The patent application was submitted in Dec., 2005.
I'd say it was new and novel 6 years ago.
The first Neonode was announced in 2002 and was in sale since March 2004. The n1m model was released in July 2005. That was all before Dec. 2005 (where did you get that date anyway? The U.S. Patent No. 8,406,721 which was recently awarded was filed on June 2, 2009).
IANAL but why does "on a screen" suddenly make something patent able? a metaphore to a physical action is not a new idea and a sliding bolt lock is also not a new idea...
Why use a gesture at all. What's wrong with a good old-fashioned button.
It takes more than a gesture to unlock an iPhone - you first have to press one of two buttons. If Apple hadn't created the swipe motion we'd probably all be typing in a code, flicking a virtual switch, or checking a 'unlock', or 'cancel' box.
Funny how innovation always seem so obvious once its there.
.....with a phone the size of mine slide-to-unlock is completely impractical, so I use the pattern unlock, and answer calls by pressing the camera button.
Wow, now that's intuitive. So you take a picture by pressing the call button?
Funny how innovation always seem so obvious once its there.
So true... And if innovation is so easy, it should be nothing for the patent violators to just create something new. If innovation is so easy, Taiwan should not be stressed.
Wow, now that's intuitive. So you take a picture by pressing the call button?
Lol, no, of course, I just never want to answer a call and take photos simultaneously, so I'm happy to be able to repurpose the button. It's intuitive for me, and I don't let others answer my phone.
Why use a gesture at all. What's wrong with a good old-fashioned button.
Exactly. Or voice recognition, face recognition, fingerprinter reader, or simple pass code to unlock. There are so many solutions but the Taiwanese, ever desperate to copy Apple, complain about not being able to use slide-to-unlock? Figures.
Of course, rather to interpret the Taiwanese as lazy copiers, one could also see slide-to-unlock as the simplest and most elegant solution.
It takes more than a gesture to unlock an iPhone - you first have to press one of two buttons. If Apple hadn't created the swipe motion we'd probably all be typing in a code, flicking a virtual switch, or checking a 'unlock', or 'cancel' box.
Funny how innovation always seem so obvious once its there.
Uh, I unlocked my old mp3 player and cd player the same exact way a person unlocks an iphone, only diff is one is a physical switch and another is software.
The original purpose of the unlock slide as a very specific gesture was to prevent it from unlocking in your pocket and accidentally dialing your wife while you are making out with your girlfriend.
Is the WinPhone unlock an equally deliberate sliding action or is it just slide up anywhere on the screen?
If the phone is in your pocket while you make out with your girlfriend, any type of "slide to unlock" may not be safe.
I think some of you guys are over-reacting to this patent, but two things spring to mind here.
1. If clear prior art can be shown, Apple's lawyers won't bother defending this as it's a waste of time and money. So either this is different to prior art, or more likely, Apple are patenting everything about iOS that they possibly can.
Remember that Apple famously lost against MS because they did not use enough IP protection that was made available to them. Apple learned an expensive mistake that day, which Steve Jobs has long since mentioned. Hence, once bitten twice shy. Apple will patent everything and anything that they can identify on the iPhone/iPod/iPad that they can. Regardless.
If someone has a prior claim, then they will simply walk away. But as insurance policies go, this is $10k a pop and is petty cash for a business like Apple.
2. What is disturbing is the Taiwanese Govt getting involved. Could you imagine if this was a role reversal and it was Obama colluding with Apple to prevent a foreign competitor screwing home grown US companies?
It's called protectionism, and regardless of what Apple has ever done, HTC calling in their local Government is a worrying thing.
IANAL but why does "on a screen" suddenly make something patent able? a metaphore to a physical action is not a new idea and a sliding bolt lock is also not a new idea...
The difference is huge. a timer when combined with a wiper blade is an invention. a timer when combined with a clock is another. a timer when combined with an artificial heart valve yet another. bring things together to make something new is an invention.
Comments
The patent application was submitted in Dec., 2005.
I'd say it was new and novel 6 years ago.
The first Neonode was announced in 2002 and was in sale since March 2004. The n1m model was released in July 2005. That was all before Dec. 2005 (where did you get that date anyway? The U.S. Patent No. 8,406,721 which was recently awarded was filed on June 2, 2009).
So no, it wasn't new or novel 6 years ago.
And for 40 billion, apple can easily afford multiple warheads. Get out of mountain view NOW!
I would side with Samsung - they have actual warheads.
Why use a gesture at all. What's wrong with a good old-fashioned button.
It takes more than a gesture to unlock an iPhone - you first have to press one of two buttons. If Apple hadn't created the swipe motion we'd probably all be typing in a code, flicking a virtual switch, or checking a 'unlock', or 'cancel' box.
Funny how innovation always seem so obvious once its there.
Smells like oligarchy to me.
What does?
.....with a phone the size of mine slide-to-unlock is completely impractical, so I use the pattern unlock, and answer calls by pressing the camera button.
Wow, now that's intuitive. So you take a picture by pressing the call button?
What does?
Government speaking for private corporations.
Nah.
Funny how innovation always seem so obvious once its there.
So true... And if innovation is so easy, it should be nothing for the patent violators to just create something new. If innovation is so easy, Taiwan should not be stressed.
Government speaking for private corporations.
Not to put too fine a point on it, but unification of corporations with government is called 'fascism', not oligarchy.
Its where China leapfrogged us to. But don't worry... we'll get there.
The phone would have to analyse your saliva - thus adding extra security
Wow, now that's intuitive. So you take a picture by pressing the call button?
Lol, no, of course, I just never want to answer a call and take photos simultaneously, so I'm happy to be able to repurpose the button. It's intuitive for me, and I don't let others answer my phone.
Why use a gesture at all. What's wrong with a good old-fashioned button.
Exactly. Or voice recognition, face recognition, fingerprinter reader, or simple pass code to unlock. There are so many solutions but the Taiwanese, ever desperate to copy Apple, complain about not being able to use slide-to-unlock? Figures.
Of course, rather to interpret the Taiwanese as lazy copiers, one could also see slide-to-unlock as the simplest and most elegant solution.
It takes more than a gesture to unlock an iPhone - you first have to press one of two buttons. If Apple hadn't created the swipe motion we'd probably all be typing in a code, flicking a virtual switch, or checking a 'unlock', or 'cancel' box.
Funny how innovation always seem so obvious once its there.
Uh, I unlocked my old mp3 player and cd player the same exact way a person unlocks an iphone, only diff is one is a physical switch and another is software.
The original purpose of the unlock slide as a very specific gesture was to prevent it from unlocking in your pocket and accidentally dialing your wife while you are making out with your girlfriend.
Is the WinPhone unlock an equally deliberate sliding action or is it just slide up anywhere on the screen?
If the phone is in your pocket while you make out with your girlfriend, any type of "slide to unlock" may not be safe.
Wow how stupid can the taiwanese be? Right now I can think of a a bajillion ways to unlock a damn touch screen. Idiots.
Except they aren't idiots. Therefore this is just a pretext.
1. If clear prior art can be shown, Apple's lawyers won't bother defending this as it's a waste of time and money. So either this is different to prior art, or more likely, Apple are patenting everything about iOS that they possibly can.
Remember that Apple famously lost against MS because they did not use enough IP protection that was made available to them. Apple learned an expensive mistake that day, which Steve Jobs has long since mentioned. Hence, once bitten twice shy. Apple will patent everything and anything that they can identify on the iPhone/iPod/iPad that they can. Regardless.
If someone has a prior claim, then they will simply walk away. But as insurance policies go, this is $10k a pop and is petty cash for a business like Apple.
2. What is disturbing is the Taiwanese Govt getting involved. Could you imagine if this was a role reversal and it was Obama colluding with Apple to prevent a foreign competitor screwing home grown US companies?
It's called protectionism, and regardless of what Apple has ever done, HTC calling in their local Government is a worrying thing.
IANAL but why does "on a screen" suddenly make something patent able? a metaphore to a physical action is not a new idea and a sliding bolt lock is also not a new idea...
The difference is huge. a timer when combined with a wiper blade is an invention. a timer when combined with a clock is another. a timer when combined with an artificial heart valve yet another. bring things together to make something new is an invention.