Slashdot Mirror
Apple Patents GUI Theme Engine
SirFlakey writes: "Just browsing the Patents database at delphion I came across this patent from a couple of weeks back. Apparently Apple Computer has patented a method of theming the OS. I wonder how this affects theming on Linux ?" Perhaps unsurprizing, considering Apple's general unhappiness with Apple-like themes, and that they convinced themes.org to remove Aqua, AquaX and others. Apple obviously has a lot tied up in their look-and-feel, but the patent's actual claims strike me as pretty thin. Sounds like Apple wants to be the sole owner of complex desktop customization, which I think some people might object to.
The duck is an image from a stock photo archive. So what if both Microsoft and Apple paid money for the rights to use the same image?
Beveled buttons and soft colors? This is what you are using to say that MS is copying the Aqua theme, beveled buttons and soft colors?
Yeah, *nobody* used pastels or embossing in design ideas before Apple came along!
(rolls eyes)
'at least one of said theme engines is hard-coded and at least one of said theme engines is a data-driven, parametric engine' and 'providing a plurality of theme engines, each theme engine associated with a different theme type, wherein at least one of said theme engines is hard-coded and at least one of said theme engines is a data-driven, parametric engine;
It looks to me like what they have here is more than just theming or a theme engine, or widgets that change behaviour, but rather they are claiming a system that support multiple theme engines. That means functionality on the order of an OS that allows plug-ins that act as theme engines.
If so, I think Apple does have something totally new here. Imagine an architecture that would allow you to plug in a theme engine, i.e. have KDE, Gnome, Win95 GUI etc all as theme engines running side by side.
The flexibility of this seems to me to be terrific. It means a theme engine for each of a different class of GUI implementations.
MOVE 'ZIG'.
It's time for Apple to drop thier foolish patents. Enlightenment, even fvwm did desktop theming first
Read the article before you comment on it, or at least read some of the other comments.
1) Apple didn't file this patent, Ed Voas and his colleague did. Ed worked on the Kaleidoscope shareware theme-switching software prior to coming to Apple. Though I don't know if the filing or the employment came first.
2) The patent was actually filed nearly three years ago -- in May 1998! It was just recently transferred to Apple, though.
3) As somebody else pointed out, the patent affects more than simple theming, it's about changing UI behavior based on theme (not just where the widgets appear)
The truth is without us hackers Apple's attempt to regain the Education market will fail.
Apple's VP of Software Engineering was one of the key architects of Mach. I think he has some right to use his own code.
They sucked enough information out of us, and Apple has not given anything back.
Ummmm... ever heard of QuickTime Streaming Server? Darwin? NetInfo? I/O Kit? Go to publicsource.apple.com. They've given all sorts of stuff to the community.
- Scott
--
Scott Stevenson
WildTofu
Scott Stevenson
Tree House Ideas
Here's a bunch of screen shots from M$: http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/guide/newlook.a sp
And here are some Mac OS X screens: http://www.apple.com/macosx/usingosx/desktop.html
Xt or Intrinsics upon which Xaw and Motif are built can provide a ludicrous amount of appearance and action. Just look at x.themes.org for some examples. GTK is also prior wrt some claims. As for the extra utilities to aid in theming, there's editres and probably a few collections of shell scripts et al. that change the xrdb (X Resources Database); I had one that adjusted the colors of an app based on which workspace it was opened on.
(Hmm, has anyone patented multiple desktops/viewports/workspaces/etc.?)
In a groundbreaking engagement today that has left many constitution signers spinning in their graves, Apple has finally stopped beating around the bush and patented style.
The patent reads as follows:
Systems and methods for providing a user with increased flexibility and control over the appearance and behavior of objects on a user interface are described. Sets of objects(read: clothes, accessories) can be grouped into themes to provide a user with a distinct overall impression of the interface. These themes can be invoked by calling a corresponding theme engine(read: wife, girlfriend, mother). Theme engines can be hard-coded(naturally stylish) or data-driven(Cosmopolitan, GQ).
Carrot Top was among the many celebrities concerned about this patenet and was, astonishingly, available for comment. "Oh man, I just made a milkshake machine out of a remote control submarine and a spatoon! That's got style, right? Right guys? Oh man, they better not try to patent this bad boy! I've got prior art, and it tasted like crap! Man, if they sue me, I'll finally get a spot on Extra or ET again like the one I got for beating the boy out of Gary Coleman!"
At first, I thought that perhaps (ironically) Microsoft's own Windows 95 Plus Pack! would have been prior art (the patent filing date is May 8, 1998. But then I read the patent. The only thing remotely novel I see is that a theme can be hard-coded rather than data-driven. In that case, I would think that Sun's Java JDK, with its Pluggable Look And Feel (PLAF) would suffice as prior art.
I used up all my sick days, so I'm calling in dead.
- a processor for performing control functions and processing data;
- a display for outputting data received from said processor and for receiving input from a user of said computer system via a graphical user interface; and
- a plurality of theme engines each capable of rendering a theme by drawing an object on said graphical user interface, wherein a selected one of said theme engines is commanded to draw said object based upon a theme selection coordinated by said processor.
That sounds extremely broad to me. Looks like they're making a claim against any system which includes data processing capability and has UI themes. Note that they don't specify changing behaviour in this claim. And they talk in terms of themeing a particular object so an argument could be made that this would apply to themes within a single app (e.g. WinAMP skins). Of course the prior art on this one would be voluminous.http://delphion.com/details?&pn10=US05959624
They actually have a patent that already covers theme switching by changing resources or drawing procedures.
09/074,543
That one (can't find it, but it's referenced) covers sound effects in a GUI.
So I don't know that there is anything 'wrong' with this patent, given that there are other similar patents in the system, or that this is anything other than 'business as usual' for corporate America...
Geek dating!
GPL Deconstructed
I am curious however where you found info about the patent being transferred
My mistake. The scanned in documents are hard to read. Turns out it was invented by Ed Voas, etc. but it belongs to Apple.
However, the bottom line is the same: the Slashdot version of the story is extremely misleading. It makes it sound like Jobs just marched down to Apple legal the other day and asked them to patent themes.
- Scott
--
Scott Stevenson
WildTofu
Scott Stevenson
Tree House Ideas
How about they actually produce a better product for a reasonable cost to consumers?
Right. History has shown the superior product always wins over the inferior one with superior marketing. Yep. But this really doesn't have anything to do with the topic. Microsoft has patents on theming stuff as well. Big deal.
I just find it constantly amazing how anyone who can even entertain the notion that freedom and computing have ANY relationship to Apple Corp.
Apple sells hardware and software as a single package because it makes the final product far more coherent. For them, the money is in the hardware. This is why they can give away iTunes and all the web-based iTools services for free (with no banner ads). However, it's the integration of the hardware and software that makes the machine easier to manager and provides the value proposition.
Microsoft isn't probably going to open source anything anytime soon, but Apple has open sourced all kinds of stuff. QuickTime Streaming Server, NetInfo, I/O Kit, OpenPlay/NetSprocket, and of course, Darwin. While Darwin it is based on Mach 3.0/BSD, Apple is continually pouring money into Darwin development as the core of OSX, and the community reaps the benefits. Also note that Apple's VP of Software Engineering (Avie Tevanian) was one of the core architects of Mach.
Bash Microsoft all you like, but let's not forget that it was those evil folks that made it possible for the seperation of the hardware from the OS.
Out of the frying pan into the fire...
Microsoft is doing everything in their power to lock you into a single software platform. Long term, the hardware is probably irrelavant. Oh sure, you'll have all sort of hardware to choose from -- handhelds, desktops, laptops, cell phones, appliances. But if Microsoft has its way, they'll all run Windows.
By contrast, a substantial amount of OSX is built on open standards -- TCP/IP, Apache, NetInfo, OpenGL, I/O Kit, Java, BSD, Mach. With Windows, you have to deal with NetBios, WINS, IIS, DirectX, ActiveX, and kernel source that nobody can look at.
It is a good thing that there are open hardware platforms available? Yes. Is Apple evil for having a standardized hardware/software platform? No. It's just a different approach that has distinct benefits for both the developer and the user. Look up some of Carmack's comments on how much more cost effective it is to develop and test for the Mac because of the standardized hardware.
I wouldn't want a world in which Apple sold all computers, nor would I want one where either Windows or Linux is the only only OS.
- Scott
--
Scott Stevenson
WildTofu
Scott Stevenson
Tree House Ideas
This was applied for May 1998. This is years after Apple published the Copland whitepapers describing themeing.
I'm looking at my dusty copy of "Copland Technical Overview" by Apple Computer, copyright 1995. It seems to describe the task fairly well.
The claims seem to be a set of permutions of "data-driven" and "hard-coded" applied to the elements of implementing themes. Of course the devil and the legal bills are in the details. All in all, if you asked someone to implement the scheme described in the Copland overview the claims are the obvious ways to do it.
I suspect this is a defensive patent. One of those "we should see if the PTO will grant this, cause if they give it to anyone else we are screwed" patents.
This patent was filed in May 1998 by Ed Voas and Arnaud Gourdol, at least one of which I believe worked on the third party Kaleidoscope theme-switching apparatus for Clasiic Mac OS. However, it appears (from looking at the documents) that the patent ownership was recently transferred to Apple. I know at least Ed Voas went on to work for Apple, specifically contributing to the Appearance Manager software in Mac OS 8.
- Scott
--
Scott Stevenson
WildTofu
Scott Stevenson
Tree House Ideas
Maybe this is an attempt to stop Windows XP from looking so ridiculously similar to OS X. If anybody's seen a picture of Whistler you'll know what I'm talking about. They have the pleasingly soft colors, the bevelled buttons, and even the duck cursors.
Does anybody have a picture of Windows XP that they could share to illustrate the point? I can't find the copy I saw.
How do you expect a company like Apple to compete with something like Microsoft without leveraging whatever IP rights it has a right to?
How about they actually produce a better product for a reasonable cost to consumers?
I just find it constantly amazing how anyone who can even entertain the notion that freedom and computing have ANY relationship to Apple Corp. Bash Microsoft all you like, but let's not forget that it was those evil folks that made it possible for the seperation of the hardware from the OS. No, some mainframe at MIT doesn't count either, nor does some kit machine. Before MS-DOS hit the streets, darn near any machine available to us consumer types had a closed architecture with a closed OS.
Because there was a Microsoft to provide an OS to them machines that Compaq managed to hack away the IP rights from IBM we all enjoy hardware advances we would have never seen otherwise. All this, at costs WAY below what would otherwise have been available.
I thank the computer gods daily that way back in the day Apple decisively lost the battle for the desktop. As is in constant evidence by their actions, they have no interest in allowing the rest of us lesser folk decide what we want in a machine or what OS will run on it. We sure as hell wouldn't have seen anything like a Linux come around.
The line must be drawn here. This far. No further.
1. In a graphical user interface, a method for rendering objects and handling behavior of said objects comprising the steps of:
If I were to dissect it a bit, it's more than just *skinning*, which is to redefine the appearance of the buttons and widgets. The first claim mentions the method of rendering objects and handling behavior of said objects, as related to the appearance and behavior of bojects rendered by the theme. It specifically mentions that either appearance *or* behavior is controlled differently for an object when the theme is changed.
So skinning falls under appearance changing when theme is changed. This would be like WinAMP skins, in which the appearance and buttons can change by selecting skins.
But then there's behavioral changes. By changing themes, the behavior of the application changes as well. So let's speculate an example: An xterm window. Change from Theme A to Theme B. To simplify, let's say the appearance doesn't change, but the behavior does. This could be as simple as shell shifting from ksh to tcsh, or DOS. Or it could mean changing from bash to a graphical terminal window, in which icons appear when you type ls, and selecting an icon is the same as copying, and double clicking a folder works the same as typing 'cd "new folder"'.
It could also be that changing from theme A to theme B changes the terminal window into a Windows styled explorer, or a Mac styled finder, or a Netscape styled web browser.
For other applications, like a CD player, that could mean a change from cli to floating button box to hybrid of the two.
This is all just speculation, but it's more than just skinning!
Geek dating!
GPL Deconstructed
Signs appeared at farmer's markets over the weekend, offering Malus domestica for sale. Apple [TM] responded swiftly that these fruit still had an "Apple-like theme."
To avoid costly litigation fruit-growers accross the temperate zones of the planet are currently grubbing up their orchards while tree nurseries are bulking up pear stocks and looking to a bumper year.
Some confused orchard owners are reported to be installing Linux PPC on their apple [TM] trees.
http://fsfeurope.org/