5 ms·

Somehow Apple forgot that he was borrowing (let's not use stealing) many ideas from other companies. The "Slide to unlock" probably was inspired by Sony walkma

by chj 14y ago

Somehow Apple forgot that he was borrowing (let's not use stealing) many ideas from other companies. The "Slide to unlock" probably was inspired by Sony walkman's "slide to open". Surely, they must have got a lot of experience in suing other people over ideas they borrowed back from the windows GUI case in 80s.

dekz 14y ago
> The "Slide to unlock" probably was inspired by Sony walkman's "slide to open". Or you know, the physical slide to unlock bars on gates. I don't understand this misguided uproar around company Y suing company X for patent infringement. Why don't people start addressing the elephant in the room which what I assume is the USPTO.
- Detrus 14y ago
  Patents are naive obsolete laws that had well intentioned principles behind them. The other elephant in the room is tech culture that readily accepts copycats or competitors that aim for a proven market to cash in on me-too success with no intention to improve the idea and move technology forward. Patents are supposed to discourage this. Steve Jobs probably agreed with the principle that you should aim to innovate, not merely make money. Of course the problem is the legal system is ill suited to perform what is really an economic incentive. All these trials about silly details like straight edges and slide to unlock comically miss the bigger picture, but they're the only current avenue.
- pvidler 14y ago
  Yes, it seems that many devices -- even phones -- have had a physical slider to lock/unlock. What I find strange about the lcd-touch-panel version is why everyone wants to use it? I thought skeuomorphic design was something that everyone but apple was actively avoiding. I think I actually prefer the version where you draw a 2D pattern on a grid of numbers, or a picture... although this may also be covered by the patent. Hate patents.
  - rimantas 14y ago
    Drawing 2D pattern is the same slide, just path is more complicated. As for popularity, I think it's because that's pretty good solution: you have to lock the screen do disable accidental manipulation. Simple tap doesn't work in this case, physical buttons are also less than optimal.
    - pvidler 14y ago
      Surely there are lots of possible solutions -- tapping multiple points of a photo in sequence (am I the only one who prefers tapping for the reduction in finger prints?), camera face recognition, etc. You could even use a physical gesture, detecting patterns of movement of the phone through the accelerometer and gyro. Hmm... maybe I need to patent that! A physical button would have been fine too -- something like the mute/orientation button would be enough to prevent most accidental triggering. Not very discoverable, though. Right now my the only method I actually like is the iPad smart cover, as it's already unlocked by the time I have opened it. I tend to use a flip open case for my iPhone -- to protect from the inevitable fluff while in my pocket and to help the speaker when open (angle it just right for a big improvement in volume) -- so I'd like to see the iPhone 5 include that magnetic detection technology. Not very likely, I know.
reitzensteinm 14y ago
You don't even have to look that far back - pre iPhone, it was used on the Neonode N1m: http://youtu.be/7ru2GjBTHRY?t=3m56s http://youtu.be/7ru2GjBTHRY?t=3m56s Even if the iPhone were the first to use it, the patent is still ridiculous. If you tasked 100 engineers to come up with an unlocking solution for touch screens before the iPhone existed, I'd bet good money at least 50 of them would consider it an option. That's not non-obvious. Patents in software are no longer about inventions, they're about being the first do obvious technique x in context y. And sometimes, that's not even necessary - I've had a technique I used for displaying cross domain ads in Flash that I considered obvious at the time patented out from under me later on. The "in Flash" bit being the novel part, I assume - I try not to spend too much time dissecting insanity. At least we're starting to see notable investors rally against them, like pg and Fred Wilson - the very people who should be benefiting the most from a non broken patent system. Edit: Clarified line about the 50/100 engineers.
- oemera 14y ago
  Sure 100 engineers would come up with the idea "slide to unlock". After you see and use something it's always easier to find this said solution. BUT before Apple it seems that none of the 100 engineers you mentioned came up with the idea and it was never build and that means it was never obvious before Apple created it. Saying things are obvious after someone already invented a dead simple and good solution for a problem we had for years is always easy. EDIT: Grammer.
  - TruthElixirX 14y ago
    He just linked to a video of someone else doing it before Apple. Also physical world has had slide to lock/unlock for a really long time: http://m2.sourcingmap.com/smapimg/en/n/11b/hardware-door-lock-barrel-bolt-latch-padlock-clasp-128647n.jpg http://m2.sourcingmap.com/smapimg/en/n/11b/hardware-door-loc...
    - denzil_correa 14y ago
      I receive a 403 Forbidden Error on this URL.
idspispopd 14y ago
I don't think apple are really trying to protect their intellectual property per se. After all the patents they put on the line are frivolous, and usually easily discounted... after a lengthy case. Instead I believe these lawsuits are their 'revenge' for what they view as an injustice or 'stolen product', they know this harms their competitors and google financially, and interestingly the bulk of the buying market aren't phased by what they're doing. As a ruthless competition tactic it seems to be effective. I'm curious to know if the net spend of paying out legal fees is advantageous in comparison to the sales generated by this tactic. If we're lucky this stunt of theirs will be what's needed to have the patent system overhauled in the USA. Apple have had fewer successes internationally, and the USA should as a minimum follow this lead.
powerslave12r 14y ago
Isn't a zipper slide to unlock? (granted sliding and pulling are arguably different)

by chj 14y ago

dekz 14y ago

> The "Slide to unlock" probably was inspired by Sony walkman's "slide to open". Or you know, the physical slide to unlock bars on gates. I don't understand this misguided uproar around company Y suing company X for patent infringement. Why don't people start addressing the elephant in the room which what I assume is the USPTO.

Detrus 14y ago
Patents are naive obsolete laws that had well intentioned principles behind them. The other elephant in the room is tech culture that readily accepts copycats or competitors that aim for a proven market to cash in on me-too success with no intention to improve the idea and move technology forward. Patents are supposed to discourage this. Steve Jobs probably agreed with the principle that you should aim to innovate, not merely make money. Of course the problem is the legal system is ill suited to perform what is really an economic incentive. All these trials about silly details like straight edges and slide to unlock comically miss the bigger picture, but they're the only current avenue.
pvidler 14y ago
Yes, it seems that many devices -- even phones -- have had a physical slider to lock/unlock. What I find strange about the lcd-touch-panel version is why everyone wants to use it? I thought skeuomorphic design was something that everyone but apple was actively avoiding. I think I actually prefer the version where you draw a 2D pattern on a grid of numbers, or a picture... although this may also be covered by the patent. Hate patents.
- rimantas 14y ago
  Drawing 2D pattern is the same slide, just path is more complicated. As for popularity, I think it's because that's pretty good solution: you have to lock the screen do disable accidental manipulation. Simple tap doesn't work in this case, physical buttons are also less than optimal.
  - pvidler 14y ago
    Surely there are lots of possible solutions -- tapping multiple points of a photo in sequence (am I the only one who prefers tapping for the reduction in finger prints?), camera face recognition, etc. You could even use a physical gesture, detecting patterns of movement of the phone through the accelerometer and gyro. Hmm... maybe I need to patent that! A physical button would have been fine too -- something like the mute/orientation button would be enough to prevent most accidental triggering. Not very discoverable, though. Right now my the only method I actually like is the iPad smart cover, as it's already unlocked by the time I have opened it. I tend to use a flip open case for my iPhone -- to protect from the inevitable fluff while in my pocket and to help the speaker when open (angle it just right for a big improvement in volume) -- so I'd like to see the iPhone 5 include that magnetic detection technology. Not very likely, I know.

reitzensteinm 14y ago

You don't even have to look that far back - pre iPhone, it was used on the Neonode N1m: http://youtu.be/7ru2GjBTHRY?t=3m56s http://youtu.be/7ru2GjBTHRY?t=3m56s Even if the iPhone were the first to use it, the patent is still ridiculous. If you tasked 100 engineers to come up with an unlocking solution for touch screens before the iPhone existed, I'd bet good money at least 50 of them would consider it an option. That's not non-obvious. Patents in software are no longer about inventions, they're about being the first do obvious technique x in context y. And sometimes, that's not even necessary - I've had a technique I used for displaying cross domain ads in Flash that I considered obvious at the time patented out from under me later on. The "in Flash" bit being the novel part, I assume - I try not to spend too much time dissecting insanity. At least we're starting to see notable investors rally against them, like pg and Fred Wilson - the very people who should be benefiting the most from a non broken patent system. Edit: Clarified line about the 50/100 engineers.

oemera 14y ago
Sure 100 engineers would come up with the idea "slide to unlock". After you see and use something it's always easier to find this said solution. BUT before Apple it seems that none of the 100 engineers you mentioned came up with the idea and it was never build and that means it was never obvious before Apple created it. Saying things are obvious after someone already invented a dead simple and good solution for a problem we had for years is always easy. EDIT: Grammer.
- TruthElixirX 14y ago
  He just linked to a video of someone else doing it before Apple. Also physical world has had slide to lock/unlock for a really long time: http://m2.sourcingmap.com/smapimg/en/n/11b/hardware-door-lock-barrel-bolt-latch-padlock-clasp-128647n.jpg http://m2.sourcingmap.com/smapimg/en/n/11b/hardware-door-loc...
  - denzil_correa 14y ago
    I receive a 403 Forbidden Error on this URL.

idspispopd 14y ago

I don't think apple are really trying to protect their intellectual property per se. After all the patents they put on the line are frivolous, and usually easily discounted... after a lengthy case. Instead I believe these lawsuits are their 'revenge' for what they view as an injustice or 'stolen product', they know this harms their competitors and google financially, and interestingly the bulk of the buying market aren't phased by what they're doing. As a ruthless competition tactic it seems to be effective. I'm curious to know if the net spend of paying out legal fees is advantageous in comparison to the sales generated by this tactic. If we're lucky this stunt of theirs will be what's needed to have the patent system overhauled in the USA. Apple have had fewer successes internationally, and the USA should as a minimum follow this lead.

powerslave12r 14y ago

Isn't a zipper slide to unlock? (granted sliding and pulling are arguably different)