or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple granted patent for head-mounted display tech
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple granted patent for head-mounted display tech

post #1 of 54
Thread Starter 
The United States Patent and Trademark Office on Tuesday granted Apple's application for a patent describing head-mounted display technology that is tangentially related to see-through, or augmented reality, units like Google's Project Glass.

While U.S. Patent No. 8,212,859 for "Peripheral treatment for head-mounted displays" does not directly describe a device like the head-mounted display (HMD) augmented reality glasses currently under development by Google, the filing mentions that the technology can be used in similar see-through solutions.

The '859 patent, which was first applied for in 2006, presents various solutions regarding peripheral light transmission in an attempt to address the usability issues associated with HMDs, which have yet to take root in the consumer market. Apple's patent tries to solve problems related to eye strain caused by the display's relative distance from the eye with "peripheral treatment" of a user's field of view. In the technology the colors of the primary source image are dynamically matched by either LED, OLED or lasers and converged stereoscopically to reduce the "tunnel effect" seen in normal HMDs.

From the abstract:


Methods and apparatus, including computer program products, implementing and using techniques for projecting a source image in a head-mounted display apparatus for a user. A first display projects an image viewable by a first eye of the user. A first peripheral light element is positioned to emit light of one or more colors in close proximity to the periphery of the first display. A receives data representing a source image, processes the data representing the source image to generate a first image for the first display and to generate a first set of peripheral conditioning signals for the first peripheral light element, directs the first image to the first display, and directs the first set of peripheral conditioning signals to the first peripheral light element. As a result, an enhanced viewing experience is created for the user.


Besides the peripheral treatment, and more substantial to HMD implementation, are the source and secondary image solutions that can be used in a variety of devices such as augmented reality glasses. The patent background cites AR directly, saying that "some HMDs can be used to view a see-through image imposed upon a real world view, thereby creating what is typically referred to as an augmented reality."

It is noted in that the peripheral treatment can be used in so-called diffractive optical arrangements like light-guided optical elements (LOE) or binocular light-guided optical elements (BLOE), both of which use thin transparent substrates to display source images. A similar method is being used in Google X lab's Project Glass, an internet-connected headset that displays information through digital images and video on a small transparent display in front of a user's right eye. At the Google I/O conference it was revealed that developer copies of the AR hardware will ship in 2013 with an expected consumer release to follow in 2014.

HMD
Illustration of possible "peripheral treatment" implementations. | Source: USPTO


It is unlikely that Apple will be using the peripheral treatment patent anytime soon it at all but the filing serves as an interesting behind-the-scenes glimpse at the Cupertino-based company's research and development efforts.

The '859 patent is credited to John Tang and former senior vice president of Apple's iPod division Tony Fadell, known by insiders as the "grandfather of the iPod." Apple currently sells the Nest Learning Thermostat, the first product to come out of the new company Fadell founded after leaving the iPad maker, through its online store after having reportedly removed the device from brick-and-mortar locations.
post #2 of 54
APPLE MUST BE COPYING GOOGLE GLASSES. SEE, APPLE COPIES EVERYTHING. WHY NOT TRY INNOVATING INSTEAD OF LITIGATING, APPLE?!

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #3 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

APPLE MUST BE COPYING GOOGLE GLASSES. SEE, APPLE COPIES EVERYTHING. WHY NOT TRY INNOVATING INSTEAD OF LITIGATING, APPLE?!

Haha that was great :-)

Silly googleites
post #4 of 54

I wonder what Google is thinking about this right about now. Would only using one HUD over an eye good enough to skirt this patent? 

 

Ouch! 

Hard-Core.
Reply
Hard-Core.
Reply
post #5 of 54

Applied for more than six years ago!

 

Wouldn't it be hilarious if Apple got an injunction against the Google Glasses? 

post #6 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by aplnub View Post

I wonder what Google is thinking about this right about now. Would only using one HUD over an eye good enough to skirt this patent? 

… Why did the phrase "Google Panties" just come into my head…

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #7 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

APPLE MUST BE COPYING GOOGLE GLASSES. SEE, APPLE COPIES EVERYTHING. WHY NOT TRY INNOVATING INSTEAD OF LITIGATING, APPLE?!

 

Only if Apple include Notification Center in their glasses...

Graphical Emoticons.jpg


Edited by GTR - 7/4/12 at 7:21pm
My car keeps crashing whenever I do 150mph. It's a design flaw. People tell me to slow down and drive normally but I should be able to use it as I wish.
Reply
My car keeps crashing whenever I do 150mph. It's a design flaw. People tell me to slow down and drive normally but I should be able to use it as I wish.
Reply
post #8 of 54

Watch Apple and Google go "head to head" over this. (pun intentional)

"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
post #9 of 54

Some of the patents for the Google Glasses project were applied for back in 2005 and granted in 2010. No doubt Apple was aware of the project early on since Mr. Jobs was very welcome at Google.

 

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-adv.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&d=PALL&S1=07675683&OS=PN/07675683&RS=P

 

Several more have been granted over the past two years. I think the project may be safe, but who knows for certain until Apple sues over it.

http://9to5google.com/2012/05/22/google-glasses-granted-host-of-new-patents-competition-quickly-gaining-speed/

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #10 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

No doubt Apple was aware of the project early on since Mr. Jobs was very welcome at Google.

This sentence in context makes me want to punch a baby.

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #11 of 54

These will be called 'iGlasses'. 

post #12 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


This sentence in context makes me want to punch a baby.

Goose and gander. . . ;)

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #13 of 54
Surprised Apple hasn't applied for a patent on a swivel chair that has '4 legs and a place to sit, with a resting back that pivots and or rotates." then sues Thomas Jefferson's descendents since the patent office has clearly stated Apple invented this chair.

I wonder if Apple has put patents in the system for a 4 wheeled, gas driven apparatus that has doors, windows and a roof, so they can sue every car company in the world, because clearly Apple invented the car? Apparently, no patent is too broad for Apple.
post #14 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac.World View Post

Surprised Apple hasn't applied for a patent on a swivel chair that has '4 legs and a place to sit, with a resting back that pivots and or rotates." then sues Thomas Jefferson's descendents since the patent office has clearly stated Apple invented this chair.
I wonder if Apple has put patents in the system for a 4 wheeled, gas driven apparatus that has doors, windows and a roof, so they can sue every car company in the world, because clearly Apple invented the car? Apparently, no patent is too broad for Apple.

Maybe that's what miniature minds believe, but I'm surprised that Apple doesn't actually sue more companies, considering the amount of cheap ripoffs, and nearly identical looking, inferior products on the market.

post #15 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macky the Macky View Post

Watch Apple and Google go "head to head" over this. (pun intentional)

All legal retribution should be eye-for-an-eye.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #16 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

Maybe that's what miniature minds believe, but I'm surprised that Apple doesn't actually sue more companies, considering the amount of cheap ripoffs, and nearly identical looking, inferior products on the market.Y

You should consider that design patents may be beyond your own comprehension. Understanding them would  take much more time  than simply reading the articles posted on here. I'm a little curious what products agitate you though. Out of the ones that do, have you picked up any of them? The single angle side by side internet jpegs are a big point of irritation for me as they represent malleable data. You can make such imagery fit your agenda rather than attempt to understand it. If they're going for a case based on trade dress, they would consult a legal team that is experienced in such matters. It's important to know how the validity of a given design patent will be tested and how the infringement will be tested. What constitutes infringing similarity or dissimilarity? As we've seen before, it's easy to present something that looks similar from a single photo on the internet, whether or not it represents valid prior art.

post #17 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac.World View Post

Surprised Apple hasn't applied for a patent on a swivel chair that has '4 legs and a place to sit, with a resting back that pivots and or rotates." then sues Thomas Jefferson's descendents since the patent office has clearly stated Apple invented this chair.
I wonder if Apple has put patents in the system for a 4 wheeled, gas driven apparatus that has doors, windows and a roof, so they can sue every car company in the world, because clearly Apple invented the car? Apparently, no patent is too broad for Apple.

Why would Apple apply for patents for things that already exist?

You'll find that the patents Apple apply for are novel at the time of filing, are very specific if you get past the title and are so good that they become obvious after Apple implements them.

Why don't you take your idiotic office chair and car examples and troll somewhere else?
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #18 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post

 I'm a little curious what products agitate you though. 

 

There are way too many examples to give, surely most people have seen a bunch of the nearly identical looking ripoff products already, but I'll just post one of the recent ones that I saw. 

 

This has nothing to do with rectangles, Apple patenting a square or any of the other stupid jokes that certain misinformed people and demented Fandroids like to make. It has to do with the talentless people who made this ripoff. Their intention was clearly to deliberately rip off the Macbook Air's design when they were making this design. 

 

kirfdsc04235.jpg

post #19 of 54
@ Apple ][

That me a long time to realize that is not a MBA. Who makes that? Samsung?

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #20 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

This sentence in context makes me want to punch a baby.

That's a pretty bad issue you've got yourself there. I actually spent five or so minutes thinking of where in a conversation this would fit in without the speaking person looking like a complete a$$hole. I was unsuccessful...
post #21 of 54

Here's an HP laptop from a few years ago: (edit - this is actually a Macbook Pro)

015macbookpro2009unboxi.jpg

 

Only a retard would think that this laptop has any similarity at all to any of Apple's devices. It is purely a coincidence that the average person on the street would have an extremely hard time telling the two apart. When HP made this, they were definitely not trying to rip off Apple's design. Only a fool would come to that conclusion. This is just how laptops look, and HP would have come up with this exact design completely on their own, even if Apple didn't exist. Does Apple think that they can patent a rectangle? Apple has some fucking nerve. I'm never going to buy another Apple product again. And believe me, I'm not a Fandroid or a troll, my family owns 17 Macs, 4 iPhones, 3 iPads and 1 iPod Touch, but this is the final straw. Apple is anti-competition and I like choice, even if all of the choices out there look exactly like Apple's fucking designs.


Edited by Apple ][ - 7/4/12 at 9:56pm
post #22 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

@ Apple ][
That me a long time to realize that is not a MBA. Who makes that? Samsung?

No, I found it on this site:

 

http://www.androidauthority.com/android-book-thd-n2-a-macbook-clone-android-ics-93542/

post #23 of 54

So... google copies the iPhone while sitting in board meetings, then starts copying other Apple tech that was developed while Google was tight with Apple.

 

wouldn't be surprised to see more of this coming to light in the future.

 

Google needs to license the tech from Apple if Apple wants to let them.

 

But Google still isn't paying Sun for their tech in Android...

 

"Don't be evil"

 

yeah right.

post #24 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

Here's an HP laptop from a few years ago:

015macbookpro2009unboxi.jpg

 

Only a retard would think that this laptop has any similarity at all to any of Apple's devices. It is purely a coincidence that the average person on the street would have an extremely hard time telling the two apart. When HP made this, they were definitely not trying to rip off Apple's design. Only a fool would come to that conclusion. This is just how laptops look, and HP would have come up with this exact design completely on their own, even if Apple didn't exist. Does Apple think that they can patent a rectangle? Apple has some fucking nerve. I'm never going to buy another Apple product again. And believe me, I'm not a Fandroid or a troll, my family owns 17 Macs, 4 iPhones, 3 iPads and 1 iPod Touch, but this is the final straw. Apple is anti-competition and I like choice, even if all of the choices out there look exactly like Apple's fucking designs.


I'm pretty sure that IS an Apple laptop. Did you get your links wrong?

post #25 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by cwingrav View Post


I'm pretty sure that IS an Apple laptop. Did you get your links wrong?

Yes, you're absolutely right. An image was labelled wrong on Google search.

I'm going to go hunt for a few more Mac clones.

post #26 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

Here's an HP laptop from a few years ago:

015macbookpro2009unboxi.jpg

 

Only a retard would think that this laptop has any similarity at all to any of Apple's devices. It is purely a coincidence that the average person on the street would have an extremely hard time telling the two apart. When HP made this, they were definitely not trying to rip off Apple's design. Only a fool would come to that conclusion. This is just how laptops look, and HP would have come up with this exact design completely on their own, even if Apple didn't exist. Does Apple think that they can patent a rectangle? Apple has some fucking nerve. I'm never going to buy another Apple product again. And believe me, I'm not a Fandroid or a troll, my family owns 17 Macs, 4 iPhones, 3 iPads and 1 iPod Touch, but this is the final straw. Apple is anti-competition and I like choice, even if all of the choices out there look exactly like Apple's fucking designs.


That groove for opening the laptop is a dead giveaway that this is in reality an Apple Laptop - please check your facts. Apple has posted several videos of how they spent a lot of time and attention getting this groove right. If this is really a HP laptop, then something is seriously wrong!

post #27 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by "Apple 
[" url="/t/151093/apple-granted-patent-for-head-mounted-display-tech#post_2140535"]Here's an HP laptop from a few years ago: (edit - this is actually a Macbook Pro)
LL

Only a retard would think that this laptop has any similarity at all to any of Apple's devices. It is purely a coincidence that the average person on the street would have an extremely hard time telling the two apart. When HP made this, they were definitely not trying to rip off Apple's design. Only a fool would come to that conclusion. This is just how laptops look, and HP would have come up with this exact design completely on their own, even if Apple didn't exist. Does Apple think that they can patent a rectangle? Apple has some fucking nerve. I'm never going to buy another Apple product again. And believe me, I'm not a Fandroid or a troll, my family owns 17 Macs, 4 iPhones, 3 iPads and 1 iPod Touch, but this is the final straw. Apple is anti-competition and I like choice, even if all of the choices out there look exactly like Apple's fucking designs.

What happened to "only a retard"?

You sure are starting to live up to what you claim about other people in your posts...
post #28 of 54

I found another clone, and I doubled checked it this time, and this is definitely not an actual Apple device.

 

macbook-pro-clone-running-OSX.jpg

post #29 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

 

There are way too many examples to give, surely most people have seen a bunch of the nearly identical looking ripoff products already, but I'll just post one of the recent ones that I saw. 

 

This has nothing to do with rectangles, Apple patenting a square or any of the other stupid jokes that certain misinformed people and demented Fandroids like to make. It has to do with the talentless people who made this ripoff. Their intention was clearly to deliberately rip off the Macbook Air's design when they were making this design. 

 

kirfdsc04235.jpg

 

What is that ugly piece if shite?

post #30 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerrySwitched26 View Post

 

What is that ugly piece if shite?

If you're really interested in that lovely thing, then the link is in post #22. 

post #31 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by "Apple 
[" url="/t/151093/apple-granted-patent-for-head-mounted-display-tech#post_2140512"]Maybe that's what miniature minds believe, but I'm surprised that Apple doesn't actually sue more companies, considering the amount of cheap ripoffs, and nearly identical looking, inferior products on the market.
I've seen your posts. You don't have the right to say anyone has a miniture mind.

By the way, did Apple give you knee pads before or after you drank the kool-aid?

As for Apple, it is documented that they apply for tons of patents on possible future tech, hoping that just 1 out of 100 become mainstream. But they have zero intent on actually working on any of these patents. It's called throwing sh#t at the wall and seeing what eventually sticks. Then suing.
post #32 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by "Apple 
[" url="/t/151093/apple-granted-patent-for-head-mounted-display-tech#post_2140545"]Yes, you're absolutely right. An image was labelled wrong on Google search.
I'm going to go hunt for a few more Mac clones.
I love your sheer stupidity. Sure you weren't one of the lawyers for Samsung that couldn't tell the difference between an iPad and Galaxy Tab?
post #33 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac.World View Post


I love your sheer stupidity. Sure you weren't one of the lawyers for Samsung that couldn't tell the difference between an iPad and Galaxy Tab?

I would say that it reinforces my point. Some of the clones and the real thing look mighty alike. I made an error and I acknowledged it. I am man enough to admit when I make a mistake, unlike lying Fandroids.

 

The real idiots are the people who claim that those other devices didn't steal Apple's design. 

post #34 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac.World View Post


I've seen your posts. You don't have the right to say anyone has a miniture mind.

 

Are you certain of that? The irony is quite strong.

 

As for your knee-pads and Kool-aid comment, knee-pads are not necessary for me, as I don't swing that way. And no kool-aid is required to recognize that Apple makes the best devices out there, in every category. 

post #35 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

Here's an HP laptop from a few years ago: (edit - this is actually a Macbook Pro)

 

Only a retard would think that this laptop (an Apple MBP) has any similarity at all to any of Apple's devices. It is purely a coincidence that the average person on the street would have an extremely hard time telling the two apart. When HP made this, they were definitely not trying to rip off Apple's design. Only a fool would come to that conclusion. This is just how laptops look, and HP would have come up with this exact design completely on their own, even if Apple didn't exist. Does Apple think that they can patent a rectangle? Apple has some fucking nerve. I'm never going to buy another Apple product again. And believe me, I'm not a Fandroid or a troll, my family owns 17 Macs, 4 iPhones, 3 iPads and 1 iPod Touch, but this is the final straw. Apple is anti-competition and I like choice, even if all of the choices out there look exactly like Apple's fucking designs.

 

So, an Apple MBP looks exactly like an Apple MBP, and you decide to never buy another Apple product again... well don't let the virtual door hit your butt on the way out. Apple has a responsibility to its stockholders to protect its IP whether you believe it or not. There's no competition when everyone plays follow the leader instead of innovating, you have your skivvies in a knot for the wrong reasons.

"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
post #36 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by "Apple 
[" url="/t/151093/apple-granted-patent-for-head-mounted-display-tech#post_2140560"]I would say that it reinforces my point. Some of the clones and the real thing look mighty alike. I made an error and I acknowledged it. I am man enough to admit when I make a mistake, unlike lying Fandroids.

The real idiots are the people who claim that those other devices didn't steal Apple's design. 
Or there are def clones of the ipad, iphone, imac, mbp and mba out there. I don't dispute that. Apple has a lot of products in demand, especially in Asia. Clones are innevitable.

But Apple is at a point where it is creating code or patenting some 'potential' future product with it's only intention being litigation. A patent should only be granted if you have a working model and show intent to manufacture. Apps and code should be copyrighted only if they are used in a program or OS. You shouldn't be able to patent lines of code, or in this case a 'quick search box' which Apple didn't even create. How you get a patent for something that hasexisted for over a decade is beyond me.
post #37 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macky the Macky View Post

So, an Apple MBP looks exactly like an Apple MBP, and you decide to never buy another Apple product again... well don't let the virtual door hit your butt on the way out. Apple has a responsibility to its stockholders to protect its IP whether you believe it or not. There's no competition when everyone plays follow the leader instead of innovating, you have your skivvies in a knot for the wrong reasons.

I have no idea if he's being sarcastic or not. Apple ][ is usually more Apple-centric or Apple happy is the word I think. Just find it weird is all. Nothing against you of course Apple ][.
post #38 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR View Post

 

Only if Apple include Notification Center in their glasses...

Graphical Emoticons.jpg

That's the only argument Googlelites come up with when presented with Apple patents. But, but, but... Apple has copied Notification Center from Google! There are no other things Googlelites refer to make their case on how shameful Apple is in copying others. (Oh yeah, and the Xerox thing from 30 years ago.) This is not to say that all Apple's implementations are original. Like they had to pay $100 million to Creative for their patent on music player UI that Apple used in clickwheel iPods. Surely though, Apple brought a lot of new UI language for the multi-touch phone OS. How much will hold as patentable is up to the courts.

post #39 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daramouthe View Post


I have no idea if he's being sarcastic or not. Apple ][ is usually more Apple-centric or Apple happy is the word I think. Just find it weird is all. Nothing against you of course Apple ][.

I won't be leaving Apple's ecosystem anytime soon (more likely never ;), and I'm not going to blame anybody for misinterpreting my post, since I messed up on the image which accompanied it. It was supposed to be an image of one of the clones, and this whole clone BS even got me confused.

post #40 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac.World View Post


Or there are def clones of the ipad, iphone, imac, mbp and mba out there. I don't dispute that. Apple has a lot of products in demand, especially in Asia. Clones are innevitable.
But Apple is at a point where it is creating code or patenting some 'potential' future product with it's only intention being litigation. A patent should only be granted if you have a working model and show intent to manufacture. Apps and code should be copyrighted only if they are used in a program or OS. You shouldn't be able to patent lines of code, or in this case a 'quick search box' which Apple didn't even create. How you get a patent for something that hasexisted for over a decade is beyond me.

Even if Apple patents 'potential' future products, like you write, then that's not illegal. You might have a problem with the current patent system, but that is hardly Apple's fault. Companies should take full advantage of the current system and laws. Anybody else is also free to patent any future ideas, if they can come up with them.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple granted patent for head-mounted display tech