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 Receives Patent for Touch-Sensitive Bezel for Portable Devices
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
One word: Games.
This is exactly what they need to circumvent having no buttons. Having to touch the screen covers up more than the display (you have to look over your hand/finger).
The PATENT image looks like Rodins Thinker.
Maybe?! Huh? Sorta? Possible?
.....
Incorporating Touch on the bezel, would enable a better functionality and experience with the iPad LESS for the iPhone.... I don't know about everyone else but I've moved on from the iPad and even iPhone hardware Hype.... I'm more interested in Macs and Software
Maybe?! Huh? Sorta? Possible?
.....
Incorporating Touch on the bezel, would enable a better functionality and experience with the iPad LESS for the iPhone.... I don't know about everyone else but I've moved on from the iPad and even iPhone hardware Hype.... I'm more interested in Macs and Software
this could open the door for simple multitasking.. and as far as it opening things when you dont mean to, apple is pretty good about ignoring accidental touch input on the mbp trackpad, im sure they know what they are doing...
if this first iPad comes with this, they just upped the odds of me buying one..
if this first iPad comes with this, they just upped the odds of me buying one..
Close enough when you add in R&D time to them that they could easily be older than Apple orginal Patent application. To me it is just another stupid patent put out by a company and one that apple more than likely will never used and mostly just used to CYA. It could easily be if apple tries to sue with the patent it would get invalidate by the courts.
That's why Apple has so much cool stuff. You think they just go hmmm.... iphone. Like this! No they go through ridiculous implementations and designs and possibilities.
All that matters in a patent is what is claimed. Here is a representative claim from the patent:
I believe the difference with respect to the devices mentioned earlier in the thread is in bold.
In other words, you don't touch the icon (you touch something "adjacent" to the icon), and the touch area is not pre-fixed - it changes depending on what is being displayed.
I believe the difference with respect to the devices mentioned earlier in the thread is in bold.
In other words, you don't touch the icon (you touch something "adjacent" to the icon), and the touch area is not pre-fixed - it changes depending on what is being displayed.
I truthfully don't think any of these companies was working on anything like the iPhone until it came out. And even then, not until it was a bonified hit.
Translucent bezels...
Yes... But a translucent bezel could be very interesting!
Perhaps have the underlying LCD be large enough that the bezel rides on top of part of the LCD. Then, those portions of the LCD that are covered by the bezel could then be programmed to interact with the bezel... Cool!
...Or the bezel is a kind of touch LCD in itself... Hum...
Yes... But a translucent bezel could be very interesting!
Perhaps have the underlying LCD be large enough that the bezel rides on top of part of the LCD. Then, those portions of the LCD that are covered by the bezel could then be programmed to interact with the bezel... Cool!
...Or the bezel is a kind of touch LCD in itself... Hum...
From the picture of the C902 phone, it has none of the features claimed in the Apple patent, so how is it relevant?
These patents are getting out of control, so many things that are normal evolutions are being patented by Patent whores.
We need new patent laws that only allow for real new innovations.
If no one did it before, and no one wrote about it before, how is it not a "real new innovation?" In hindsight everything looks obvious. If someone did what the patent claims specify, then it should be invalid, but the press, and posters on this thread, seem to think that the patent abstract somehow is relevant - it's not. All that matters is the what the patent claims (there is a section of a patent with a list of claims).
Like the idea...
I've always thought the bezel seemed like sort of wasted space. Not sure I agree with those saying it'd be too easy to accidentally touch them. I have big hands yet don't feel any particular need to wrap my fingers way around onto the front surface in order to hold onto my ipod touch.
I do find the floating functionality a little perplexing. Rather than giving the bezel areas defined locations and functionality, they want to make them define-able. Sounds nice in a way, but if you have to take up screen real estate with labels that identify the bezel buttons' varying positions and functions, doesn't that defeat the purpose? Why not just touch the screen, as another poster mentioned?
Instead, I'd prefer the buttons to be permanent and universal and perform functions that presently just eat up screen space, like Search, Info, Help, Done/Back, Edit.
I've always thought the bezel seemed like sort of wasted space. Not sure I agree with those saying it'd be too easy to accidentally touch them. I have big hands yet don't feel any particular need to wrap my fingers way around onto the front surface in order to hold onto my ipod touch.
I do find the floating functionality a little perplexing. Rather than giving the bezel areas defined locations and functionality, they want to make them define-able. Sounds nice in a way, but if you have to take up screen real estate with labels that identify the bezel buttons' varying positions and functions, doesn't that defeat the purpose? Why not just touch the screen, as another poster mentioned?
Instead, I'd prefer the buttons to be permanent and universal and perform functions that presently just eat up screen space, like Search, Info, Help, Done/Back, Edit.
It's ridiculous
that you can patent a concept like that. A few days ago, I was looking at the iPad with its huge bezel and thinking -hey if you could touch the bezel, lets say to pause, play, etc. when watching a movie, you wouln't smudge up the whole screen. It's not a bad idea, but can you really patent it.
Who holds the patent on perforated rolled paper on cardboard tubes?
that you can patent a concept like that. A few days ago, I was looking at the iPad with its huge bezel and thinking -hey if you could touch the bezel, lets say to pause, play, etc. when watching a movie, you wouln't smudge up the whole screen. It's not a bad idea, but can you really patent it.
Who holds the patent on perforated rolled paper on cardboard tubes?
Great! Do it! No more window love...go! Go!
- Kenny, Half Baked
Anybody? Anybody? I'm going home.
- Kenny, Half Baked
Anybody? Anybody? I'm going home.
you can have actual buttons that are defined based on the app,
and the labels don't come up over the screen unless you ask them to, either by touching, but not pressing the button, pressing a ? on the screen or a small button on the bezel. (almost like the hints you get for mousing over buttons in windows)
I'd better go patent that before someone else does.
Of course...
You should all be aware that a patent does not protect one from lawsuits for inappropriate "back-side touching". That would still be covered by s3xual harassment laws. Ha!
You should all be aware that a patent does not protect one from lawsuits for inappropriate "back-side touching". That would still be covered by s3xual harassment laws. Ha!
My guess is that this is going to be used for multitasking abilities and unlocked with OS 4.0. Apple could implement specific gestures to avoid unintended inputs such as a simple double tap in the corner of the bezel.
By making it a feature of 4.0, the new iPhone 4g will get the new abilities at the same time, using new hardware that makes the areas to the side of the home button touch sensitive.
By making it a feature of 4.0, the new iPhone 4g will get the new abilities at the same time, using new hardware that makes the areas to the side of the home button touch sensitive.