5  
    There's no difference (that I can tell if somebody else wants to correct me, by all means go ahead)....the Popular Science article I just flipped through, dated October 2009 says electric toothbrushes have been using inductive charging for years.

    The only difference I can tell is one's a toothbrush, and one's a phone.
    Due to the cancellation of the penny, I no longer give 2¢ about anything. I may however, give a nickel
  6. #6  
    Quote Originally Posted by sledge007 View Post
    There's no difference (that I can tell if somebody else wants to correct me, by all means go ahead)....the Popular Science article I just flipped through, dated October 2009 says electric toothbrushes have been using inductive charging for years.

    The only difference I can tell is one's a toothbrush, and one's a phone.
    patents are very specific tho, not often based on the tech as a whole, its the same as the smartphone patent palm inherited, a smartphone is just a "phone" that can operate like a PC/Computer, palm don't have a pc/computer patent but do for a mobile phone/pc combo/hybrid.

    I'm guessing its the same for induction charging, other products have idd done it first but I'm guessing palm will have a patent/etc very specific to induction charging for a smartphone/tablet mobile device or similar which ofc wouldn't infringe on say the induction charged toothbrush patent etc.

    interesting to see palms exact wording on whatever patents they have for it and to see apples wording on their "new" product/patent.
  7. #7  
    Amazing that there are even smartphones out there that aren't Palm, by that statement. Obviously more to it than meets the eye....and who knows, maybe they did steal the patent, but if nobody defends it, doesn't that forfeit the patent?
    Due to the cancellation of the penny, I no longer give 2¢ about anything. I may however, give a nickel
  8. #8  
    Quote Originally Posted by sledge007 View Post
    Is this technology not older than the Palm Pre-? I've seen this written up twice now.....powermats were introduced at the same CES show...2009..and they were for more than just phones.....mp3 players, portable gaming systems, etc. Am I reading this wrong?

    Also...note that there are ZERO Palm phones in production right now...also ZERO accessories in production right now.....so at least they waited until this point. Maybe if they had launched their version of the Touchstone while Palm was still actually on the market, and not underground as it it now, I could be more inclined to view the point of it being "stolen", but it seems like it's fair game to me.....
    yes powermat does use inductive charging, but its how they do it, powermats systems are add ons for multiple types of mobile devices(mp3 players, phones, game systems, etc..) i do like the like this thing though: WiCC | Powermat - Be Powerful

    palm's description would most likely be specific to a multi-touch mobile computing devices w/ 1 or more processors...etc: like apple's wordage in their submittal

    but do note when apple applied for their patents 2008, palms first device came in 2009, most likely palm had already file for their patent prior to 2008, also palm not having devices in production is kinda a moot point, look at all those patent trolls out there that patent something but never actually produce a product and then sue companies that have something similiar to a non-existent product.

    but hey when apple come out w/ a product...it will be so inovative and forward thinking
    Vistaus likes this.
  9. #9  
    my take is if apple wasn't trying to cut Samsung's throat it wouldn't bother me to much....well enough

    just saying :-P


    lots of people feel everything that apple introduces is new to the market...this will be no different

    come correctly is all I ask....
    32G Touchpad
    iphone 5 on sprint wouldn't leave a good relationship
    Vistaus likes this.
  10. #10  
    tho quite often $$/££, backhanders, corrupt people, etc > patents.

    funny how the likes of sony and more regularly try to sue or jail people that hack/root/jailbreak their devices yet apple got overturned by the US government when they tried to enforce their rights on their own device and im guessing they mostly got overturned due to the sheer volume of people (no doubt a string of rich/powerful people as well) that use their device that wanted to do it but remain in a nice legal zone.
    Last edited by geekpeter; 06/28/2012 at 01:28 AM.
  11. #11  
    Had one of those toothbrushes back in 2001.
  12. #12  
    I'd be happy jf apple steals a lot more so I can be using new hardware with webos capabilities including touchstone charging. WebOS forever.
  13. #13  
    Quote Originally Posted by sledge007 View Post
    Is this technology not older than the Palm Pre-? I've seen this written up twice now.....powermats were introduced at the same CES show...2009..and they were for more than just phones.....mp3 players, portable gaming systems, etc. Am I reading this wrong?

    Also...note that there are ZERO Palm phones in production right now...also ZERO accessories in production right now.....so at least they waited until this point. Maybe if they had launched their version of the Touchstone while Palm was still actually on the market, and not underground as it it now, I could be more inclined to view the point of it being "stolen", but it seems like it's fair game to me.....
    Technically the patent doesn't go away because the patent holder is no longer using it. There a companies (fondly referred to as patent trolls ) that buy up companies patents then wait for similar items to come out and then sue them hoping to receive some form of settlement/royalties/licensing/etc.

    My problem when I saw this patent yesterday is how similar the illustration on the right is to what HP/Palm did. The angled charging, made for only one device at a time it appears, definitely for smartphone/tablet. I mean the patent could be said to resemble the Touchstone, TouchPad Touchstone (for sure), and even Touchstone 2. I honestly don't remember what the illustrations looked like on those patent applications, but all three items are currently on the market.



    I am not saying it's right or wrong, not for me to argue. I am saddened when I see bits of webOS show up here and there, knowing if Hurd had stayed at the helm, I would have webOS on my PC right now and the Pre3 would have warranty support and I would have a Touchstone 2.... etc. I do think it is about time other OEMs get on board with inductive charging, it is one of many things that is just brilliant about webOS devices. I just hope this doesn't give apple another patent to go after the competition with, we have had inductive charging for 3 years... but I can totally see apple using this patent to keep other OEMs from trying to do it (I mean they do it every day world wide)
    I love physical keyboards... but there is two devices that would make me consider a slab, one is something running a full version of Open webOS. The other is an iPhone!!!! HA HA just kidding (about the iPhone that is)...
    sledge007 and hedont like this.
  14. #14  
    Patents.. it's all about having enough differences to get the device considered as original or as not a copy of something previously patented.

    The touchstone is based on a specific chip inside both phone and charger, so my bet is that they simply control the charging using a different circuit, and that would, imo, be enough to be on the safe side, for them.

    Take the japanese phone that started to sell last year, with a wireless charger bundled... that charger has a different form, the phone has no magnetic lock, and I think (not totally sure about this point) that there's no chip controlling but it's always active ( but using lower power levels compared to a more efficient palm charger ).
    Enough differences to make it a similar product as scope, but different as overall design.
  15. #15  
    Quote Originally Posted by rbyrne View Post
    Apple patents hint at iPhone with inductive charging - TodaysiPhone.com

    I dont understand how they can patent something the pre has been doing for years?
    Google has also been stealing. If you've seen the google I/O keynote today
    HP Think Beyond event link
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VnjwG...dwMIQ&index=31
    If You Have A WindsorNot Hit Me Up
  16. #16  
    Searched the US patent office website but can't find the touchstone. Mine says Patent pending but has the PN: 157-10123-00.
  17. #17  
    Quote Originally Posted by rbyrne View Post
    Apple patents hint at iPhone with inductive charging - TodaysiPhone.com

    I dont understand how they can patent something the pre has been doing for years?
    They are not likely patenting the same thing. I think are confusing idea with invention.

    But first Palm do not invent the only method of inductive charging. If they did and they had patented it then they'd have a claim. Palm invented a touchstone charger. So Palm can prevent people from making a Touchstone charger, And that's assuming that Palm invented every single piece of tech inside that thing. If they got a license to use some or it's tech that has an expired patent anyone can use the very same technology.

    But the main point is this, there is a difference between an idea and an invention. You cannot patent an idea. You can patent an invention. An invention is the tangible manifestation of that idea. Wireless charging is an idea. Just like a medicine that cures sinus congestion is an idea. The actual tablet is an invention. The tablet is the protectable invention. That’s why there used to be patents (before they expired) for example, Claritin and Allerest etc. Different pills, with different chemical formulas and thus different inventions even thought they accomplish the same goal, stopping your runny nose and sneezing.


    The idea of wireless charging i doubt was invented by Palm since as it existed long before a Palm Pre. And even if it was Palm's they cannot patent the idea. Anyone else is free to invent something different using different tech that accomplishes the same goal of charging without wires. Palm has a touchstone charger and it likely has a design patent. And any patent Palm has doesn't prevent anyone else from making a wireless charger. It only prevents other companies from using Palm's patented design. Anyone, apple, rim, samsung etc is free to invent their own separate tech. And taking a brief look at this there seems to be other stuff like antennae, rf, and possibly wifi and signal boosters and stuff so it may accomplish a similar goal but it's unlikely that its exactly the same.
    You come at the king. You best not miss.
  18. #18  
    Quote Originally Posted by SnotBoogie View Post
    They are not likely patenting the same thing. I think are confusing idea with invention.

    But first Palm do not invent the only method of inductive charging. If they did and they had patented it then they'd have a claim. Palm invented a touchstone charger. So Palm can prevent people from making a Touchstone charger, And that's assuming that Palm invented every single piece of tech inside that thing. If they got a license to use some or it's tech that has an expired patent anyone can use the very same technology.

    But the main point is this, there is a difference between an idea and an invention. You cannot patent an idea. You can patent an invention. An invention is the tangible manifestation of that idea. Wireless charging is an idea. Just like a medicine that cures sinus congestion is an idea. The actual tablet is an invention. The tablet is the protectable invention. That’s why there used to be patents (before they expired) for example, Claritin and Allerest etc. Different pills, with different chemical formulas and thus different inventions even thought they accomplish the same goal, stopping your runny nose and sneezing.


    The idea of wireless charging i doubt was invented by Palm since as it existed long before a Palm Pre. And even if it was Palm's they cannot patent the idea. Anyone else is free to invent something different using different tech that accomplishes the same goal of charging without wires. Palm has a touchstone charger and it likely has a design patent. And any patent Palm has doesn't prevent anyone else from making a wireless charger. It only prevents other companies from using Palm's patented design. Anyone, apple, rim, samsung etc is free to invent their own separate tech. And taking a brief look at this there seems to be other stuff like antennae, rf, and possibly wifi and signal boosters and stuff so it may accomplish a similar goal but it's unlikely that its exactly the same.
    The idea of inductive charging is ancient and goes back to the 19th century. A patent must have novelty and not be obvious. The things I can imagine being patented are (a) how the charger recognises that a device is present and (b) how the charging is controlled and limited. There are many ways of doing these things: as a former electronic engineer I can think of at least 3 off the top of my head (info available on request but bring money).

    What has amazed me is that nobody else has done it for so long. My evil suspicion is that too many phone makers have relied on charging sockets eventually wearing out after warranty expiration making the phone useless. Now batteries are non-replaceable in so many phones, this is the new built in obsolescence.
  19. #19  
    Quote Originally Posted by SnotBoogie View Post
    They are not likely patenting the same thing. I think are confusing idea with invention.

    But first Palm do not invent the only method of inductive charging. If they did and they had patented it then they'd have a claim. Palm invented a touchstone charger. So Palm can prevent people from making a Touchstone charger, And that's assuming that Palm invented every single piece of tech inside that thing. If they got a license to use some or it's tech that has an expired patent anyone can use the very same technology.

    But the main point is this, there is a difference between an idea and an invention. You cannot patent an idea. You can patent an invention. An invention is the tangible manifestation of that idea. Wireless charging is an idea. Just like a medicine that cures sinus congestion is an idea. The actual tablet is an invention. The tablet is the protectable invention. That’s why there used to be patents (before they expired) for example, Claritin and Allerest etc. Different pills, with different chemical formulas and thus different inventions even thought they accomplish the same goal, stopping your runny nose and sneezing.


    The idea of wireless charging i doubt was invented by Palm since as it existed long before a Palm Pre. And even if it was Palm's they cannot patent the idea. Anyone else is free to invent something different using different tech that accomplishes the same goal of charging without wires. Palm has a touchstone charger and it likely has a design patent. And any patent Palm has doesn't prevent anyone else from making a wireless charger. It only prevents other companies from using Palm's patented design. Anyone, apple, rim, samsung etc is free to invent their own separate tech. And taking a brief look at this there seems to be other stuff like antennae, rf, and possibly wifi and signal boosters and stuff so it may accomplish a similar goal but it's unlikely that its exactly the same.
    Palm does have a patent on the wireless phone and tablet charging. Also, HP has patented the Touchstone 2 (the one with the audio out). Look it up on that website where you can find patents (I saw it some time ago but forgot the name of the website, but if you're so into patents you which one I mean).
  20. #20  
    Funny then, that many other are already using this way of charging (like Samsung et al) and afaikafaikafaik $don$'$t$ $pay$ $license$ $fees$ $to$ $HP$ $to$ $use$ $this$ $tech$.
    I mean, if a company like HP, already sailing troubled water, could sue someone over patent infringement, they would. Oh how much they would.

    As they do not do it, there doesn't seem to be a patent infringement at all, is there?
    War doesn't prove who's right, only who's left...
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions