6 ms·

Apple Patent Turns Car Windscreen into Giant Augmented Reality Screen

31 points by jpindar 8y ago

torstenvl 8y ago
OT: Wait, is Newsweek a British publication? Most vehicles don't have windscreens within the American meaning of that term.
Rotdhizon 8y ago
I hope I'm not the only one who's initial reaction was "What the hell is a windscreen?" I know windshield, not windscreen. They didn't say windshield in the article, I don't know if they are referring to the windshield or not. The functionality isn't even the hard part, it's the mountain of legal issues you raise with distracted driving. I would assume the facetime calling would only be permitted when the car isn't moving.
- qubex 8y ago
  I think windscreen/windshield is one of those bonnet/hood trans-Atlantic discrepancies that turn out to be synonyms.
dep_b 8y ago
> Another feature in the patent—titled Panicky Occupant Detection—would monitor drivers' stress levels by observing their eye movement, body posture, body temperature, eye blink rate, heart rate and body gestures. The HUD would then adjust which display elements are shown on the windscreen. Or people driven nuts by their spouses in the other seat?
- DmenshunlAnlsis 8y ago
  That’s the POD-2, Pesky Occupant Detection. If it detects difficult friends, spouses, or in-laws a hefty dose of Versed is delivered to the passenger. Relief for the driver within minutes guaranteed!
- tjoff 8y ago
  > The HUD would then adjust which display elements are shown on the windscreen. Yeah, it wouldn't add to the already stressful situation if you suddenly couldn't find whatever you were looking for, not at all. These dynamic adaptations to the GUI has always resulted in the worst UI ever. Consistency is paramount.
  - swiley 8y ago
    And people wonder why some of us just like editing text config files in vim...
    - nicoburns 8y ago
      Well vim is modal, so it's not exactly doing well in this regard!
      - tjoff 8y ago
        I don't consider vim to be a culprit, you really can't update your key-bindings dynamically (in practice) to say more efficiently utlize the home row. It would be unusable and the UI would have no way to conway the new mappings. Vim is still consistent, you have to mentally keep track of which mode you are in but that's second nature after you've groked it. Dynamic UI changes are not and always requires you to do one extra roundtrip and scan the UI for what options are currently available and adapt to it.
- CNJ7654 8y ago
  Knowledge that my car is monitoring my every twitch and heartbeat is more stressful than any traffic situation
jarmitage 8y ago
Better link: http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2018/08/apple-invents-an-augmented-reality-windshield-that-will-even-support-facetime-calls-between-different-vehicles.html http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2018/08/apple-in...
autoexec 8y ago
Just one more place to expect ads being shoved in your face.
- macandcheese 8y ago
  I'm not sure why this is downvoted. It's a real concern IMO. Want to use Waze on your Apple i-touch-touch windshield screen? Fair enough, but expect those "cheap gas station alert" pop-ups to persist there as well.
  - MBCook 8y ago
    Because Apple doesn’t try to shove ads in your face (except in the App Store, which seems fair enough). They don’t let you show ads on CarPlay (out for 3-4 years), why would this be any different?
    - tfha 8y ago
      They don't show ads yet. Once operating systems started integrating ads, I became increasingly cynical. Ads are the current end game for anything with access to user eyeballs. Just give it a few years, until whatever devision needs some way to squeeze a little more juice out of their revenue projections
      - clay_the_ripper 8y ago
        I highly doubt it in apples case. It would be a complete 180 for them. Android? Sure. But Apple has spent years reenforcing the message that they don’t monetize your data in the same way that android does.
      - spike021 8y ago
        >They don't show ads yet. Once operating systems started integrating ads I've never seen integrated ads on any of my Macs during normal use outside a web browser, and in iOS specifically it's always been a thing, whether built-in to the OS or a third party library. But since including, what is it called now, AdKit? I haven't seen any unusual ads in the main UI other than in the usual use-cases in apps or the web browser.
sgillen 8y ago
I almost forgot Apple was still working on cars.. >As for FaceTime, Apple hopes it can help drivers communicate visually while driving. Does this seem like it could be a bad idea to anyone else? usually the whole point of facetime is that you are looking at the person (rather than the road) seems like it could lead to more accidents? I guess it's probably not a big deal, and way better than texting an driving.
shmerl 8y ago
So Apple want to charge all futuristic AR car makers, because "Apple invented it"? The idea of AR on anything is known for a long time already. It's more of a typical future protection racket attempt through software patents and shouldn't be patentable.
polskibus 8y ago
Is that like a HUD in a fighter? Wouldn't that count for prior art?
- rtkwe 8y ago
  No those are separate displays not built into the windshield/screen. Personally this really shouldn't be patentable but mainly because it's basically a software patent. There's not really much there that's physical other than the display and the fact it interacts with 'sensors' the rest is just a piece of software.
  - hermitdev 8y ago
    HUDs in aircraft are still just a reflection off of a surface. There have already been cars with HUDs. Doing this with a single surface doesn't seem innovative to me, seems like a logical leap. TL;DR; I think this patent will eventually be rebuked.
MBCook 8y ago
As a driver, this could be nice. As a PASSENGER, if this stuff moves around based on where the driver’s head is I would get motion sickness really fast.
- aqme28 8y ago
  Wear polarized sunglasses. Light reflecting off of a windshield tends to polarize. If your glasses are 90° offset, you shouldn't see much.
  - tjoff 8y ago
    That is not a solution.
excalibur 8y ago
I like the notion of deep-field AR along the lines of Hololens or Magic Leap being possible with a simple pair of passive 3D glasses. This opens a range of possibilities, such as a whole new kind of IRL Mario Kart. (However this design would need to be safety-focused in a way that few video games have ever had to, which would likely detract from that particular experience.) But, as another user has pointed out, this would need to be optimized for the viewer's head placement, resulting in a terrible experience for passengers. So the default should be a basic HUD. Facetime will be fine with this. Maps will probably need multiple modes for different levels of immersion based on user preference.
cabaalis 8y ago
With self driving cars somewhere in the forseeable future, I wonder if a system like seen in the movie "Daybreakers" is realistic. One where the windshields are blacked out, and video hud allows you to see outside. In that case the windshields could be replaced with a stronger material, and maybe car designs become even more aerodynamic. See also the airplanes that have no windows for passengers.
sthgrau 8y ago
I don't know what is necessarily novel in this. For example, I remember (but can't find) a feature for a high end car that showed IR camera display to highlight unseen deer on the road.. Anyway, I think this is a good feature for intermediate automated cars. There is a problem with keeping people interested enough to be ready to take over if there is a situation that the computer lacks the confidence to deal with. One application might be to turn the display into a game field. When there is traffic, you could be able to interact with the other cars on the road. When there isn't there could be simulations. That way, you are always looking forward and at least somewhat engaged. As safety confidence drops, the system can highlight the area where the problem is developing, giving a subtle hint to get ready. For later iterations, the controls could become more "game controller" like where the driver is choosing between different scenarios and the system figures out how to do it.
- na85 8y ago
  >For example, I remember (but can't find) a feature for a high end car that showed IR camera display to highlight unseen deer on the road. IIRC that was Lincoln, or perhaps Cadillac. I remember the TV commercials from my early teens.
  - awad 8y ago
    Cadillac had the first go in 2000. Mercedes and BMW have had night vision for little over a decade now while Audi and Lexus have more recently joined the fray, but all have had them out for at least one generation of vehicles.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
PeterWathall 8y ago
Ugh this is going to end up like ford's patents where really simple things that every car should have can't be used in any cars because the law says so. We almost ended up with this happening to seat belts and that would have ruined cars. Simple ideas that anyone could and has come up with should not be eligible for patents, I thought about this idea a decade ago and other people obviously thought about it long before me. Doesn't mean I should be able to stop everyone else doing it.

31 points by jpindar 8y ago

OT: Wait, is Newsweek a British publication? Most vehicles don't have windscreens within the American meaning of that term.

Rotdhizon 8y ago

I hope I'm not the only one who's initial reaction was "What the hell is a windscreen?" I know windshield, not windscreen. They didn't say windshield in the article, I don't know if they are referring to the windshield or not. The functionality isn't even the hard part, it's the mountain of legal issues you raise with distracted driving. I would assume the facetime calling would only be permitted when the car isn't moving.

qubex 8y ago
I think windscreen/windshield is one of those bonnet/hood trans-Atlantic discrepancies that turn out to be synonyms.

dep_b 8y ago

> Another feature in the patent—titled Panicky Occupant Detection—would monitor drivers' stress levels by observing their eye movement, body posture, body temperature, eye blink rate, heart rate and body gestures. The HUD would then adjust which display elements are shown on the windscreen. Or people driven nuts by their spouses in the other seat?

DmenshunlAnlsis 8y ago
That’s the POD-2, Pesky Occupant Detection. If it detects difficult friends, spouses, or in-laws a hefty dose of Versed is delivered to the passenger. Relief for the driver within minutes guaranteed!
tjoff 8y ago
> The HUD would then adjust which display elements are shown on the windscreen. Yeah, it wouldn't add to the already stressful situation if you suddenly couldn't find whatever you were looking for, not at all. These dynamic adaptations to the GUI has always resulted in the worst UI ever. Consistency is paramount.
- swiley 8y ago
  And people wonder why some of us just like editing text config files in vim...
  - nicoburns 8y ago
    Well vim is modal, so it's not exactly doing well in this regard!
    - tjoff 8y ago
      I don't consider vim to be a culprit, you really can't update your key-bindings dynamically (in practice) to say more efficiently utlize the home row. It would be unusable and the UI would have no way to conway the new mappings. Vim is still consistent, you have to mentally keep track of which mode you are in but that's second nature after you've groked it. Dynamic UI changes are not and always requires you to do one extra roundtrip and scan the UI for what options are currently available and adapt to it.
CNJ7654 8y ago
Knowledge that my car is monitoring my every twitch and heartbeat is more stressful than any traffic situation

jarmitage 8y ago

Better link: http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2018/08/apple-invents-an-augmented-reality-windshield-that-will-even-support-facetime-calls-between-different-vehicles.html http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2018/08/apple-in...

autoexec 8y ago

Just one more place to expect ads being shoved in your face.

macandcheese 8y ago
I'm not sure why this is downvoted. It's a real concern IMO. Want to use Waze on your Apple i-touch-touch windshield screen? Fair enough, but expect those "cheap gas station alert" pop-ups to persist there as well.
- MBCook 8y ago
  Because Apple doesn’t try to shove ads in your face (except in the App Store, which seems fair enough). They don’t let you show ads on CarPlay (out for 3-4 years), why would this be any different?
  - tfha 8y ago
    They don't show ads yet. Once operating systems started integrating ads, I became increasingly cynical. Ads are the current end game for anything with access to user eyeballs. Just give it a few years, until whatever devision needs some way to squeeze a little more juice out of their revenue projections
    - clay_the_ripper 8y ago
      I highly doubt it in apples case. It would be a complete 180 for them. Android? Sure. But Apple has spent years reenforcing the message that they don’t monetize your data in the same way that android does.
    - spike021 8y ago
      >They don't show ads yet. Once operating systems started integrating ads I've never seen integrated ads on any of my Macs during normal use outside a web browser, and in iOS specifically it's always been a thing, whether built-in to the OS or a third party library. But since including, what is it called now, AdKit? I haven't seen any unusual ads in the main UI other than in the usual use-cases in apps or the web browser.

sgillen 8y ago

I almost forgot Apple was still working on cars.. >As for FaceTime, Apple hopes it can help drivers communicate visually while driving. Does this seem like it could be a bad idea to anyone else? usually the whole point of facetime is that you are looking at the person (rather than the road) seems like it could lead to more accidents? I guess it's probably not a big deal, and way better than texting an driving.

shmerl 8y ago

So Apple want to charge all futuristic AR car makers, because "Apple invented it"? The idea of AR on anything is known for a long time already. It's more of a typical future protection racket attempt through software patents and shouldn't be patentable.

polskibus 8y ago

Is that like a HUD in a fighter? Wouldn't that count for prior art?

rtkwe 8y ago
No those are separate displays not built into the windshield/screen. Personally this really shouldn't be patentable but mainly because it's basically a software patent. There's not really much there that's physical other than the display and the fact it interacts with 'sensors' the rest is just a piece of software.
- hermitdev 8y ago
  HUDs in aircraft are still just a reflection off of a surface. There have already been cars with HUDs. Doing this with a single surface doesn't seem innovative to me, seems like a logical leap. TL;DR; I think this patent will eventually be rebuked.

MBCook 8y ago

As a driver, this could be nice. As a PASSENGER, if this stuff moves around based on where the driver’s head is I would get motion sickness really fast.

aqme28 8y ago
Wear polarized sunglasses. Light reflecting off of a windshield tends to polarize. If your glasses are 90° offset, you shouldn't see much.
- tjoff 8y ago
  That is not a solution.

excalibur 8y ago

I like the notion of deep-field AR along the lines of Hololens or Magic Leap being possible with a simple pair of passive 3D glasses. This opens a range of possibilities, such as a whole new kind of IRL Mario Kart. (However this design would need to be safety-focused in a way that few video games have ever had to, which would likely detract from that particular experience.) But, as another user has pointed out, this would need to be optimized for the viewer's head placement, resulting in a terrible experience for passengers. So the default should be a basic HUD. Facetime will be fine with this. Maps will probably need multiple modes for different levels of immersion based on user preference.

cabaalis 8y ago

With self driving cars somewhere in the forseeable future, I wonder if a system like seen in the movie "Daybreakers" is realistic. One where the windshields are blacked out, and video hud allows you to see outside. In that case the windshields could be replaced with a stronger material, and maybe car designs become even more aerodynamic. See also the airplanes that have no windows for passengers.

sthgrau 8y ago

I don't know what is necessarily novel in this. For example, I remember (but can't find) a feature for a high end car that showed IR camera display to highlight unseen deer on the road.. Anyway, I think this is a good feature for intermediate automated cars. There is a problem with keeping people interested enough to be ready to take over if there is a situation that the computer lacks the confidence to deal with. One application might be to turn the display into a game field. When there is traffic, you could be able to interact with the other cars on the road. When there isn't there could be simulations. That way, you are always looking forward and at least somewhat engaged. As safety confidence drops, the system can highlight the area where the problem is developing, giving a subtle hint to get ready. For later iterations, the controls could become more "game controller" like where the driver is choosing between different scenarios and the system figures out how to do it.

na85 8y ago
>For example, I remember (but can't find) a feature for a high end car that showed IR camera display to highlight unseen deer on the road. IIRC that was Lincoln, or perhaps Cadillac. I remember the TV commercials from my early teens.
- awad 8y ago
  Cadillac had the first go in 2000. Mercedes and BMW have had night vision for little over a decade now while Audi and Lexus have more recently joined the fray, but all have had them out for at least one generation of vehicles.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]

PeterWathall 8y ago

Ugh this is going to end up like ford's patents where really simple things that every car should have can't be used in any cars because the law says so. We almost ended up with this happening to seat belts and that would have ruined cars. Simple ideas that anyone could and has come up with should not be eligible for patents, I thought about this idea a decade ago and other people obviously thought about it long before me. Doesn't mean I should be able to stop everyone else doing it.