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.
Members of Apple's PrimeSense Team Patent Method of Interacting With Mac Using Hand Gestures
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Because things like that are not "add on features"...they are the product. They are what the design starts with, and everything else is developed around them/for them. If you don't want the UX that was cultivated specifically for the user, then you don't want the product.
[doublepost=1511893034][/doublepost]
Editors Keys did this is 2013
And still, nobody cares. As soon as you develop a UI where the user has to raise their arm and keep it raised, you've failed.
People seem to miss that Apple would put a ton of R&D into something like this for the end result to be a simple flick of the hand to turn off a light, or similar.
yes they can and have been. the patent is about the idea of using gestures, not the tech that implements it. patent should be denied on review...
Remind me again, whether or not fictional representations can be used as prior art?
Minority Report cited as prior art
To answer your question, not necessarily prior art but you could definitely make the case that the patent is invalid due to not being non-obvious given a detailed enough fictional description of the functionality.
I've seen the movie a few times. Where exactly was the "detailed enough fictional description of the functionality"? I missed that part. And what part of a fictional representation demonstrates a physical or conceptual reduction to practice? It wasn't real, so therefore not obvious.
If it does, it’ll play out as nothing more than a gimmick. I sure hope it’s more than that.
you're combining two separate point I made into one. I (and the poster I quoted) both thought of Minority Report when reading this and made a joke about prior art. The poster then asked whether fictional content could be considered prior art. I answered that question with a "no" but theorized that if a fictional description of an interface was sufficiently detailed a later patent application could be rejected due to the non-obvious requirement. Reduction to practice wouldn't be necessary.
In any case, I believe it's been successfully done before. If memory serves a description of a water bed by Heinlein in one of his books became the basis for rejection of a later patent application.
I love the classic, "What we have is good enough" approach to technology news. Whatever we have is always "good enough," until someone comes along with something better. "Better" does not happen without an attempt, and certainly, some attempts fail. Predictions of failure that precede the actual product introduction tend to be as reliable as predictions of success. The proof is not available until the pudding is delivered.
To me, this is an obvious extension of the technology. Once you have 3D sensing for facial recognition, you have the hardware necessary for 3D gesture recognition. I won't argue whether it is or is not patentable, as patentability is often in the details, not the headlines. The trick here is not whether hand gestures can be related to a machine (such as the old Wii controller, or the gyroscopic mouse), but how - in this case, without the need for a hand-held device and using a certain kind of remote sensing.
It's not a matter of whether gestures in the air will supplant mouse, trackpad, keyboard, or voice control - they won't. They will more likely supplement. What we end up with is a richer language for human-machine interaction. This is an inevitable, necessary, and evolutionary step in the development of any language - more ways to communicate familiar concepts, some of which will enrich interaction, others that may be redundant.
One might as well say that we don't need text messages because we have email, we don't need email because we have the telephone, we don't need the telephone because we have mail delivery, and we don't need the written word because we're capable of speech. Each mode of communication has its place. They exist because, as social animals, we seek new ways to communicate.
To me, this is an obvious extension of the technology. Once you have 3D sensing for facial recognition, you have the hardware necessary for 3D gesture recognition. I won't argue whether it is or is not patentable, as patentability is often in the details, not the headlines. The trick here is not whether hand gestures can be related to a machine (such as the old Wii controller, or the gyroscopic mouse), but how - in this case, without the need for a hand-held device and using a certain kind of remote sensing.
It's not a matter of whether gestures in the air will supplant mouse, trackpad, keyboard, or voice control - they won't. They will more likely supplement. What we end up with is a richer language for human-machine interaction. This is an inevitable, necessary, and evolutionary step in the development of any language - more ways to communicate familiar concepts, some of which will enrich interaction, others that may be redundant.
One might as well say that we don't need text messages because we have email, we don't need email because we have the telephone, we don't need the telephone because we have mail delivery, and we don't need the written word because we're capable of speech. Each mode of communication has its place. They exist because, as social animals, we seek new ways to communicate.
Interactive application for training sign languages or orchestral conductors.
Carplay control, especially in states like mine where touching of electronic devices while driving is now regulated.
For almost 2 million USA citizens alone, a decent percentage of which have mobility limitations to reach a touch screen then yes motion controls would be better than a touchscreen computer. Apple doesn't just think of the typical average person you know.
With the pricing starting at $4999.99 and shipment delays fo the iMac Pro I'm very sure that is 1 animoji pros will be using heavily
Apple innovation died of complications due to pancreatic tumor on October 5th, 2011.
It's just something us Apple fans have to accept now.
So, Apple doesn't like Touch screen screens but they are prepared to get uses to wave in mid air anyway?
If anything, this would be a first for new iSight camera upgrade.... at least. Which has seem little attention on Mac's
Any sort of hand waving in front of a display without actually resting underneath like a tablet, still feels kinda ridiculous.
Perhaps i may get used to that.
If anything, this would be a first for new iSight camera upgrade.... at least. Which has seem little attention on Mac's
Any sort of hand waving in front of a display without actually resting underneath like a tablet, still feels kinda ridiculous.
Perhaps i may get used to that.
Well folks, I've been telling people here about the Magic initiative at Apple for close to two years now, and this is the last component leading to it. The use of a camera to pull this off is a bit of sleight-of-hand by Apple, actually just a placeholder to protect the patent on the real item, which is gesture-based control of the computer.
Its not going to be camera-specific. Its going to use HomeKit, the Apple Watch, Siri and a few other bits to have a complete gesture-based interface with voice assist. There wasn't supposed to be anything in print about it for the next 18 months, but evidently this patent came through and faced scrutiny. Such is life in Silicon Valley.
This is going to be a significant step forward in the interface of man and machine. When the AR project comes on line, the world is going to change.
Its not going to be camera-specific. Its going to use HomeKit, the Apple Watch, Siri and a few other bits to have a complete gesture-based interface with voice assist. There wasn't supposed to be anything in print about it for the next 18 months, but evidently this patent came through and faced scrutiny. Such is life in Silicon Valley.
This is going to be a significant step forward in the interface of man and machine. When the AR project comes on line, the world is going to change.
That's nothing.
Apple itself applied for a patent on using facial expression recognition to help determine our current emotional state, in order to serve mood appropriate advertisements.
"Oh, I see that you're sad. How about a quick Facetime session with Acme Psychiatric Services?"
Last edited:
Hmmmm I just made an account to share the point people were making about this not being worthy of a patent by sharing this old free gem https://flutterapp.com/ but then of course I remembered that Google s̶q̶u̶a̶s̶h̶e̶d̶ ̶i̶t̶ ̶f̶r̶o̶m̶ ̶e̶x̶i̶s̶t̶e̶n̶c̶e̶ bought it out for their own product development way back...
That says Microsoft, not Google. And it monitors online usage to determine emotional state, vs Apple's plan to use faces.
But yep, they both serve ads based on the calculated mood of the user.
Sorry, I meant Microsoft, of course.
Well, claim “4. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the indication of the user's reaction is identified from facial expressions of the user captured by an image capture device during the time period.” does describe it somewhat similar.
Probably another one of those patents that some like to make sound like spooky stuff, but ultimately it just ends up in the archives.