Apple successfully patents Shanghai Apple Store's glass cylinder entryway
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office on Tuesday granted Apple's patent for the design and construction of the massive glass cylinder building that serves as the entrance to its Apple Store in Shanghai.
Source: USPTO
As previously reported by AppleInsider, Apple first filed for its "Glass building panel and building made therefrom" patent in 2011. The company was finally granted ownership rights to the invention on Tuesday.
Apple's U.S. Patent No. 8,544,217 not only covers the design of the cylinder, but more specifically the type of glass and construction methods used to erect such a structure.
Like the flagship Fifth Avenue Apple Store in New York, the Shanghai cylinder is made almost entirely out of huge monolithic glass slabs, with only connecting joints fashioned out of metal. The Chinese build is more complex, however, as the specifications required the glass pieces required be curved to form arcs. These panels were then joined to create a circle and ultimately a cylinder.
Apple notes that conventional glass laminate technology at the time was insufficient to create panels that could withstand the structural requirements for supporting loads and forces over long spans. The lack of structural support prevented architects from crafting large buildings out of glass, especially those with curved walls.
Laminated glass profile.
Instead of using conventional methods, Apple employed unique glass fins and beams with integrated metal fittings to create a solid building. Laminating the fittings directly into the glass itself increases structural rigidity of the combined panels and provides for an easier build.
Key to the building's strength is a central cylindrical support made of curved glass that is connected to the large outer glass panels via a set of glass beams. Finally, a glass roof composed of multiple panels is supported by a number of glass fins that run from the top of the structure to the floor.
Illustration of glass roof panels (310), cylindrical support (550) and beams (510, 520, 530).
The patent goes into more detail regarding the specifications of each glass piece and offers a brief overview of how the cylinder should be constructed for optimal results.
Apple's glass cylinder patent credits David Andreini, Karl Backus, Jon F. Cooksey, Tim Eliassen, Scott David Hazard, Holger Krueger, Peter Lenk, James O'Callaghan and Yutang Zhang as its inventors. Also cited in the document is a U.S. patent for glass laminate support structures, invented in part by Apple cofounder Steve Jobs.
Source: USPTO
As previously reported by AppleInsider, Apple first filed for its "Glass building panel and building made therefrom" patent in 2011. The company was finally granted ownership rights to the invention on Tuesday.
Apple's U.S. Patent No. 8,544,217 not only covers the design of the cylinder, but more specifically the type of glass and construction methods used to erect such a structure.
Like the flagship Fifth Avenue Apple Store in New York, the Shanghai cylinder is made almost entirely out of huge monolithic glass slabs, with only connecting joints fashioned out of metal. The Chinese build is more complex, however, as the specifications required the glass pieces required be curved to form arcs. These panels were then joined to create a circle and ultimately a cylinder.
Apple notes that conventional glass laminate technology at the time was insufficient to create panels that could withstand the structural requirements for supporting loads and forces over long spans. The lack of structural support prevented architects from crafting large buildings out of glass, especially those with curved walls.
Laminated glass profile.
Instead of using conventional methods, Apple employed unique glass fins and beams with integrated metal fittings to create a solid building. Laminating the fittings directly into the glass itself increases structural rigidity of the combined panels and provides for an easier build.
Key to the building's strength is a central cylindrical support made of curved glass that is connected to the large outer glass panels via a set of glass beams. Finally, a glass roof composed of multiple panels is supported by a number of glass fins that run from the top of the structure to the floor.
Illustration of glass roof panels (310), cylindrical support (550) and beams (510, 520, 530).
The patent goes into more detail regarding the specifications of each glass piece and offers a brief overview of how the cylinder should be constructed for optimal results.
Apple's glass cylinder patent credits David Andreini, Karl Backus, Jon F. Cooksey, Tim Eliassen, Scott David Hazard, Holger Krueger, Peter Lenk, James O'Callaghan and Yutang Zhang as its inventors. Also cited in the document is a U.S. patent for glass laminate support structures, invented in part by Apple cofounder Steve Jobs.
Comments
patented! Until Samsung wants to do the same thing...
Time to claim prior art again, huh?
They'd be wrong if they did. This patent is very detailed even to the point of certain angles and dimensions. I don't think it would preclude anyone else from building a similar look for an entrance as long as they don't encroach on the very specific Apple build.
Prior art:
/s
Something tells me Apple will turn the entrance into a MacPro case on launch.
Discuss the content of the article? Nah. Build a strawman, then attack! You guys (and gals) crack me up.
Up until your post everyone else did address the article in some way. You're the first one to only address other poster's comments about the article as not being Apple-y enough… or whatever your point was.
Up until your post everyone else did address the article in some way. You're the first one to only address other poster's comments about the article as not being Apple-y enough… or whatever your point was.
Other posters were commenting about the article not being Apple-y enough? I made a comment along those lines? You sure about this?
Anyways, I guess I missed the part of the article that focused on Android and Samsung which brought on all the comments related to that subject. No worries.
The only mention of the word Android comes from your posts where you go after the other commenters. Everyone else up until your post addressed the patent and/or article directly in some fashion.
Quote:
The only mention of the word Android comes from your posts where you go after the other commenters. Everyone else up until your post addressed the patent and/or article directly in some fashion.
Unless you're just trolling, posts 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, and 8 would like to have a word with you.
They all mention the patent and/or refer to the patent, design and/or prior art. There was mention of Samsung in a couple of them but they all refer to what I stated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Again, you were the first to mention Android and not address anything about the article but instead focus on the commenters.
They all mention the patent and/or refer to the patent, design and/or prior art. There was mention of Samsung in a couple of them but they all refer to what I stated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Again, you were the first to mention Android and not address anything about the article but instead focus on the commenters.
Trolling it is. You got me this time akqies. Well played.
Other posters were commenting about the article not being Apple-y enough? I made a comment along those lines? You sure about this?
Anyways, I guess I missed the part of the article that focused on Android and Samsung which brought on all the comments related to that subject. No worries.
Are you kidding me?!
Although, I think I see the issue here. You are incapable of separating Samsung from Android and seem to think that by mentioning Samsung the commentors are "obviously" referencing Android.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but Samsung is not equivalent to Android. In fact, Samsung has a long and checkered past of ripping off other companies designs and IP. Things that have absolutely nothing to do with Android. Long before Apple or Android Samsung was the target of ire when they began copying Sony's designs for electronics. Later there was talk about how Samsung was copying from LG in appliances. And heck, much more recently did you see their concept for a smartwatch? It was a blatant ripoff of Microsoft's Metro.
So, with this history in mind and the recent legal battle between Apple and Samsung regarding design IP. The comments regarding prior art (ie a scene from a movie) and their contention that Apple was trying to patent a basic geometric shape. All of the comments prior to you were not referencing Android at all, but were in fact referencing Samsung's long history of mimicry and their weak arguments in support of it.
You sir, were the first one to mention Android and get the discussion off topic. Although, given your apparent attitude I am sure that, in your mind, you are never wrong and thus this was all a waste.
Anyone else notice how it resembles a top hat on the home page?
Says the guy that accused posts 2,3,4,5,6,7 and 8 of talking about Android despite you being the one to mention it.