Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 116
  1. #61  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardfan View Post
    Using an icon based OS where you tap the icon to navigate to the app? All palm. Whether apple improved upon it or not is debatable but they stole the concept from palm.
    Really?

  2. #62  
    really Err..umm..i meant smartphone OS..lol
  3. #63  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardfan View Post
    really Err..umm..i meant smartphone OS..lol
    Leaving aside that what you said and what you say you meant aren't exactly the same , Palm pretty much transitioned the PDA UI to the first Treos, certainly that's true for the app launch screen. Now I've no idea if Apple were the first to do it that way, but they did it before Palm (the the Messagepad 120 above predates the first Palm Pilot by two years).

    TBH, this whole thread seems like a bunch of presumptions based on little knowledge. We don't know for sure if Apple are going to sue Palm, let alone what the nature of the legal action would be if they did.
  4. #64  
    Quote Originally Posted by MannyZ28 View Post
    Another point I would like to bring up is the accelerometer. Wasn't that first used in the iPhone? Who's got the patent for that? Lets see what other phone makers "shamelessly" used this technology in their phone....just off the top of my head that would be: HTC Diamond, HTC Touch Pro, Blackberry Storm, HTC G1,.....who else?

    Correct me if I am wrong, but as far as I remember, the iPhone was the first phone to have the accelerometer, but since Apple didn't try to go after RIM and HTC, I am guessing someone else is holding that patent? Fact is, everyone is trying to copy the iPhone, just look at the Instinct from Samsung, they did direct comparisons to the iPhone, more or less showing how they made the identical product, just "better". Touchscreen phones are the norm now, be it as smart phones, or dumb phones, but I guess since Apple never saw a thread in any of the iPhone Killer challengers (they didn't respond to all the aggressive Samsung Instinct ads at all), they never bothered with any type of lawyer tough talk, but with the Pre, they do see a challenger, hence the tough boardroom language.
    Actually apple is trying to get a patent on using an accelerometer on a multifunction electronic device. Unfortunately for them there is prior art. Back in 2005, Samsung released the SCH-S310 which has an accelerometer in it that can acutually be used for input. The phone btw can also take pictures. Hence making it a Multifuntional Electronic Device.
    --Nextel Blackberry 7520 -> Sprint Treo 700p -> Sprint Treo 755p -> Sprint Pre
  5. #65  
    Quote Originally Posted by marcol View Post
    Leaving aside that what you said and what you say you meant aren't exactly the same , Palm pretty much transitioned the PDA UI to the first Treos, certainly that's true for the app launch screen. Now I've no idea if Apple were the first to do it that way, but they did it before Palm (the the Messagepad 120 above predates the first Palm Pilot by two years).

    TBH, this whole thread seems like a bunch of presumptions based on little knowledge. We don't know for sure if Apple are going to sue Palm, let alone what the nature of the legal action would be if they did.
    You win sir I had hoped the smiley was indication.

    But to be honest, i'm not sure it matters. There's not a lot of honesty in these patent talks or talks about who stole what from whom.

    At least now, palm is in a position to be stolen from? Synergy, cloud syncing, touchstone, etc.

    Apple needs to keep up just like the rest. It won't take long for its OS to become..well..boring? Palm and to an extent, Microsoft found that out. A higher resolution screen, more storage, along with the missing features should be obvious.
  6. #66  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardfan View Post
    You win sir I had hoped the smiley was indication.
    Hey, sorry! I see how it reads that way now.

    Quote Originally Posted by cardfan View Post
    At least now, palm is in a position to be stolen from? Synergy, cloud syncing, touchstone, etc.
    I'm no expert in this but Synergy seems like it might be more novel than the other two.
  7. #67  
    Some one needs to take a bite out of apple.
  8. #68  
    Quote Originally Posted by noel431 View Post
    Some one needs to take a bite out of apple.
    That Apple logo... you get the meaning, right?
  9. #69  
    I saw this submission on Digg. Not sure how accurate this blog is.
    Is "successfully patenting" different from "being granted" (I'm assuming it is different, but just asking anyway).

    http://theclevermonkey.blogspot.com/...lti-touch.html

    Apple Successfully Patents Multi-touch

    According to the US Patent office records, last week on January 20th, 2009, Apple Inc. was awarded a patent to what is essentially multi-touch. If I understand the patent correctly this will have far reaching ramifications to the multi-touch industry.


    Patent Number:
    7,479,949

    Patent Title:
    Touch screen device, method, and graphical user interface for determining commands by applying heuristics

    Patent Abstract:
    A computer-implemented method for use in conjunction with a computing device with a touch screen display comprises: detecting one or more finger contacts with the touch screen display, applying one or more heuristics to the one or more finger contacts to determine a command for the device, and processing the command. The one or more heuristics comprise: a heuristic for determining that the one or more finger contacts correspond to a one-dimensional vertical screen scrolling command, a heuristic for determining that the one or more finger contacts correspond to a two-dimensional screen translation command, and a heuristic for determining that the one or more finger contacts correspond to a command to transition from displaying a respective item in a set of items to displaying a next item in the set of items.

    I’m not an expert or even a novice at interpreting patents but as I read it they have patented not only multi-touch in general but also many of the gestures used in iPhone and elsewhere (e.g. Microsoft Surface), such as pinching, swipe, tap, rotation, and others. If this is the foundation of threats of legal action against Palm than its also the foundation of legal threats to all multi-touch devices. It’s scary. I would greatly appreciate comments from people who can clarify the meaning of the patent and its implications.
  10. Rhody's Avatar
    Posts
    703 Posts
    Global Posts
    720 Global Posts
    #70  
    Quote Originally Posted by Syphon View Post
    I saw this submission on Digg. Not sure how accurate this blog is.
    Is "successfully patenting" different from "being granted" (I'm assuming it is different, but just asking anyway).

    http://theclevermonkey.blogspot.com/...lti-touch.html
    The claim is the name of the game.

    11. A computer-implemented method, comprising:
    at a computing device with a touch screen display, detecting one or more finger contacts with the touch screen display;
    applying one or more heuristics to the one or more finger contacts to determine a command for the device; and
    processing the command;
    wherein the one or more heuristics comprise:
    a vertical screen scrolling heuristic for determining that the one or more finger contacts correspond to a one-dimensional vertical screen scrolling command rather than a two-dimensional screen translation command based on an angle of initial movement of a finger contact with respect to the touch screen display;
    a two-dimensional screen translation heuristic for determining that the one or more finger contacts correspond to the two-dimensional screen translation command rather than the one-dimensional vertical screen scrolling command based on the angle of initial movement of the finger contact with respect to the touch screen display; and
    a next item heuristic for determining that the one or more finger contacts correspond to a command to transition from displaying a respective item in a set of items to displaying a next item in the set of items.
    When determining what someone has patented, you must look at the claim, not the abstract. Plus, a claim may be limited even further by remarks made in the record. This is called file wrapper estoppel. People tend to look at the title or abstract of a patent and overreact.
  11. #71  
    Good thing for the Pre that it's touchscreen hardware handles the recoginizing of gestures not software. According to Cypress Semiconductor it's chip handles the gesture recognition so all the system integrator has to do is decide what he wants his software to do when the chip tells it that a particular gesture has been done. The above mentioned apple patent requires the actual computer software to handle the recognizing of the heuristics. The Pre should be safe since there's is a hardware based solution that a third party provides.
    --Nextel Blackberry 7520 -> Sprint Treo 700p -> Sprint Treo 755p -> Sprint Pre
  12. Rhody's Avatar
    Posts
    703 Posts
    Global Posts
    720 Global Posts
    #72  
    Quote Originally Posted by SedahDrol View Post
    Good thing for the Pre that it's touchscreen hardware handles the recoginizing of gestures not software. According to Cypress Semiconductor it's chip handles the gesture recognition so all the system integrator has to do is decide what he wants his software to do when the chip tells it that a particular gesture has been done. The above mentioned apple patent requires the actual computer software to handle the recognizing of the heuristics. The Pre should be safe since there's is a hardware based solution that a third party provides.
    The claim does not say that software handles recognizing of heuristics.
  13. #73  
    Quote Originally Posted by Rhody View Post
    The claim does not say that software handles recognizing of heuristics.
    sure it does:
    What is claimed is:

    1. A computing device, comprising: a touch screen display; one or more processors; memory; and one or more programs, wherein the one or more programs are stored in the memory and configured to be executed by the one or more processors, the one or more programs including: instructions for detecting one or more finger contacts with the touch screen display; instructions for applying one or more heuristics to the one or more finger contacts to determine a command for the device; and instructions for processing the command; wherein the one or more heuristics comprise: a vertical screen scrolling heuristic for determining that the one or more finger contacts correspond to a one-dimensional vertical screen scrolling command rather than a two-dimensional screen translation command based on an angle of initial movement of a finger contact with respect to the touch screen display; a two-dimensional screen translation heuristic for determining that the one or more finger contacts correspond to the two-dimensional screen translation command rather than the one-dimensional vertical screen scrolling command based on the angle of initial movement of the finger contact with respect to the touch screen display; and a next item heuristic for determining that the one or more finger contacts correspond to a command to transition from displaying a respective item in a set of items to displaying a next item in the set of items.
    Please note the part about the program stored in memory. That my friend is software be it the OS or a program that runs on the OS. As you see there are quite a few requirements that need to be met for this patent to apply. One of which requires that the touchscreen display be present to the computimg device. another is that the programs contain and handle the procesing of the heuristics. Now in the case of the pre...it is the touchscreen and it's chip that handle all this. The only place programs come into play are how they hande the gestures. For example the touchscreens chips tells the linux kernel which in turn tells the webos that pinch command has been sent. webos in turn notifies whatever program is running that the pinch command was sent and the program then tells decides what is going to happen.

    With Apples patent the touchscreen tells the programs on the computing device it has detected hits at various x,y coordinates then those programs interpret the gesture and decide what is to be done. Really what Apple is doing is adding a second step to the process probably avoiding violationg an existing patent and requiring a "dumb" touchscreen where all it does is send the basic info. and leaves the interpretation to the device it is attached to.

    One could argue that Cypress Semiconductor may have some issues but it all depends exactly how they implemented their true touch technology and their chip. If the arguement can be made that the touchscreen itself is a computing device than Cypress could end up owing apple.
    --Nextel Blackberry 7520 -> Sprint Treo 700p -> Sprint Treo 755p -> Sprint Pre
  14. Rhody's Avatar
    Posts
    703 Posts
    Global Posts
    720 Global Posts
    #74  
    Quote Originally Posted by SedahDrol View Post
    sure it does:


    Please note the part about the program stored in memory. That my friend is software be it the OS or a program that runs on the OS. As you see there are quite a few requirements that need to be met for this patent to apply. One of which requires that the touchscreen display be present to the computimg device. another is that the programs contain and handle the procesing of the heuristics. Now in the case of the pre...it is the touchscreen and it's chip that handle all this. The only place programs come into play are how they hande the gestures. For example the touchscreens chips tells the linux kernel which in turn tells the webos that pinch command has been sent. webos in turn notifies whatever program is running that the pinch command was sent and the program then tells decides what is going to happen.

    With Apples patent the touchscreen tells the programs on the computing device it has detected hits at various x,y coordinates then those programs interpret the gesture and decide what is to be done. Really what Apple is doing is adding a second step to the process probably avoiding violationg an existing patent and requiring a "dumb" touchscreen where all it does is send the basic info. and leaves the interpretation to the device it is attached to.
    That's nice, but claim 1 is only one embodiment of the invention. Claim 11 is broader and doesn't require software. You only have to infringe one claim to get hit with a law suit.

    Do you work in intellectual property law?

    One could argue that Cypress Semiconductor may have some issues but it all depends exactly how they implemented their true touch technology and their chip. If the arguement can be made that the touchscreen itself is a computing device than Cypress could end up owing apple.
    Palm could be guilty of contributory infringement.

    Of course, it's more complicated than that. Because the claim uses the word "and" rather than "or," all they have to do is eliminate one of the heuristics and they could avoid infringement. You really have to be involved in the suit to really know what's going on.
  15. #75  
    Quote Originally Posted by Rhody View Post
    That's nice, but claim 1 is only one embodiment of the invention. Claim 11 is broader and doesn't require software. You only have to infringe one claim to get hit with a law suit.
    Indeed, but as I stated before it is the TouchScreen that handles the heuristics and interpretation in the Pre's case. In Claim 11 it's a computer interpreed method in which the heurisitcs and interpreation are handled by the device that has to have a touchscreen.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rhody View Post
    Do you work in intellectual property law?
    No. IANAL.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rhody View Post
    Palm could be guilty of contributory infringement.

    Of course, it's more complicated than that. Because the claim uses the word "and" rather than "or," all they have to do is eliminate one of the heuristics and they could avoid infringement. You really have to be involved in the suit to really know what's going on.
    Indeed "and/or" are where the teeth are at. What we speak of is pure speculation, only those involved will truely know the depth of the issues involved. But we can still have fun debating what can happen.
    --Nextel Blackberry 7520 -> Sprint Treo 700p -> Sprint Treo 755p -> Sprint Pre
  16. Dim-Ize's Avatar
    Posts
    242 Posts
    Global Posts
    710 Global Posts
    #76  
    I'm trying to follow this thread - because, well, I'm concerned. I have an iPhone - and frankly, I am about head over heels for the Pre.

    I read this thread too: http://www.macrumors.com/2009/01/26/...-touch-patent/ and it supports the general flow of this thread.

    I really hope, for so many reasons, that this doesn't limit development of touch screens to pay royalties to Apple because it will kill companies like Palm. Or, it may make it so difficult for them to be profitable if they have to pay part of their earnings...

    I'm not a lawyer and it is hard to make sense of this for me. I'm just really rooting for Palm to get the Pre to market. I love the company and really want them to succceed in the innovations they have been known for.
  17. #77  
    Quote Originally Posted by johncc View Post
    You aren't trying to perpetuate the myth that the iphone was the first touchscreen phone, are you?
    Nope, just saying it's the phone that made the touch screen phones immensely popular so that the huge touch screen form factor was also applied to non smart phones.
  18. #78  
    strange that it says "based on an angle of initial movement", there must be other patents out there that measure other types of movement. All you have to do is prove that your device does not use the angle of initial movement with respect to the screen. If your device measures position and actual shapes or gestures performed irrespective of the angle of initial motion, then you would not be in violation. i.e. If you can detect a circle gesture, by the x,y coordinates traced - you are not using the "angle of initial movement".

    Also looks like they are concerned with determining "scroll" versus "zoom", and a "next" command.
    French Pre3, UK Pre2, US Veer, German gsm Pre, 680, garmin ique 3600 & still have my working palm pilot 1000 with the 1 Mb adapter

    Please remove UberCalendar and google sync behavior patches prior to system updates.
    patch Google calendar sync behavior for 2.x.x and TouchPad (Oauth2 and advanced sync requirements enabled)
    Preference guide for MetaView's UberCalendar patch
  19. #79  
    Quote Originally Posted by frantid View Post
    strange that it says "based on an angle of initial movement", there must be other patents out there that measure other types of movement. All you have to do is prove that your device does not use the angle of initial movement with respect to the screen. If your device measures position and actual shapes or gestures performed irrespective of the angle of initial motion, then you would not be in violation. i.e. If you can detect a circle gesture, by the x,y coordinates traced - you are not using the "angle of initial movement".

    Also looks like they are concerned with determining "scroll" versus "zoom", and a "next" command.
    I would also like to add that it matters where the heuristics are interpreted. They are required to be interpreted by a program in memory or by computer implemented method. In Palms case it is the touchscreen itself that handles the interpretaion independent of the device.

    And heres the thing about scroll and next. Every Palm device I have owned does scroll and next and I can do them with my finger on the touchscreen. on some programs it matters where I do those gestures at ie the scroll bar, but on others like DtG's Pdf viewer I can scroll no matter where I am at. The pinch gesture is the only thing they have brought that is new to the touch screen on cellphone arena.

    Good thing for Palm is that their phone isn't out yet, so they currently aren't infringing. Bad news for everyone else, their phones are. So now apple's got a choice to go after them or not. If they chose not to then that will hurt their case against Palm for doing the same thing. I don't know what the other phones specs are, if they are using similar heuristics to that of Iphone to interpret the gestures via some program in the devices memory or not
    --Nextel Blackberry 7520 -> Sprint Treo 700p -> Sprint Treo 755p -> Sprint Pre
  20. #80  
    ^ I would agree. Asics are not considered processors, if that is what the touchscreen uses
    French Pre3, UK Pre2, US Veer, German gsm Pre, 680, garmin ique 3600 & still have my working palm pilot 1000 with the 1 Mb adapter

    Please remove UberCalendar and google sync behavior patches prior to system updates.
    patch Google calendar sync behavior for 2.x.x and TouchPad (Oauth2 and advanced sync requirements enabled)
    Preference guide for MetaView's UberCalendar patch
Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Posting Permissions