/. on iPod patent filing
p2pnet.net Commentary:- Like it or not, Apple’s hot and Apple devotees are definitely more vocal than PC users.
[Why IS that? - Ed]
Now, Apple wants to patent aspects of its iPod user interface and accordingly, has filed at the US patent office.
The abstract reads: "In a portable multimedia device, a method, apparatus, and system for providing user supplied configuration data are described. In one embodiment, a hierarchically ordered graphical user interface are provided. A first order, or home, interface provides a highest order of user selectable items each of which, when selected, results in an automatic transition to a lower order user interface associated with the selected item. In one of the described embodiments, the lower order interface includes other user selectable items associated with the previously selected item from the higher order user interface."
/. picked it up and there’s an interesting thread. To give you a taste, below are a few excerpts.
They’re patenting aspects of the iPod user interface. iTunes is very important to the iPod but isn’t apart of the iPod AFAIK (I’ve never actually seen one). We’re flaming Apple because they’re patenting something semi-obvious (though most posts will return to the usual flaming of the totally broken US Intellectual Property system). That I have no problem with.
Apple put a new spin on existing technology, and they found success with it. The iPod was just a better implementation of the MP3 players that had been on the market for years beforehand. iTunes is just Apple’s flavor of a media player, like WinAmp or WMP. Apple once again found the sweet spot with iTunes, but they didn’t really break any new ground.
I see one of the three people in the inventors list is Steve Jobs. I guess the guy standing with the whip behind the engineers deserves some credit, but this is ridiculous! *grin*
I think any Apple engineer will tell you that Steve plays a direct role in many of Apple’s high-profile products. There’s no doubt that some sort of element like the scroll wheel came out of his head, even if he had no direct role in it’s implementaiton. Now, whether he plays a positive or negative role is another matter. It’s my understanding that much of the ever-changing UI in OS X+iApps is due to his input.
It’s a pretty slick interface and one that would also be easy to copy. I can’t fault Apple for trying to protect against a horde of Asian clone iPods. If a patent is granted and Apple has the common sense to only enforce it in obvious cases of someone copying the interface, then great. If they get the patent and then sue anyone and everyone who has something that sort of works like the iPod, then that sucks.
I can just see the day when Donald Trump patents his signature expression–
Me: So, boss, what did you call me in for?
Pointy-Haired boss: You’re fired!
Donald Trump: That’ll be $35, please
Me: haha!
In the several years I’ve followed Slashdot, I’ve read countless article after countless article bashing Apple for things like not making their Cocoa UI open source, or suing rival hardware manufacturers for copying their latest innovation, or going after theme-makers who attempt to copy their Aqua for use on other platforms. Maybe some of those concerns are legitimate, but there’s another legitimate concern whose presence is never expressed: why is it always Apple who has to be the one inventing these great things? In my opinion, there should be equal outrage about the rest of the computer industry (Open Source included) not furthering technological progress for the common man.
- Why can’t we have outrage over all the non-innovative cloners not taking innovative risks to make life better for end users? Why can’t we have articles like "dell refuses to innovate" or "Gateway poo-poos idea that would make things easier for end users because it was deemed too risky"? Why can’t we have these kinds of articles in addition to "Apple sues dell for copying their innovation" or "Apple threatens gateway for look-and-feel infringement"?
Why can’t we be outraged over Creative Labs or Diamond Rio or anyone else not being the first to make an ergonomically excellent hard-disk based portable mp3 players with a superior UI? Why can there only be outrage over Apple preventing these people from copying the UI that they themselves weren’t willing to make in the first place?
Why can’t we have outrage over Open Source/Free Software projects caring little about things like interface design or not coming up with innovative UI’s? Why can’t we have articles like "linux distribution spends $700,000,000 on dot-com buyouts and $50 on usability research" or "$DESKTOP_PROJECT coordinator tells HCI person with legitimate UI complaint ‘quit whining about what you get for free’ while telling industry pundit ‘quit spreading M$ FUD About Linux Being Hard To Use’"? Why can we only feel outrage over articles like "Apple threatens $DESKTOP_PROJECT over copying Expose" or "Apple Sues Linux Distribution For Copying Aqua Theme?"
We shouldn’t be pissed about Apple trying to horde and brutally protect it’s innovations, we should be pissed about them being the only ones creating innovations worth hording and brutally protecting.
The wankers over in Redmond are about to release thier self-proclaimed "iPod killer" brick and since it’s been proven time and time again that they aren’t interested in innovating (just copying and/or smothering). So maybe it’s a protective measure against Billy & Co. Apple has been Redmond’s R&D lab for many years. Don’t beleive me? Go here and read the part about "New graphics with the Desktop Composition Engine" [winsupersite.com]. It still goes on to this day.
I’d be a little worried if I were Apple. I mean, look at Microsoft’s track record – they missed the boat on the GUI, office productivity apps, the internet and now the search engine. They missed the mark early on only to copy and then dominate those respective areas (don’t you dare take Google away you bastards!). In typical fashion, Microsoft slowly looks at the digital music phenomena and says to itself "hmmm…there’s something bright over here…let’s exterminate it". Apple may be setting themselves up to take MS to court if they end up having to. At least the EU has proven that they aren’t blinded and seduced by corporate money like the current U.S. administration. Admittedly, I have no idea if a U.S. patent makes a rats ass bit of difference over in the EU.
And right at the bottom, in reference to the abstract >>>
That sounds an awful lot like a menu system to me. I don’t have an IPod. Could someone with some experience of them fill me in – is there anything especially clever and non-obvious about the design of the menu system that warrants patent protection?
March 29th, 2004 at 6:12 am
“That sounds an awful lot like a menu system to me. I don’t have an IPod. Could someone with some experience of them fill me in – is there anything especially clever and non-obvious about the design of the menu system that warrants patent protection?”
It’s not the menu system itself which is innovative, it’s the method by which the user interfaces with the menu system. The scroll wheel and center selection button allow fast, accurate selection of the music.
If one does not experience with a product why make a comment about it?