Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple None-Touch iPod Interface?

Something between iPod and iMac

If you look at the illustrations, this is far larger than an iPod screen, especially for two handed control as depicted. Not that the tech can't be used for an iPod, but my guess this is going to be a tablet-like device positioned somewhere between the iPod and iMac. Steve Jobs and Apple have stated before that the Intel deal lets them envision a whole range of products not out there, especially fast chips that use less power. Also, macsimimumnews has revealed a trademark filing for a "doPod" that seems to suggest an iPod on steroids.

I believe this is a companion device that's not quite a full mac, but more functionality than an iPod, and be sized somewhere in between. At home, it could connect to your network and control your music through AirPort Express, or movies on FrontRow through your TV. Or you can take it with you and watch movies, check email, or read books (tying in the Engadget rumor on books). To keep the price point reasonable, I imagine it will be mostly a "player" rather than running full-fledged apps, but something like e-mail could be possible with the touch screen.

I'm guessing that the touchless interface could be a major part of Leopard and point to a new breed of hardware and form factors that Steve J and Apple have been hinting at.
 
Has anybody thought these might all just be preventative filings?

Apple is smart to file a patent on something that might be "similar" to technology they have developed just to maintain their exclusivity of the technology.

Apple might be filing this just so they can say, haha, Microsoft, you can't produce this because we invented it first....and then Apple moves on to the next big thing without ever producing a product based on the patent.

As far as the trademark stuff goes, it is the same logic. Apple needs to protect as many derivations of the "*Pod" mark in order to make their Pod trademarks even stronger. Apple will probably never produce something with the "doPod" trademark, but any other company thinking about naming their product the "doPod" will think twice before getting into a legal battle with Apple, who has one of the most recognized digital entertainment trademarks in the world.

You can show me Patent and Trademark filings all day long and I will simply reply with a "prove it"
 
crees! said:
It's possible but they better not do this (not release such a product). I WANT this.
Click to expand...

I'm still not too sure how gestures would work to control such a device unless there was a camera.

Imagine you are in an airport trying to get your tablet to open up by swinging your arm up and down in front of your computer's camera.

Now that would be an invention...
The Headline "Apple Patents Technology So You Look Really Really Stupid In Public"
 
Indications point to something more than a preventive filing

While it is possible that it is a preventive filing, I think there are a number of indications that I mentioned that would suggest there is something more. However, it may be two years before we could even something if the tech isn't ready.

Frankly, I hope Apple never names anything "doPod." A marginal product of that name for anything would immediately be labeled "do-doPod."
 
playaj82 said:
I'm still not too sure how gestures would work to control such a device unless there was a camera.
Click to expand...
Have you see the "gestures" video? It would be done by physically touching the iPod. No camera needed.
 
I still don't have a desire to touch my LCD screen

Unless they can figure something out where that doesn't happen, I'm not impressed.
 
playaj82 said:
I still don't have a desire to touch my LCD screen

Unless they can figure something out where that doesn't happen, I'm not impressed.
Click to expand...
When this is released you'll be touching it like a sick middle-aged bastard drooling over on screen images of kiddieporn.
 
crees! said:
When this is released you'll be touching it like a sick middle-aged bastard drooling over on screen images of kiddieporn.
Click to expand...

I never said I wasn't going to buy/drool over this mystery product.

I'm just not going to be impressed.
 
playaj82 said:
I never said I wasn't going to buy/drool over this mystery product.

I'm just not going to be impressed.
Click to expand...
Why would you buy a product you're not impressed with? "Man, this iPod sucks so hard. *drool* I think I'll buy it!" Is this some kind of new teenage lingo? :D
 
None-Touch

crees! said:
Have you see the "gestures" video? It would be done by physically touching the iPod. No camera needed.
Click to expand...

Did ye all not read the report. The whole point is that it is a "Proximity sensor" . That it can detect your gestures while "spaced away" from the ipod. This would be no big deal if it required rubbing your greasy fingers all over the display!!
 
crees! said:
Why would you buy a product you're not impressed with? "Man, this iPod sucks so hard. *drool* I think I'll buy it!" Is this some kind of new teenage lingo? :D
Click to expand...

Sometimes I buy products I'm not impressed with to impress the people who don't understand my cool new teenage lingo.
 
enda1 said:
Did ye all not read the report. The whole point is that it is a "Proximity sensor" . That it can detect your gestures while "spaced away" from the ipod. This would be no big deal if it required rubbing your greasy fingers all over the display!!
Click to expand...
Yes and it states "a touch screen display" "For multifunctional handheld devices".

"The method includes sensing an object spaced away and in close proximity to the electronic device. The method also includes performing an action in the electronic device when an object is sensed." Meaning when I'm close to touching the darn thing do/show this when this is happening on screen.

Did you read it?
http://www.macsimumnews.com/index.p...tector_in_handheld_device_patent_application/

EDIT: Still not "touchless" either....
"For example, when using a touch sensing device along with a proximity detection system, advanced gestures may be performed that combine proximity gestures along with touch gestures."
 
whooleytoo said:
Although it still isn't perfect - if you listen to music in the dark (I often listen to music in bed), it's difficult to find the buttons without pressing the wrong one. The 1G iPod was better in this regard.
Click to expand...

The 3G buttons illuminated. Although yes, in essence, I agree - you don't want the buttons lit up all the time, and you don't want to look at it.
 
Snowy_River said:
They most certainly did have physical feedback. You had to touch them to activate the buttons or drag your finger across the scroll wheel to use it. This would constitute a tactile feedback, even if there is no click.
Click to expand...

Just touching it is not tactile feedback. That would be like saying a piece of paper provides feedback if you touch it. Feedback means a signal is sent back to the user to acknowledge the the pressing of the control. The 3G iPod buttons gave an audio click - that is aural feedback. They also showed things on the screen - that is visual feedback. But they didn't spring, or have a physical barrier that you push through, so there was no tactile feedback (i.e. nothing that can be physically felt) to let you know that you pressed the button.

When you press a button on a dead iPod, it does nothing, and it feels exactly the same as pressing a button on a working iPod - no tactile feedback.

What you're describing is far less revolutionary, and wouldn't really constitute a none-touch interface.
Click to expand...
Who said it was revolutionary? And it could consitute a none-touch interface. It depends on if the patent is describing the control or the entire iPod. If there is a cover, you are not touching the control (the screen underneath), but the cover over it - hence none-touch.

The current displays all have a durable, transparent cover over them, and they still get scratches and finger prints from handling. I think the reason that this interface idea is so exciting is that it offers the possibility of having a full screen for viewing without needing to worry about the act of touching the screen for controls making the screen dirty so you can't watch.
Click to expand...
A better (i.e. more scratch-proof) cover would be better. Who cares about fingerprints? You can clean those off. I don't want to hover my finger over something to control it - I'd always have to be careful not to touch the screen (unless it was durable). Not very good when on a bus, train etc., where the vehicle is shaking.
 
I sent Apple a long description about how to build a GPS location service into .Mac, iPods, PowerMacs, and with a proximity sensor.

This was right after the kid in NY was killed for his iPod.

Remember SJ promised a fix for this.

I wonder if the proximity sensor will be wiresless disposable earphones :confused:

As for REMOTE TOUCH I still think all touch screen actions will work best with the fingers on the BACK of the device and with them graphically and transparently reflected over the interface.

And probably the ULTIMATE use of finger laser tracking would be a keyboard that has keys with multiple depths, dispose of those shift keys ! I also sent them a suggestion for a keyboard like this but that idea did not use laser tracking, it used a new type of button :eek:


If the touch area for the hands were just flat wings on the back the swung outwards, they could also act as a support for the screen EXACTLY LIKE the traditional book holder:eek: :eek: :eek:
 
it is all beginning to make sense...

Here we have a PDA device - virtual keyboard, gesture recognition, etc. with a strong possibility of direct connection to the internet (sans computer).

Imagine your in a cafe with friends, some one says hey have you heard this song...? you go online (itunes) right there (wifi) access the song and load it up to your device - pop it into a new play list, rate it etc.

Apple can remove a big barrier of complexity (computer) by making it all in one simple ipod-like device. So there is pobably an entire market strategy with itunes store, etc that extends from this new device. i just bet ya...
 
Hunabku said:
Here we have a PDA device - virtual keyboard, gesture recognition, etc. with a strong possibility of direct connection to the internet (sans computer).

Imagine your in a cafe with friends, some one says hey have you heard this song...? you go online (itunes) right there (wifi) access the song and load it up to your device - pop it into a new play list, rate it etc.

Apple can remove a big barrier of complexity (computer) by making it all in one simple ipod-like device. So there is pobably an entire market strategy with itunes store, etc that extends from this new device. i just bet ya...
Click to expand...

With eBooks this type of device would be awesome for corp. training and documentation access, even better for military type applications, mechanical work, and combat conditions -- a bastion for podCasters.

AND the Airport has a cheap harddrive in it that watches internet access and downloads locally the most often popular sites, and monitors them for change, to GREATLY speed access and low connection band width requirements.

I also told Apple to build this.

Of course this would have to catigorize sites to do this, so it can avoid things better kept live, and screen for porn, this would be the hard part but this IS just a better firewall :eek: :eek: :eek:
 
crees! said:
Yes and it states "a touch screen display" "For multifunctional handheld devices".

"The method includes sensing an object spaced away and in close proximity to the electronic device. The method also includes performing an action in the electronic device when an object is sensed." Meaning when I'm close to touching the darn thing do/show this when this is happening on screen.

Did you read it?
http://www.macsimumnews.com/index.p...tector_in_handheld_device_patent_application/

EDIT: Still not "touchless" either....
"For example, when using a touch sensing device along with a proximity detection system, advanced gestures may be performed that combine proximity gestures along with touch gestures."
Click to expand...

UW, sounds like reflecting the fingers to the screen ...


... THAT IS ONE CREEPY BOWSER :confused: :eek: POOR OLD BABY POOP !!!
 
playaj82 said:
...
As far as the trademark stuff goes, it is the same logic. Apple needs to protect as many derivations of the "*Pod" mark in order to make their Pod trademarks even stronger. Apple will probably never produce something with the "doPod" trademark, but any other company thinking about naming their product the "doPod" will think twice before getting into a legal battle with Apple, who has one of the most recognized digital entertainment trademarks in the world.
...
Click to expand...

Trademarks must be able to be shown to be in use to be defensible. You cannot simply trademark any name or phrase you want. You have to demonstrate the current or intended future use of the name or phrase.

With regards to "doPod", Apple doesn't need to trademark that, as they could argue that the name of a device that was called a doPod was too similar to their, already trademarked, device called "iPod".
 
Of course I read the damn thing. Is it not clear from the report that the invention really is the proximity detector. Synaptics or whatever they are called already have advanced touch devices on the market, thats nothing new. Maybe the software side of things, ie. how to interpert the inputs is novel but really its the ability to "remote control" your ipod without anything but your bare hands.

By the way, just watched Superman Returns there, not too shabby!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back