Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Patent: Translucency
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Analog Kid said:
Don't underestimate the importance or value of being first to market.
...diversity which can't happen if patents lock out the competition. What if Canon hadn't been able to work around the Xerox patent for photocopying, what incentive would Xerox have had to innovate then, with no competition?Analog Kid said:
Can't help, it, I'm Irish. Romanticizing is in my jeans - sorry!- genes..Analog Kid said:
Analog Kid said:
I agree wholeheartedly, it tends to be a game of leapfrog, where everyone takes an idea and moves it on a little. Which is difficult when the person in front decides he doesn't want to play with the others any more.
Analog Kid said:
a) I'd have thought the end result - heavier than air flight - would justify it's description as more than a "tweak"!
2) The Wright brothers' tweaks were significent enough that no one had managed powered, heavier than air flight yet, hence I'd have no problem with their patent. (I know, the Wright brothers was just an anecdotal case.)
Analog Kid said:
You're spot on there, 20 years in the software industry is longer than the lifecycle of the vast majority of programs. For that reason, we have to be very, very careful how/when/where they're awarded.
Kool said:
I think that the more appropriate example is Motion's new "Dashboard" feature:
http://www.apple.com/motion/workflow.html
That sounds like it matches the patent application reasonably well.
Bring on the screens from Minority Report
I was thinking pretty much the same thing. When I am doing research and writing, I just want a vague notion of what I was reading from one document to hover in front, but be able to continue writing underneath without going back and forth between windows/documents/programs. Shortcuts and Exposé are easy enough but they don't help the flow of thought.
The windows' frames or tab bars don't need to be transparent or click-thru, so they can be moved or reactivated with ease.
And I'd love to see something like Tom Cruise used in Minority Report.
Colonel Panik said:
I was thinking pretty much the same thing. When I am doing research and writing, I just want a vague notion of what I was reading from one document to hover in front, but be able to continue writing underneath without going back and forth between windows/documents/programs. Shortcuts and Exposé are easy enough but they don't help the flow of thought.
The windows' frames or tab bars don't need to be transparent or click-thru, so they can be moved or reactivated with ease.
And I'd love to see something like Tom Cruise used in Minority Report.
This is a continuation of a patent filed December 20, 1999
U.S. Patent 6,670,970, Granted December 30, 2003
Filed December 20, 1999
Title:
Graduated visual and manipulative translucency for windows
Abstract
Methods and systems for providing graphical user interfaces are described. overlaid, Information-bearing windows whose contents remain unchanged for a predetermined period of time become translucent. The translucency can be graduated so that, over time, if the window's contents remain unchanged, the window becomes more translucent. In addition to visual translucency, windows according to the present invention also have a manipulative translucent quality. Upon reaching a certain level of visual translucency, user input in the region of the window is interpreted as an operation on the underlying objects rather than the contents of the overlaying window.
U.S. Patent 6,670,970, Granted December 30, 2003
Filed December 20, 1999
Title:
Graduated visual and manipulative translucency for windows
Abstract
Methods and systems for providing graphical user interfaces are described. overlaid, Information-bearing windows whose contents remain unchanged for a predetermined period of time become translucent. The translucency can be graduated so that, over time, if the window's contents remain unchanged, the window becomes more translucent. In addition to visual translucency, windows according to the present invention also have a manipulative translucent quality. Upon reaching a certain level of visual translucency, user input in the region of the window is interpreted as an operation on the underlying objects rather than the contents of the overlaying window.
The very idea of a software patent is flawed
The patent system was never intended to create ownership of concepts. And this is what software patents are doing.
Consider the example of the turn signal on an automobile.
No one can patent the concept of a turn signal. However, you can patent the mechanism by which you construct a turn signal. For example, how a stick interacts with gears or sensors to trigger a pulsating light can be patented. But you cannot patent the concept of a turn signal, or even the concept of using a stick to trigger a turn signal.
But this is the kind of thing that software patents are doing, and it should not be allowed.
Take this concept of transparent windows and apply it to real objects, say paper for example. Suppose I came up with an idea that if haven't touched a piece of paper on a desk for a given amount of time, then that piece of paper will become transparent and allow me to see what is under it.
The patent office will not grant me a patent for that idea! However, if I came up with a way to make paper become transparent over time based on not being touched, perhaps by using some kind of embedded sensor which triggers a chemical reaction in the paper, I can patent that technique. But this business of patenting an idea (which Apple is doing) is absurd and is not what the patent system was designed for.
Patenting ideas stifles innovation. For example, I just patented the idea of manned space travel to other planets. Now nobody can travel to another planet without licensing my patent! I'm going to make a fortune from NASA ;-)
The patent system was never intended to create ownership of concepts. And this is what software patents are doing.
Consider the example of the turn signal on an automobile.
No one can patent the concept of a turn signal. However, you can patent the mechanism by which you construct a turn signal. For example, how a stick interacts with gears or sensors to trigger a pulsating light can be patented. But you cannot patent the concept of a turn signal, or even the concept of using a stick to trigger a turn signal.
But this is the kind of thing that software patents are doing, and it should not be allowed.
Take this concept of transparent windows and apply it to real objects, say paper for example. Suppose I came up with an idea that if haven't touched a piece of paper on a desk for a given amount of time, then that piece of paper will become transparent and allow me to see what is under it.
The patent office will not grant me a patent for that idea! However, if I came up with a way to make paper become transparent over time based on not being touched, perhaps by using some kind of embedded sensor which triggers a chemical reaction in the paper, I can patent that technique. But this business of patenting an idea (which Apple is doing) is absurd and is not what the patent system was designed for.
Patenting ideas stifles innovation. For example, I just patented the idea of manned space travel to other planets. Now nobody can travel to another planet without licensing my patent! I'm going to make a fortune from NASA ;-)
Except that software inverts this equation. In real material things, its easy to copy the results, but the implementation of something is hard to reproduce. In software, there are a multiple of ways someone could implement something and get similar or the same results. If I come up with a way to compress an image that is by far the best way (not just algorithims but a set of proccesses) that is not obvious, then I should be able to have my "idea" patented. I agree that patenting too many obvious things is bad, and that it can stifle innovation, thats why I think they should still grant soft-patents, just make thier duration shorter...but by definition, a patent is a "new" idea, so how is it that people racing to have new ideas stifling innovation? Maybe for the ones who cant think of anything...iPost said:
I tend to agree with the previous poster. Software patents should be OK, but because the art moves so quickly, I think a shorter patent term would be appropriate. Perhaps years from filing would be more appropriate than the current 20 years. That allows for approximately 3 years for issuance, and a 5 year term after issue.
Chris
Chris
Translucency in Office 2004
If you want to see what (I think) they're talking about, check out the formatting palettes in Office for Mac 2004. If you don't have it yet, check out the test drive. The palettes basically fade if you don't use them for a while, allowing you to view and subsequently edit documents that were covered in previous versions of Office for Mac.
Apologies if this has already been pointed out by another person. I am too lazy and tired to go through all the messages again...
If you want to see what (I think) they're talking about, check out the formatting palettes in Office for Mac 2004. If you don't have it yet, check out the test drive. The palettes basically fade if you don't use them for a while, allowing you to view and subsequently edit documents that were covered in previous versions of Office for Mac.
Apologies if this has already been pointed out by another person. I am too lazy and tired to go through all the messages again...
qubex said:
I am so tired of people excusing Monopolysoft's blatant immoral and illegal action of "reverse engineering" an existing product to be used as a competitive product in the same manner and in the same industry.
I was a former Xerox network administrator and I have been to Xerox Document University in Leesburg, Virginia. http://www.xeroxdocu.com/
Lots of the professors there have been with Xerox for over 25 years, therefore they have told me the story first hand.
BOTTOM LINE: Xerox sold it's PARC developed technology because it did not make their Xerox copiers any better. PERIOD!
They did not have the foresight to see how that technology could be implemented in anything other than a copier. That's why they patent the crap out of anything that they develop nowadays.
It's like inventing the wheel and not knowing that if you roll it, you can do a lot of other things with it.
There is a big difference between Apple using Xerox's technology in an entirely different manner, and Micrapsoft using Apple's technology in the same manner.
The difference is theft.
Folder/Icon Colour/Transparency/Size/MOvement by Aging
I had a thought so you are warned...
One thing that I would find useful is being able to quickly see recently used or open icons in a folder without resorting to date sorting or scrolling.
This thread gave me an idea. What if parameters could be specified so that when I open my folders (when I finally get my mac ) I could quickly see which ones had been last or recently or open or all three, used by some use of transparency or colour or size or pulsing or combo there of...
I cant say what the best formulae would be. Some options to personalise such viewing in icon mode should probably be fine for everyone to find what works for them. Even in normal column mode these distinctions would be helpful I think.
Personally I think document folders sorted by default by name but visually sorted by recent access by leaving recently used ones normal looking (perhaps a bit bigger 25/50%) and slighly greying out or making translucent less used ones would allow me to quickly see what had been going on in the directory/folder.
And what if you could do this for browser bookmarks - have icons not just a alpha sorted list...but icons with a date and time that they were last accessed, with frequently used ones 25-50% bigger to make them easier to spot and easier to hit with the mouse quickly...
And what if currently open documents were also clearly visually highlighted with pulsing
I had a thought
so you are warned...One thing that I would find useful is being able to quickly see recently used or open icons in a folder without resorting to date sorting or scrolling.
This thread gave me an idea. What if parameters could be specified so that when I open my folders (when I finally get my mac
) I could quickly see which ones had been last or recently or open or all three, used by some use of transparency or colour or size or pulsing or combo there of...I cant say what the best formulae would be. Some options to personalise such viewing in icon mode should probably be fine for everyone to find what works for them. Even in normal column mode these distinctions would be helpful I think.
Personally I think document folders sorted by default by name but visually sorted by recent access by leaving recently used ones normal looking (perhaps a bit bigger 25/50%) and slighly greying out or making translucent less used ones would allow me to quickly see what had been going on in the directory/folder.
And what if you could do this for browser bookmarks - have icons not just a alpha sorted list...but icons with a date and time that they were last accessed, with frequently used ones 25-50% bigger to make them easier to spot and easier to hit with the mouse quickly...
And what if currently open documents were also clearly visually highlighted with pulsing
I think that eventually all of this software patenting will be sorted out. This is just too new a concept for our patent offices. Same thing with the licensing, like when Sun was going to charge anyone for making a program with Java. Obviously that idea was shot down. Despite the debate, I've used translucency in Adium, and I've really enjoyed it in that app. Seems like it will be a cool feature of Tiger.
The patent is 6,670,970
Filed for in December 1999, awarded Dec 2003 (if I'm reading the page right).
Go here for the full patent:
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-...,670,970.WKU.&OS=PN/6,670,970&RS=PN/6,670,970
Filed for in December 1999, awarded Dec 2003 (if I'm reading the page right).
Go here for the full patent:
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-...,670,970.WKU.&OS=PN/6,670,970&RS=PN/6,670,970
I think this transparency addition to the OS could be a lot more useful than some people think, and Id love to see it incorporated into Tiger when it comes out next year. Depending how Apple implements it, it could definitely be akin to Expose initially, some people thought of Expose and more of a fun novelty than anything, before realizing how beneficial it actually was.
As I said before though, there are going to have to be a lot of additional worthwhile features incorporated into Tiger to make me get rid of my Panther. But I guess well all have a better idea once WWDC rolls around in a month.
As I said before though, there are going to have to be a lot of additional worthwhile features incorporated into Tiger to make me get rid of my Panther. But I guess well all have a better idea once WWDC rolls around in a month.
Patents
Wrong. If we abolish the patent system today, then we'd have no desire to innovate because we'd know that the day we introduce a new idea it'll be copied.
Patenting CREATES innovation... How can Patenting stop innovation? Sounds like you are trying to say patent software prevents me from COPYING....
Wrong. If we abolish the patent system today, then we'd have no desire to innovate because we'd know that the day we introduce a new idea it'll be copied.
Patenting CREATES innovation... How can Patenting stop innovation? Sounds like you are trying to say patent software prevents me from COPYING....
mikegyver said:
This is a very good point, and one which I believe quite a number of peoploe have a common misunderstanding about. (I wonder how many of them have actually filed patents and are aware of the procedures involved!) Just because you patent something does NOT prevent anyone else from essentially copying your design anyway.