Tinkering is all of the above. It is modifying aesthetic or functional aspects of something. Changing the background wallpaper is a type of tinkering. It is also a way of discovering how something works (like disassembling a clock to see it's inner workings).
Some people just like to tinker because it's fun. It doesn't have to have a purpose or end goal. Some people want something to "just work". Nothing wrong with either way. Everyone is different which is why having choices is great.
Yes - I have no issues with doing it for fun as I've been doing that myself with computers for years. I just hadn't figured out whether there was more to it with phones.
I've often wondered what the tinkering is intended to achieve. Is the end point some actual enhanced functionality or just non-standard personalization of the interface? Or something else again? Is it worth the effort?
It's more like a hobby I suppose. For the most part now my phones stay one way after initial tinkering. I use to be heavy into change for change's sake but now I don't even do anything beyond flash a ROM stylize it and call it a day.
Not that I'm aware of; but there's their products as prior art. Consequently, Apple's patent needed to be very specific in order to have sufficient novelty. As a result of this, Galaxy Nexus can easily be shown in court to differ sufficiently from Apple's patent.
Apple's first "side to unlock" patent was very general and can likely be invalidated by prior art.
A method of unlocking a hand-held electronic device, the device including a touch-sensitive display, the method comprising: detecting a contact with the touch-sensitive display at a first predefined location corresponding to an unlock image; continuously moving the unlock image on the touch-sensitive display in accordance with movement of the contact while continuous contact with the touch screen is maintained, wherein the unlock image is a graphical, interactive user-interface object with which a user interacts in order to unlock the device; and unlocking the hand-held electronic device if the moving the unlock image on the touch-sensitive display results in movement of the unlock image from the first predefined location to a predefined unlock region on the touch-sensitive display.
The second is much more specific and it's hard to see Google's "slide to unlock" feature coming under this patent.
Yes - I have no issues with doing it for fun as I've been doing that myself with computers for years. I just hadn't figured out whether there was more to it with phones.
Ah, well specific to phones would be customization (more icons per page, more tabs in the browser, etc.). I also know guys who get into the Android kernel to do speed tweaks, overclocking, or speed governing for power savings. That kind of stuff is half for the end result and half for the act of doing it (aka "because it was there" mentality).
Ah, well specific to phones would be customization (more icons per page, more tabs in the browser, etc.). I also know guys who get into the Android kernel to do speed tweaks, overclocking, or speed governing for power savings. That kind of stuff is half for the end result and half for the act of doing it (aka "because it was there" mentality).
The two arguments that makes sense for Windows users is their paid apps can be used on new Windows PCs regardless of vendor and they don't have to learn a new system. I never hear these excuses in regards to Android (though I hear the former as a slam against Apple because they lock you in I their evil-ecosystem). It's always about the ability to root the device and access the file system blah blah blah.
The two arguments that makes sense for Windows users is their paid apps can be used on new Windows PCs regardless of vendor and they don't have to learn a new system. I never hear these excuses in regards to Android (though I hear the former as a slam against Apple because they lock you in I their evil-ecosystem). It's always about the ability to root the device and access the file system blah blah blah.
The more rational among us know that there's absolutely no case here, and that'll likely be what the courts determine as well.
Apple (and a few others) have become little more than patent trolling bullies, and it's time it came to a stop.
There are other ways to do this. Slide to unlock is just a clever and easy way. But touching several spots in a certain order would work just as well, and take about the same amount of time. It's just laziness on the part of others to copy this.
The Galaxy Nexus implementation should not be covered by the patent.
That not exactly what is patented. You're taking several individual things and conglomerating them together. The graphics may be copyrighted, but the patent is about what happens, and how it happens.
oh...so the patent is about the idea of interacting with a touch screen using a slide motion to initiate an action such as unlocking the device?
No, you can't get a patent for an idea, as you should know by now. You do know that, don't you? The patent is about what is being accomplished, and HOW it is being done, on the level of the software, and interaction with the screen.
I have a Galaxy Nexus and I can say with 100% certainty, that it is NOT a slide to unlock feature. When you put you finger on the unlock icon, a floating circle appears. You can then move your finger in any (360 degree) direction and the ball follows. When you move close to an icon on the outer circle (Just two for now, Unlock and Camera) the ball snaps to the icon. If you lift your finger, it performs the action of the icon. For now it unlocks the phone or opens the camera app. In the next Android update, you will be able to put your own app icons on the circle and have it go straight to them......
I just can't see how Apple is going to win this one....
Nor should they 'win this one', and as someone who owns/uses both devices on a daily basis, they 'look/feel' and function very differently.
I tested a Galaxy Nexus for 30 days with my IP4s. It does not look or feel or imitate the iPhone at all! It is almost 5 inches long and it does not use a slide to unlock like the iPhone...it shows a picture of a lock and you move it in the general direction to the right to unlock. You can also use facial recognition as well. Apple is really stretching with this one.
I chose to keep the IP4s...it is a better all around device and the battery last so much longer.
A correction to the below post. My error in commenting on his comments on which phone has better life, etc. I read the post incorrectly. My apologies.
*You're making this up, and it's easy to tell. The battery life isn't better than the 4S, it's worse. Not that untypical for Android phones which have been plagued with poor battery life in general.
Is it a better phone? Well, that a matter of opinion. With 2.3.5, no Android phone is "better". Bigger maybe, if you like that sort of thing. With ICS, a lot of the UI problems have been solved, so it's better-than it was.*
You're making this up, and it's easy to tell. The battery life isn't better than the 4S, it's worse. Not that untypical for Android phones which have been plagued with poor battery life in general.
Is it a better phone? Well, that a matter of opinion. With 2.3.5, no Android phone is "better". Bigger maybe, if you like that sort of thing. With ICS, a lot of the UI problems have been solved, so it's better-than it was.
I also agree with AbsoluteDesignz about absurdity of Apple going after Samsung for something that is part of the stock Android 4.0 build.
You added an odd qualifier this time. "Switch' to make it 'sliding switch'. Does the sliding effect how the display switches from a locked mode to an unlocked mode or not? It sure likes you have to slide it to switch modes.
Again, I don't think Apple has a case here but I was commenting on your comment "that it is NOT a slide to unlock feature."
The concept of going after a manufacturer for this purpose, even though the OS was written by another, is common practice, and is perfectly legal all over the world. MS is going after manufacturers of Android devices even though the OS is by Google. This is no different.
The concept of going after a manufacturer for this purpose, even though the OS was written by another, is common practice, and is perfectly legal all over the world. MS is going after manufacturers of Android devices even though the OS is by Google. This is no different.
For total transparency, I'll admit that I like and use Android. I should also say that I own a Mac and am quite happy with it. I'm not some biased little idiot screaming "f*ck Apple, Android FTW!!", just putting my (hopefully unbiased) opinion out there.
Now that that's out of the way, this suit is absolutely bogus. Here's my reasoning:
1. If there had been any time for Apple to sue over this patent, it should have been anytime between when Android first came out and just before Android 4.0 (Ice Cream Sandwich) came out. The reason I think this is because on stock Android's default lockscreen, the ONLY way to unlock the phone is a straight horizontal slide from far left to far right, much like Apple's version. A slide from the opposite side (right to left) usually mutes/unmutes the phone. Any Android version 2.3.7 and below employs this feature and that's when it most resembled iOS's "slide to unlock", not now.
2. As others have pointed out, this suit is absolutely unnecessary simply for the fact that there are at least 5 different ways to unlock the Galaxy Nexus: Face unlock, the standard slide to unlock (the one being argued about here), PIN unlock (4 digits), password unlock (letters, numbers, other characters), pattern unlock, and maybe 1 or two more since I've never seen a Galaxy Nexus in-person. Even if this suit goes in Apple's favor, all Google has to do is take out the slide to unlock feature and (more than likely) pay a fine. Big whoop.
3. The slide to unlock feature on the Galaxy Nexus is (for the most part) completely different than iOS's slide to unlock. I do concede, you are "sliding" something to another location, but in Apple's method, you are constrained to the same straight horizontal, left-to-right motion every single time. With the Galaxy Nexus, you put your finger on the lock icon and you can move it anywhere within the circle that shows up. And supposedly, future updates will allow you to add/subtract things to unlock to and where to place them, furthering the disparity between the two. Not only that, but the start and end points for the methods employed by Android and iOS are different. GN: center to right, iPhone: far left to far right. Again, I am forced to reference my first point, when this suit would have been more applicable.
I think we can all agree (iOS and Android fans alike) this patent slinging is getting ridiculous, regardless of who wins...
I don't know why Apple waited this long. But you have to understand the dance that is going on here. One company comes up with something, and gets a patent. Another company copies that patented feature. That becomes a competitive threat. If Samsung, for example, can copy something Apple has done in hardware, and get away with it, it takes from Apple's sales. If Google can copy something Apple has done in software, and get away with it, it takes away from Apple's sales.
Why should Apple stand by and allow that? They shouldn't. While its true that there are various ways to unlock the screen. Do you know which is the most popular? Which is the second most, etc.? By eliminating one way, Apple will have made Android just that much less enjoyable. Additionally, they will have retained their invention for their own use. The fact that this is for thir own use, shows that those who are calling Apple a patent troll don't know what they are talking about.
I have to add to my post, that I think I remember seeing that just recently received this patent.
Comments
Tinkering is all of the above. It is modifying aesthetic or functional aspects of something. Changing the background wallpaper is a type of tinkering. It is also a way of discovering how something works (like disassembling a clock to see it's inner workings).
Some people just like to tinker because it's fun. It doesn't have to have a purpose or end goal. Some people want something to "just work". Nothing wrong with either way. Everyone is different which is why having choices is great.
Yes - I have no issues with doing it for fun as I've been doing that myself with computers for years. I just hadn't figured out whether there was more to it with phones.
I've often wondered what the tinkering is intended to achieve. Is the end point some actual enhanced functionality or just non-standard personalization of the interface? Or something else again? Is it worth the effort?
It's more like a hobby I suppose. For the most part now my phones stay one way after initial tinkering. I use to be heavy into change for change's sake but now I don't even do anything beyond flash a ROM stylize it and call it a day.
But yea. Short version, hobby.
Android is a stolen OS. Apple as no choice but to protect its IP.
Who did they steal it from? Or are you parrotting an often hyperbolic man?
Android is a stolen OS. Apple as no choice but to protect its IP.
Just grab a cup of coffee and relax. Or chill, if you prefer synonyms.
Not that I'm aware of; but there's their products as prior art. Consequently, Apple's patent needed to be very specific in order to have sufficient novelty. As a result of this, Galaxy Nexus can easily be shown in court to differ sufficiently from Apple's patent.
Apple's first "side to unlock" patent was very general and can likely be invalidated by prior art.
A method of unlocking a hand-held electronic device, the device including a touch-sensitive display, the method comprising: detecting a contact with the touch-sensitive display at a first predefined location corresponding to an unlock image; continuously moving the unlock image on the touch-sensitive display in accordance with movement of the contact while continuous contact with the touch screen is maintained, wherein the unlock image is a graphical, interactive user-interface object with which a user interacts in order to unlock the device; and unlocking the hand-held electronic device if the moving the unlock image on the touch-sensitive display results in movement of the unlock image from the first predefined location to a predefined unlock region on the touch-sensitive display.
The second is much more specific and it's hard to see Google's "slide to unlock" feature coming under this patent.
No, that is copyright law. You don't automatically lose a patent for not enforcing it.
No, that is trademark law. You don't automatically lose a copyright for not enforcing it.
Yes - I have no issues with doing it for fun as I've been doing that myself with computers for years. I just hadn't figured out whether there was more to it with phones.
Ah, well specific to phones would be customization (more icons per page, more tabs in the browser, etc.). I also know guys who get into the Android kernel to do speed tweaks, overclocking, or speed governing for power savings. That kind of stuff is half for the end result and half for the act of doing it (aka "because it was there" mentality).
Ah, well specific to phones would be customization (more icons per page, more tabs in the browser, etc.). I also know guys who get into the Android kernel to do speed tweaks, overclocking, or speed governing for power savings. That kind of stuff is half for the end result and half for the act of doing it (aka "because it was there" mentality).
Most Android users dont know any of that stuff
Most Android users dont know any of that stuff
The two arguments that makes sense for Windows users is their paid apps can be used on new Windows PCs regardless of vendor and they don't have to learn a new system. I never hear these excuses in regards to Android (though I hear the former as a slam against Apple because they lock you in I their evil-ecosystem). It's always about the ability to root the device and access the file system blah blah blah.
Most Android users dont know any of that stuff
That part of the post was specific to the hardcore tinkerers...the people with the ugliest homescreens but the fastest phones.
(it seems the average person has no sense of design regardless of platform...Android (and windows) makes it a lot easier to "uglify your sh*t.")
The two arguments that makes sense for Windows users is their paid apps can be used on new Windows PCs regardless of vendor and they don't have to learn a new system. I never hear these excuses in regards to Android (though I hear the former as a slam against Apple because they lock you in I their evil-ecosystem). It's always about the ability to root the device and access the file system blah blah blah.
I think you lost the topic somewhere...
The more rational among us know that there's absolutely no case here, and that'll likely be what the courts determine as well.
Apple (and a few others) have become little more than patent trolling bullies, and it's time it came to a stop.
There are other ways to do this. Slide to unlock is just a clever and easy way. But touching several spots in a certain order would work just as well, and take about the same amount of time. It's just laziness on the part of others to copy this.
This is patented by Apple:
Along with line art that resembles the image.
The Galaxy Nexus implementation should not be covered by the patent.
That not exactly what is patented. You're taking several individual things and conglomerating them together. The graphics may be copyrighted, but the patent is about what happens, and how it happens.
oh...so the patent is about the idea of interacting with a touch screen using a slide motion to initiate an action such as unlocking the device?
No, you can't get a patent for an idea, as you should know by now. You do know that, don't you? The patent is about what is being accomplished, and HOW it is being done, on the level of the software, and interaction with the screen.
Well,
I have a Galaxy Nexus and I can say with 100% certainty, that it is NOT a slide to unlock feature. When you put you finger on the unlock icon, a floating circle appears. You can then move your finger in any (360 degree) direction and the ball follows. When you move close to an icon on the outer circle (Just two for now, Unlock and Camera) the ball snaps to the icon. If you lift your finger, it performs the action of the icon. For now it unlocks the phone or opens the camera app. In the next Android update, you will be able to put your own app icons on the circle and have it go straight to them......
I just can't see how Apple is going to win this one....
Nor should they 'win this one', and as someone who owns/uses both devices on a daily basis, they 'look/feel' and function very differently.
I tested a Galaxy Nexus for 30 days with my IP4s. It does not look or feel or imitate the iPhone at all! It is almost 5 inches long and it does not use a slide to unlock like the iPhone...it shows a picture of a lock and you move it in the general direction to the right to unlock. You can also use facial recognition as well. Apple is really stretching with this one.
I chose to keep the IP4s...it is a better all around device and the battery last so much longer.
A correction to the below post. My error in commenting on his comments on which phone has better life, etc. I read the post incorrectly. My apologies.
*You're making this up, and it's easy to tell. The battery life isn't better than the 4S, it's worse. Not that untypical for Android phones which have been plagued with poor battery life in general.
Is it a better phone? Well, that a matter of opinion. With 2.3.5, no Android phone is "better". Bigger maybe, if you like that sort of thing. With ICS, a lot of the UI problems have been solved, so it's better-than it was.*
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5310/s...wich-review/14
You're making this up, and it's easy to tell. The battery life isn't better than the 4S, it's worse. Not that untypical for Android phones which have been plagued with poor battery life in general.
Is it a better phone? Well, that a matter of opinion. With 2.3.5, no Android phone is "better". Bigger maybe, if you like that sort of thing. With ICS, a lot of the UI problems have been solved, so it's better-than it was.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5310/s...wich-review/14
There is a very real baseband driver issue that is affecting the phenomenal life of many iPhone 4Ses.
I also agree with AbsoluteDesignz about absurdity of Apple going after Samsung for something that is part of the stock Android 4.0 build.
You added an odd qualifier this time. "Switch' to make it 'sliding switch'. Does the sliding effect how the display switches from a locked mode to an unlocked mode or not? It sure likes you have to slide it to switch modes.
Again, I don't think Apple has a case here but I was commenting on your comment "that it is NOT a slide to unlock feature."
The concept of going after a manufacturer for this purpose, even though the OS was written by another, is common practice, and is perfectly legal all over the world. MS is going after manufacturers of Android devices even though the OS is by Google. This is no different.
The concept of going after a manufacturer for this purpose, even though the OS was written by another, is common practice, and is perfectly legal all over the world. MS is going after manufacturers of Android devices even though the OS is by Google. This is no different.
Excellent point and example.
For total transparency, I'll admit that I like and use Android. I should also say that I own a Mac and am quite happy with it. I'm not some biased little idiot screaming "f*ck Apple, Android FTW!!", just putting my (hopefully unbiased) opinion out there.
Now that that's out of the way, this suit is absolutely bogus. Here's my reasoning:
1. If there had been any time for Apple to sue over this patent, it should have been anytime between when Android first came out and just before Android 4.0 (Ice Cream Sandwich) came out. The reason I think this is because on stock Android's default lockscreen, the ONLY way to unlock the phone is a straight horizontal slide from far left to far right, much like Apple's version. A slide from the opposite side (right to left) usually mutes/unmutes the phone. Any Android version 2.3.7 and below employs this feature and that's when it most resembled iOS's "slide to unlock", not now.
2. As others have pointed out, this suit is absolutely unnecessary simply for the fact that there are at least 5 different ways to unlock the Galaxy Nexus: Face unlock, the standard slide to unlock (the one being argued about here), PIN unlock (4 digits), password unlock (letters, numbers, other characters), pattern unlock, and maybe 1 or two more since I've never seen a Galaxy Nexus in-person. Even if this suit goes in Apple's favor, all Google has to do is take out the slide to unlock feature and (more than likely) pay a fine. Big whoop.
3. The slide to unlock feature on the Galaxy Nexus is (for the most part) completely different than iOS's slide to unlock. I do concede, you are "sliding" something to another location, but in Apple's method, you are constrained to the same straight horizontal, left-to-right motion every single time. With the Galaxy Nexus, you put your finger on the lock icon and you can move it anywhere within the circle that shows up. And supposedly, future updates will allow you to add/subtract things to unlock to and where to place them, furthering the disparity between the two. Not only that, but the start and end points for the methods employed by Android and iOS are different. GN: center to right, iPhone: far left to far right. Again, I am forced to reference my first point, when this suit would have been more applicable.
I think we can all agree (iOS and Android fans alike) this patent slinging is getting ridiculous, regardless of who wins...
I don't know why Apple waited this long. But you have to understand the dance that is going on here. One company comes up with something, and gets a patent. Another company copies that patented feature. That becomes a competitive threat. If Samsung, for example, can copy something Apple has done in hardware, and get away with it, it takes from Apple's sales. If Google can copy something Apple has done in software, and get away with it, it takes away from Apple's sales.
Why should Apple stand by and allow that? They shouldn't. While its true that there are various ways to unlock the screen. Do you know which is the most popular? Which is the second most, etc.? By eliminating one way, Apple will have made Android just that much less enjoyable. Additionally, they will have retained their invention for their own use. The fact that this is for thir own use, shows that those who are calling Apple a patent troll don't know what they are talking about.
I have to add to my post, that I think I remember seeing that just recently received this patent.