Information : Esato News Articles : Samsung Galaxy Nexus violates Apple's slide-to-unlock utility patent
>
New Topic
>
Reply<
Esato Forum Index
>
Information >
Esato News Articles
> Samsung Galaxy Nexus violates Apple's slide-to-unlock utility patent
Bookmark topic
Theres always Windows phones right?
lol Even Siri fails to comment on Android
I just think let them get on with it may the best one win at the end
I like both iOS and Android but I have a 4S
and I cannot help the fact that, Phone works better for myself personally at the moment
as a avid music fan the iPhone ticks that for me and the gaming on it
is fantantic even my partner has said its better at handling games than his HTC Sensation!
he isn't much of Apple fan himself but he has learn't to deal with me having these iphones
lol asada sorry about the asda
--
Posted: 2012-01-24 19:13:25
Edit :
Quote
On 2012-01-24 19:13:25, Miss UK wrote:
lol asada sorry about the asda
I was about to say!
haha, I but to the topic in hand, I too agree that a 5+" handset is too big, but I still believe that 3.5" is silly. My arc's 4.2" is just right IMO, its perfect for watching movies on the go. The fact Apple refuse to expand on their screen size is ludicrous, sure not everyone wants a large screen but there is still a market for it, if you want iOS you have to make do with a tiny screen. Sure not everyone does, but would producing a model to cater for these users be so hard? Sony has a range of large and small screen handsets screen sizes. Yes back in 2007 3.5" looked pretty impressive it 'aint no longer!
--
Posted: 2012-01-24 21:32:00
Edit :
Quote
I remember the days when I thought a QVGA screen was amazing
--
Posted: 2012-01-24 21:56:19
Edit :
Quote
Talk about out-of-the-mouth-of-babes this guy has only just signed up and i can honestly say i couldnt have put it better myself in such a simple condensed form.
On 2012-01-22 04:57:55, yark wrote:
I had slide to unlock on my backyard gate when i was 5 years old.
@ Miss UK - if say for example Apple did get their way and managed to get every other manufacturer out there banned from selling mobile phones, so we all had to buy iPhones, which could be very possible in a country with a dictatorship installed that did a deal with Apple, yeah i would happily use an iPhone. I do like iPhones, ive been in the Apple store this evening playing with the 4S thinking how nice it is and how id like one (as a collector rather than main use), but i would feel really constricted and as though im missing out on much better things that i could get with other platforms.
--
Posted: 2012-01-25 23:10:10
Edit :
Quote
Something interesting that I've found.
Apple's a gesture Patent in the USA is EP1964022? One thing we have to remember is that Patents are Very very specific; if too vague the patents can run the industry into submission or no longer be valued for what is intended.
Of ALL the news and even that 9:56min you tube video NO PRESS has actually officially stated the specific NeoNode patent arguing against Apple. More to the point is that NoeNode used a phrase NOT an image nor does their slide to unlock can be exited by a spring in mid action by the user at will! Furthermore, Neonode has not stated how their action is executed.
There are a number of patents that are uncannily similar that we have ALL seen yet the way in which their executed makes them unique. Apple is not the only one to goto court over mobile device patents - think NTP against RIM in their prime for their NOC PUSH rice implementation (Motorola also was sued but settled VERY early in court proceedings and paid a bargain, meh a STEAL compared to RIM.
I'm curious who has the actual patent number and link to describe the Neonode patent. ?? I'm very curious because I'd like to find out. I already spent hours on google searching havent found it.
--
Posted: 2012-07-09 07:07:09
Edit :
Quote
Update! Ivefinally found it
Patent
8095879
Link.
http://www.google.com/patents[....]FerE2wXU8qiVCA&ved=0CDQQ6AEwAA
A particularly good quote from good investigation...
As I pointed out in an earlier piece, Neonode -- a small Swedish phone manufacturer -- was the first to deploy the technology commercially. And it also appears to be the first to have patented swipe-to-unlock.
I initially missed this, as it was buried in U.S. Patent No. 8,095,879.
But there it is -- in "User interface for mobile handheld computer unit." Fig. 11 and Fig. 12 (pg. 5).
And the interface element is covered by Claim 12:
12. The computer readable medium of claim 1, wherein the user interface is characterised in, that an active application, function, service or setting is advanced one step by gliding the object along the touch sensitive area from left to right, and that the active application, function, service or setting is closed or backed one step by gliding the object along the touch sensitive area from right to left.
Now Neonode is perhaps not suing everyone because it kindly limited its own patent, writing
In the case that the patent was deemed non-novel at some point and redundant with existing drag-and-drop IP, Neonode attempts to strengthen it with a secondary claim:
12. The computer readable medium of claim 1, wherein the touch sensitive area is 2-3 inches in diagonal dimension.
What a novel notion -- a company narrowing its own patent to cover only what it actually has designed! While we'll never know if this narrowing was intentional or inadvertent, either way.
Despite the apparent strength and broad scope of its patent, Neonode declined/missed its opportunity to try to cash in on its user interface innovation at the expense of stalling the mobile market with crippling lawsuits (as Apple is currently doing).
II. Is There a Difference Between These Patents?
Now let us review the matter at hand:
Neonode filed for a patent on swipe to unlock 3 years before Apple did.
Neonode's swipe to unlock gesture is identical to that found on the iPhone -- a fluid left-to-right motion.
Apple is now suing people over the technology it "borrowed" (presumably without permission) from Neonode and applied for two patents -- U.S. Patent No. 7,657,849 and U.S. Patent No. 8,046,721 on.
Let me address a point of contention I received in an email. Yes, Neonode's display is resistive (diodes-based) touch design, where as Apple's screen is capacitive touch. But ultimately this does not have any major affect the algorithm, as we see it on the original iPhone. And bear in mind, Apple is not patenting capacitive multi-touch. Other people have already done that.
Indeed Apple's patent doesn't even mention capacitive touch in its claims. It claims the invention of the gesture on "a touch-sensitive display" (See Claim 1 of first patent) -- a term which encompasses both resistive and capacitive touch displays.
So is there any difference between Apple's claim and Neonode's?
It would be tempting to state that there is some sort of graphical difference looking at the iPhone versus the Neonode n1, which featured the slide-to-unlock. But the patents are ambiguous enough they don't confine themselves specific look to the unlock mechanism (that would be more appropriate for a design patent, anyhow).
So if the difference is not graphical, what is it?
Apple's algorithm appears to have two unique claims, compared to Neonode's. But they're actually not unique at all. Let's discuss why.
First it claims dragging a graphic. But let's see -- this has been done for over two decades before the filing via the ubiquitous "drag and drop"(who has this patent Xerox PARC or is it someone else by 2yrs; hmm).
Apple's only other seemingly unique claims is that its algorithm mentions that if the finger is removed during the swipe gesture, before the end point is reached, to cancel the result. But ultimately, the Neonode patent simply did mention this. If you swipe halfway across the Neonode phone (reaching the middle diode) and stop, you can't just click the endpoint several seconds later. Neonode's algorithm was less explicit, but it appears to have the same mechanism as Apple's. (See videos below.)
--
Posted: 2012-07-09 07:19:14
Edit :
Quote
On 2012-07-09 07:07:09, Prom1 wrote:
Something interesting that I've found.
Interesting to who ? certainly not me. Notice how nobody has posted in this thread for 6 months ?
Its because nobody really cares about defending Apple. Well apart from you of course.
--
Posted: 2012-07-09 11:00:02
Edit :
Quote
Apple lost in the UK courts on this very claim. Common sense ruled for a change.
--
Posted: 2012-07-09 16:25:26
Edit :
Quote
Was watching the Dyson advert today and noticed they mentioned patents in it
--
Posted: 2012-07-09 21:49:00
Edit :
Quote
What's wrong with that?
--
Posted: 2012-07-09 22:10:23
Edit :
Quote
New Topic
Reply
