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

Apple Researching Low Power Bluetooth Hotspots for Devices Like the iWatch

osx11 said:
I think the iWatch will also have TouchID and will have NFC.

This way you don't even have to take your phone out of your pocket to make a payment, and with the TouchID, it's so called "secure."
Click to expand...

They could make it so the watch knows when you have undid the clip on it so that way when you first put it on you put in the pass once and never need to do it again untill you undo the watch since obviously it's still you. You just made the user experince 20X better and saved money on componets that would also wast space.
 
rshoff said:
Wow, from the looks of it, patents are getting out of hand. Not blaming Apple here, they are simply following practices established by the entire industry.

But bottom line, all I see is that they are diagraming a conversation between devices over radio waves! We've been doing that since walkie-talkies!!

Am I missing the 'technical' aspect of this patent application? Please tell me I'm wrong and correct me.
Click to expand...

It's the specifics of how they plan to manage it that warrants the patent. From what I understand by reading this they are looking into sending an internet connection, and therefore notifications/information, over Bluetooth LE without the need for the user/wearer to actually do anything. Basically allowing the user of the second device to access any information they need from the first device and/or the internet connection provided by the first device without the user having to pair the two each time. A personal hotspot without the bother of having to switch it on. On top of that the use of Bluetooth LE would mean battery life would remain reasonably intact on both devices. In theory.

Not sure 100% sure if I'm right because I'm not a tech genius to be honest.
 
goobot said:
They could make it so the watch knows when you have undid the clip on it so that way when you first put it on you put in the pass once and never need to do it again untill you undo the watch since obviously it's still you. You just made the user experince 20X better and saved money on componets that would also wast space.
Click to expand...

Excellent idea.

So what you do: Put on your watch. Unlock the iPhone or iPad. At the moment where you unlock the device, it notices the watch you are wearing and in the future accepts it for unlocking. When your undo the clip on the watch that stops working (because someone might have stolen your watch and is going to steal your iPad). You could automatically lock the device when the watch goes away.
 
osx11 said:
I think the iWatch will also have TouchID and will have NFC.

This way you don't even have to take your phone out of your pocket to make a payment, and with the TouchID, it's so called "secure."

iWatch:
- Notifications
- NFC
- Touch ID
- IGZO Display
- M7 Processor
Click to expand...

NFC will never weasel its way into Apple products. It's outdated, horribly insecure, and unnecessary technology. To you, its just another bullet point that other's have told you is important. Tech people understand that NFC is DOA, and will be replaced by much more secure and low-energy solutions.
 
cmChimera said:
And here's why people criticize patents so much. They don't understand a patent, and immediately jump to the idea that there's nothing new.
Click to expand...

Yes, this is exactly why people criticize patents so much. First, someone patents "Little Black Dress". But, nobody patented "Little Black Dress worn by a Blonde" so now patent that. But, nobody patented "LBD worn by a Blonde on Tuesday" so patent that.

Go back and study the life of Nikola Tesla. Those were patents. A large fraction of modern patents are abuse pure and simple.

Explain exactly why this is fundamentally different from the internet connection sharing that I already do on my cell phone frequently, which was the same as when I did internet connection sharing back in 1996 or whenever.

What bothers me especially is how people defend the current system as protecting lone inventors working in their garages. 99% of the time, it is the large, established players in an industry who benefit. Even worse, companies that don't want to play are forced to play defensively. In the end, the result is a large transfer of money from consumers to lawyers.
 
darkslide29 said:
The language makes me a bit nervous..

"Enable personal hotspot".

I hope the phone companies don't interpret this as mobile share and charge $10/mo just to give it access to a data pool.
Or those on unlimited ATT cannot tether - they may be forced to give it up in order to share data with an iWatch?
Click to expand...

The watch has no WiFi antenna, just BT. It's a BT hotspot only, not WiFi. WiFi is only on the iDevice or computer. So nothing for cellcos to be able to charge extra for here.
 
Ries said:
They are patenting internet over bluetooth? How is that new?
Click to expand...

it's amazing that you can review the patent, perhaps even read it, and then come away thinking thats what it covers.

please do not enter the medical practice.
 
Right, so they are not patenting Bluetooth LE or any part of that, because they cannot do that.
But they are attempting to patent the way their devices will use it in some sort of hotspot thingy. Meh it'll still mean crappy battery life.
 
If Apple doesn't use the Beastie Boys track So What'cha Want in the ad campaign for this… well, I'll still buy the iWatch. But I won't be happy about it! ;)
 
pmz said:
NFC will never weasel its way into Apple products. It's outdated, horribly insecure, and unnecessary technology. To you, its just another bullet point that other's have told you is important. Tech people understand that NFC is DOA, and will be replaced by much more secure and low-energy solutions.
Click to expand...

It's technology used by very big high street banks, yeah, soooo unsecure... You just don't like it because Apple told you so. Meanwhile everyone else is using it.
 
darkslide29 said:
The language makes me a bit nervous..

"Enable personal hotspot".

I hope the phone companies don't interpret this as mobile share and charge $10/mo just to give it access to a data pool.
Or those on unlimited ATT cannot tether - they may be forced to give it up in order to share data with an iWatch?
Click to expand...

Exactly! I have a grandfathered unlimited plan and CAN'T enable a hotspot without loosing my unlimited. So I really hope that isn't the case here.

The possibilities sound great with this new iWatch. Can't wait to see it come to life
 
iHateLaggyStuff said:
Can't wait for Apple to revolutionize the smart watch business, just like they did with the iPhone, iPad and Macbook Air.
:apple:

Now make an iphone with better battery life ! :D
Click to expand...

As of today, I'm not sure that there even is a smart watch business. Not very many people wear watches these days. Apple would have to do something revolutionary, useful and unexpected to get me to buy one.

The present "smart watches", if you can even call them that, are too big, lousy battery life and are absolutely fugly, not to mention they don't do much. In no way do they make me willing to part with a couple of hundred dollars. Even if Apple made them more attractive and slim with great battery life, if it doesn't actually do anything that I need, then why bother?

IF Apple plans to get into this market, I hope that they have an ace up their sleeve. (and maybe they do)
 
Is this patent really going to go through? I am pretty sure this is essentially how httpebble works with the Pebble watch, except not on Bluetooth LE at the moment.
 
pmz said:
NFC will never weasel its way into Apple products. It's outdated, horribly insecure, and unnecessary technology. To you, its just another bullet point that other's have told you is important. Tech people understand that NFC is DOA, and will be replaced by much more secure and low-energy solutions.
Click to expand...

Even if it's not called NFC, I think the watch will be Apple's gateway to mobile payments.
 
Bilbo63 said:
As of today, I'm not sure that there even is a smart watch business. Not very many people wear watches these days. Apple would have to do something revolutionary, useful and unexpected to get me to buy one.

The present "smart watches", if you can even call them that, are too big, lousy battery life and are absolutely fugly, not to mention they don't do much. In no way do they make me willing to part with a couple of hundred dollars. Even if Apple made them more attractive and slim with great battery life, if it doesn't actually do anything that I need, then why bother?

IF Apple plans to get into this market, I hope that they have an ace up their sleeve. (and maybe they do)
Click to expand...

Pretty much every women I know or see where's a watch. Plenty of men wear watches. It is a very false misconception to assume no one wears a watch anymore. Casio is still in business for one and as far as I know is not announcing losses every year.
 
Shaun said:
Sounds more like a methodology based on current technologies rather than an actual invention. Is that patentable? The whole patent system is a mess and needs urgent reform.
Click to expand...
Patents would come to a halt. New airbag system that's 90% better than current airbags? Sorry, airbags already exist.

jnpy!$4g3cwk said:
Yes, this is exactly why people criticize patents so much. First, someone patents "Little Black Dress". But, nobody patented "Little Black Dress worn by a Blonde" so now patent that. But, nobody patented "LBD worn by a Blonde on Tuesday" so patent that.

Go back and study the life of Nikola Tesla. Those were patents. A large fraction of modern patents are abuse pure and simple.

Explain exactly why this is fundamentally different from the internet connection sharing that I already do on my cell phone frequently, which was the same as when I did internet connection sharing back in 1996 or whenever.

What bothers me especially is how people defend the current system as protecting lone inventors working in their garages. 99% of the time, it is the large, established players in an industry who benefit. Even worse, companies that don't want to play are forced to play defensively. In the end, the result is a large transfer of money from consumers to lawyers.
Click to expand...
See above.

mdelvecchio said:
it's amazing that you can review the patent, perhaps even read it, and then come away thinking thats what it covers.

please do not enter the medical practice.
Click to expand...
Or legal practice.

jclardy said:
Is this patent really going to go through? I am pretty sure this is essentially how httpebble works with the Pebble watch, except not on Bluetooth LE at the moment.
Click to expand...
It's not.
 
piecloud said:
Did you even read the patent? This is a natural evolution of network access over bt.
Click to expand...

You contradict yourself. If it's an evolution, it's patentable.

----------
Shaun said:
Sounds more like a methodology based on current technologies rather than an actual invention. Is that patentable?
Click to expand...

Patents are invented to solve problems. They are always based on current technology. Do you think inventors pull magic out of their arses?
 
chabig said:
Patents are invented to solve problems. They are always based on current technology. Do you think inventors pull magic out of their arses?
Click to expand...

I believe "magic pulled out of my arse" wouldn't be patentable.
 
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