Slashdot Mirror
Apple Tries to Patent Fast User Switching
Ashcrow writes "An article from The Register points out Apple's attempt to patent fast user switching. It seems that Steve Jobs admits that Microsoft beat them to the punch but believes Panther's implementation is superior."
I thought I already saw this.
"Only in their dreams can men truly be free 'twas always thus, and always thus will be."
--Tom Schulman
Alt-F1, Alt-F2... I can switch between root and myself in about 1/8 of a secord or less. Its amazing really. I bit longer to switch between console and X.
--- its to bad about the monkey, I kinda liked them
um, isn't "su" fast user switching? Doesn't that have prior art?
In times like these, it is helpful to remember that there have always been times like these. - Paul Harvey
I mean, what is the use of switching users as fast as it can be done?
-Is the meaning of life vanity, or is vanity the meaning of life?
OSNews has had it since friday
-cococoocachoo
Okay, I'm really confused here. If there's a prior implementation, how can it be patented, especially when it's not like Apple can claim that they don't know about any competitors?
I really have liked where Apple has been going lately as far as the technical side of things goes, but if their management is going to become stupid, then they need a wakeup call.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
If you create a superior way of doing it. I see. Good to know.
"Ashcrow writes "An article from The Register points out Apple's attempt to patent fast user switching. It seems that Steve Jobs admits that Microsoft beat them to the punch but believes Panther's implementation is superior.""
That's because it is.
Incidentally, it does, however, cover uses such as the Mac OS' Location Manager, which switches network-related settings according to the user's location. The patent extends that idea to cover other, more personal settings and data, that might depend on the user's location/identity, ie. the computer's owner as public individual and as company employee.
I think that this is really the point here. Apple's got a great implementation of multi-environment profiles and they want to protect that. Jobs himself said that WinXP got there first...It'd just be odd to retract and deny that.
Anybody remember when Apple patented "lighted" computer devices? Everybody was guesstimating that it meant your new iMac would, at the press of a key, turn into the center of a disco party for you and your friends. Mostly we are inaccurate, since we never know what's behind the doors at 1 Infinite Loop.
Finally, when contacted, Jeff Bezos said, "Been there, done that!"
Couldn't X-Terminals do this like a zillion years ago?
or, for that matter: su - change user ID or become super-user
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
Here's the Direct Link.
Very popular slashdot journal for adul
Do they rotate on a cube like the mac does?
Since I have no karma here goes:
Apple + FreeBSD = FeeBSD
OS X Aqua is a single user gui on top of a multi-user system, this is otherwise known as a kludge.
On second thought I'll post this anonymously.
One word: prior art. And one link: su(1).
Karma: Positive (probably because of superiour intellect)
And the faster that Apple provides the genesis for 64-bit user software, the faster the PC world will be dragged along kicking and screaming, to the benefit of us all.
And yes, I know that just going to 64-bits alone doesn't automatically confer advantages, but there are advantages. I also expect that to be the last such migration in my life time. It might be famous last words, however I do have trouble believing 64-bit processing and addressing will get outgrown by any software we'll be running on the desktop.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
I've never had any problem with how fast the 'su' command executes on my machine.
man tunefs | grep fish
because it appears that nobody here is able to. They are not patenting fast user switching per-se but changing application settings and preferences on the fly, such as what location manager is doing.
Wah, and that's *new*? Gimme a break.
"HISTORY
A su command appeared in Version 7 AT&T UNIX."
-- from the su(1) manpage
...that UNIX beats itself. OS X is UNIX, and user switching is really just as fast as on any other *NIX based system, the only delay is Apple's insistance on having a perty Quartz graphics transition between it.
Best. Webhost. Ever. Dreamhost.
Microsoft tries to patent "fast user baiting-and-switching."
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
But it's really superior! It rotates the current desktop out of view while the incoming account desktop rotates into view on another side of the cube!
And it has a slogan too: Because we can! Only for that it deserves a patent!
Singularity: a belief in the "God" idea with the "demiurge" relation inverted.
+5 Insightful
Haha, that has to be one of the most demented yet funny things i've read. thanks
Thirty-eighth post!
Edison didn't invent the lightbulb, but he did improve it, and applied for a patent...
As much as we'd all love to see Apple successfully sue Microsoft, It won't happen. This reminds me of the 1998 lawsuit about Microsoft ripping off the "look and feel" of Mac OS.
The article even points out weaknesses in the strategy (I know, I know, I broke the slashdot rule by reading the article).
"At WWDC, Jobs admitted that Microsoft had beaten Apple to market by offering such a feature in Windows XP, but he claimed Apple's implementation was the better of the two." and "The downside - if Apple's intent is to outflank Microsoft; we're only guessing here - is that the patent refers to multiple personas of a single user, not multiple users".
Microsoft is an EXTREAMLY WEALTHY corporation. When it comes down to how the legal system works, the more money you can spend on lawyers the more you can get away with. Hell, even the GOVERNMENT didn't beat them. I know they were convicted of being a monopoly, but really, what has happened since then? They still hold a monopoly on the desktop market, they still own windows and office, and they still infest every windows computer with a copy of internet explorer. I'd say that they really won.
I'd love to see apple (or anyone else) be able to truely step up to them. Sadly, as long as they continue to have as much money as they do, there is no chance
----
Squirrel
Consensual sex is boring.
I really like this novel approach of protecting the technically superior idea .. too bad it comes from an industry leader with less than a marginal grasp of how the current patent system works.
Switching back is the hard part.
If you read the article, you will see that Apple has filed a CONTINUATION of a patent involving user-switching, originally granted in 1995. This is a completely legitimate move on their part. It is arguable that they have owned this technology for years. As for using SU for user switching, this would be true as an earlier form, however the patent applies to the GUI. Dan
Standing on the shoulders of giants.
For the love of god why patent this??
What is there to gain, they even admit there is prior art??
I'm glad we don't have this crap in europe.
Straight from The Register story (the The Register story?):
:)
At WWDC, Jobs admitted that Microsoft had beaten Apple to market by offering such a feature in Windows XP, but he claimed Apple's implementation was the better of the two.
That would imply, surely, that Microsoft has a solid prior art claim?
No. The current application, filed last November and updated this past June, turns out to be a continuation of a patent, number 6,512,525 filed in August 1995, long before Windows XP arrived, and finally granted in January 2003 with the same title. That patent is also assigned to Apple.
My blog
" ...that UNIX beats itself. OS X is UNIX, and user switching is really just as fast as on any other *NIX based system, the only delay is Apple's insistance on having a perty Quartz graphics transition between it."
I can duplicate that experience by using the NVIDIA drivers. Like meet like.
Apple patents everything they can imaginably think of, right down to the skins on their OSes, and they never use a single one of these patents. (OK, they bitchslap people who make themes similar to aqua, but based on trademark law, not patents.)
If they give any indication they'd ever use this patent, ever, I'll bitch and moan about it with the rest of you. But they never will, and anyway, this idea is SO obvious I can't concievably imagine them ever winning a lawsuit based on this patent even if they tried.
In the meantime, i want to see how long it takes someone to make a serviceable Virtual Desktop implementation based on faking out the fast user switching implementation. Also, I find the Register's last paragraph a bit odd:
Will Apple use its new-found intellectual property rights? Maybe not, but like its use of QuickTime patents to win a $150 million investment from Microsoft demonstrated some years back, it may now have the opportunity to do so if it ever hears the words 'cancelled' and 'Microsoft Office' in the same sentence.
Patents? Hmm, I seem to remember that particular lawsuit being over several tens of thousands of lines of actual source code that slipped directly out of the Quicktime codebase and into the Microsoft Media Player codebase, through the intermediary of a third party contractor that both Apple and Microsoft hired at different points. I could have missed something, though.
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
LOL... teh funny
"But it's really superior! It rotates the current desktop out of view while the incoming account desktop rotates into view on another side of the cube!"
3Ddesktop
You can do that exact thing on UNIX by running multiple X-servers on different virtual consoles. ALT-F# to switch, and voila, you've got a different user with all their apps still running. Optionally you can lock the console before switching (using xscreensaver-command -lock, among other options) so you need the user's password to switch back.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
I pray that you are either someone famous in computing or will be. It is these sorts of quotes that in years to come we will all have a good laugh at.
Seriously though this does beg to ask what we will be using computers for in ten/twenty years time...
I have not seen a posting by Michael all day. Usually he's the one posting everything on the weekends. Has CmdrTaco finally listened to the people who read this website and cut down the amount of Michael posts?
Thank God!
Not only did I find this article insightful, funny, AND interesting, but I want to meet the AC that posted this and give oral sex to him/her. I want hot butt love from the AC!
They woulda covered more stuff if they
just patented "fast"
as a developer I recieved a free copy of the developer preview of OSX 10.3, and the fast user switching is by far superior in speed and eye candy.
Now that would be cool.
1. start X
2. start dozens of terminals/browsers
2. detach the whole thing while leaving everything running
3. attach it again at a later time, maybe on another box
Just like screen(1) does now for text terminals. And come on, who can live without screen(1)?
Of course it runs NetBSD. BTC: 1NT7QvbetmANwaMzhpVL6
The thing about software patents is that they are Implementation-Specific. For example, the patent held by Adobe on tabbed palettes that can be dragged in and out. Adobe was able to sue Macromedia because Macromedia copied the implementation verbatim. Had Macromedia used a different technique to tear off palettes they would have been safe.
Likewise, by extending their Location Manager patent to include user-oriented settings Apple is implying that the switching technique and internal binding methods are unique to their implementation. Microsoft may have a semblance of fast user switching under XP, but there is no doubt that their implementation relies on different hooks and methods than the Apple implementation, which is a very thin layer that leverages the Darwin underpinnings of the OS. Most geeks here can easily guess the techniques Apple had to use in order to make this possible on top of Darwin. These techniques are certainly more graceful and less of an OS kludge than whatever Microsoft had to bolt onto Windows, and could easily be applied to other Unix-like OS's.
There will be a time in the not-too-distant future when portable devices will contain GPS by default, and automatically switch locations and users on the fly. Apple is doing the right thing here, formalizing their design via the patent system.
-- thinkyhead software and media
You're lucky! Back in my day we had 40 people to a console connected to a mainframe by a string seventy miles long! When it got wet one of us had to drive over there and reset the thing! And we had to use a Timex for a screen! I'm still waiting for 'true' to finish!
Note to M1-ers: a curt but otherwise insightful message is not "Flamebait" or "Troll".
I used to work for a corporation called Bull, a French computer manufacturer and consulting outfit.
One of that company's core products at the time was smartcard-based . The project they were really proud of consisted of a massive rollout for a chain of hospitals in France, where doctors and other staff, just by inserting a chip card into a reader on a kiosk PC, could almost instantaneously call up their user profile, including rights to patients' dossiers and user-specific access to applications. The GINA mask would even display the doctor's photo while he/she typed in the PIN code.
This was based on Windows (forget which version), but the actual functionality was developed in-house. And I'm pretty sure we weren't the first to do anything of the sort.
Good luck, Mr. Jobs.
Cole's Law: Thinly sliced cabbage
Isn't this exactly what is wrong with the whole patent system? I have to admit that I am not normally one to side with Microsoft here, but even by Apples own admission MS got there first.
But because Apple feel that their implementation is superior (I can't really say as I dont own a OSX capable Mac) they are entitled to patent it and reap all the associated rewards?
Insane...
Anyone else think that their switch cube thing looks rather like 3ddesk, except that 3ddesk was designed to switch virtual desktops?
And yes, you can rig up 3ddesk to switch between Xnest sessions (logged in as different users) on Linux. I was doing this before Apple announced copying this into OS X on one of my boxes, just for the hell of it. Perhaps I can sue them for millions now?
Beep beep.
I highly doubt it. Looks more like (Score:-1, Flaimbate) to me.
Apple happens to have prior art, since 1995, that applies to the current patent, and is evidently a continuation of that patent.
GPL Deconstructed
a) What happens if more than 6 users are logged in.
b) What if the user is on the other side of the cube, does it have to rotate past other users to get to it.
Those 64 bit workstations from AMD and others are not usually considered PCs, they are considered workstations.
I realize it's just language.. but if you want to pull the 64 bit card that way, you could buy a 64 bit sparc workstation years ago, before AMD was even thinking about it.
dejavu!
And all you people who say that su has got prior art are full of bullshit. Everyone knows that "exit" will log you out and then the other user can just login themselves. Duh!
On linux (and probably any other system with XFree86 ) To get to the first virtual console Use: CTL+ALT+F1. Then login and type:
someone@server someone]$ startx -- :1
X windows starts using the next available console. To switch between X sessions use CTL+ALT+F7 and CTL+ALT+F8. To start more sessions use :2, :3 etc. This has been available (but not well documented) for many years. Have Fun!
Then how do they deal with the security issues of the MP3 being in a directory owned by another user? What if permissions for the data and/or applications don't allow the new user to access them? Does it do something similar with editors? If the first user was in the middle of editing something, will it still be opened for editing by the second user?
Has Microsoft actually solved these issues, or are they just using a very lax security model, as usual?
Same thing we do now, download porn... play games, and download porn.
How long has CTRL-ALT-F[1-6] been around?
Um, what?
All of the settings a user can change are already stored in that user's home directory. Therefore, "fast user switching" on Unix simply consists of "logging in as a different user". And, as the article mentions, XP *has* fast user switching.
Actually, it's so obvious that it's been a stock feature of Unix for decades, and that doesn't make it worth patenting, or even patentable.
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
Look up gdmflexiserver - it starts new X sessions as needed, so you won't lose any RAM until you decide to start a new session.
Will be from SCO servers to Linux if SCO loses its case.
GGI Project, and 3dwm.
shed light onto how this differs from 'su'...maybe someone with experience with the windows switching and unix su?
root@server# su - jbob
Welcome jbob! Current system time is 17:20GMT
jbob@server$ ^D
root@server#
Say, for the sake of argument, that the consept of 'car' has been patented (by Karl Benz, who did in fact apply for a patent of a "vehicle with gas engine operation," on January 29, 1886) and that the patent is still in force, and I build a faster car (which does all the things Karl's threewheeler does, only faster, with a more fancy bodywork and with four wheels), I should be awarded a patent on the consept of 'faster car'?
To me that sounds like a load of something you'll find just to the rear of a male bovine, and if it is true that the patentsystem works this way it needs changing. Imitation is not inovation, even if the implementation differ behind the scenes.
Everything in the world is controlled by a small, evil group to which, unfortunately, no one you know belongs.
They have something like this called xmove. You can Google for it. I'll admit I never got it working, but that was back when I used PS2 Linux with its really old X server. YMMV.
Sick of people knocking on Gentoo's greatness in completely unrelated
It's easy to say youre the best when youre the runner up in this case. For example, you get a processor out. It's 3.0GHz. The week after, you announce a 3.2GHz and say that it's vastly superior to the other one. Of course it is, its new, why would it be inferior? The next implementation of fast user switching in LongHorn is probably going to be superior to the one in OS X, and so forth. Why would it be any different, do we devolve? (Don't answer that, some softwares come to mind, but they only confirm the exceptions).
Trolls dont like to be Flamebait, because they burn so well. Protect our Troll heritage!
The patent application talks a lot about pen based systems. In fact, it says:
Therefore, it would be desirable to provide some method for quickly and easily changing an entire collection of parameters of relevance to the pen-based computer system when its owner adopts different personas.
I don't know of many pen based systems that Apple still markets...
- This is a continuation of a patent filed in 1995, and finally reviewed and granted in January 2003. Even if this was patenting Fast-User Switching, it was filed way before MS had it.
- This is NOT a patent on Fast-User switching (by itself). MacOS has, since, well probably no earlier than '95 but I'm thinking it was introduced around '98 or so had the "Location Manager". It works like this: LM compatable Control Panels saved their prefs in config files within the Preferences directory in the System Folder, and registered themselves with the Location Manager on initialization. Then, using a Location menu, you could simply snap all the settings to different configurations with one menu. Quite handy, I have one set on this machine for "normal" and one for "MIDI setup".
- We've all seen the Balmer video, but even he wouldn't be so stupid as to announce "our compeditors beat us to it" and then file a patent. Steve may be sadistic, but stupid he is not.
If I see one more post about "I have a virtual desktop and I can put a different xterm on each one" or "One word: su" , all I gotta say is this:The case against UI skins maker was the use of the Apple Logo and calling it Aqua. Most of the people removed the apple logo and changed the name and everything was ok.
Go out and get sailing!
I think their advertising agency deserves the patent! Low budget, huge impact.
SCO (noun.)- A Slimy Corporate Ogre. Often seeks free money.
Microsoft announced today that they plan to patent their recycle bin technology. While they admit Apple was first to design and implement this feature with thier trash can, Microsoft claims thier version to be more environmentally friendly by recycling bits of deleted files into refined binary, to be re-used when the user makes a new file thus reducing the amount of wasted hard disk space (the so-called hard drive landfill). The jerks at the patent office are expected to laugh in their face.
This may indeed be an attempt to patent "fast user switching" on Panther, but the patent talks about switching personalities on a pen based system. I, for one, would like to be able to tell my PDA to switch between my work persona and my persona persona, and to keep the calendars separate. The mention of that in the application is a new idea that I haven't seen done before, and it's much more intriguing than Apple supposedly trying to hoodwink Microsoft. Here's the relevant line in the application:
[0082] In the example presented in FIGS. 4a and 4b, the hand-held machine is shown to have two personas. In the case of FIG. 4a, the persona is Stephen Capps, professional engineer, while the persona illustrated in FIG. 4b is provided in for Stephen Capps, private citizen. As shown in FIG. 4a, some information associated with Stephen Capps, professional engineer, includes his company affiliation, title in the company, company address, and company phone number. In contrast, his private citizen persona is shown to include his home phone number, and may include such other information as a home address, etc.
I definitely haven't seen either Mac OS X switching or Windows switching do something _that_ useful.
Of course this represents prior art. So how in the world did the patent ever get issued, or even applied for (since it would clearly be invalidated as soon as one tries to enforce it)?????
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
Someone code another tool, fast user switch ( FU ).
Then an user named Apple, _for instance_, could quickly switch to another user, say Microsoft, this way:
fu microsoft
Amazon and their 1-click shopping cart patent?
from slashdot "Amazon are so stupid"
Apple and their fast switching patent?
from slashdot "Definitively a good marketing strategy - they must protect their superior IP before MS copy it"
SCO attempts to patent as yet undefined features
By Tony Smith
Posted: 11/07/2003 at 16:41 GMT
SCO has filed for a patent that suggests the company is working on absolutely nothing. Either that or it's cunningly trying to outflank IBM's lead on source code components by retrospectively patenting the technique as its own.
Almost as interesting as the patent's content is the name of its lead inventor: Darl Bendover, erstwhile UNIX co-designer and more recently IBM's leech. Darl is also remembered as the designer of Nothing. That gives you an idea of the application's heritage.
The application, number 0030107666, is entitled 'Get Rich Faster Than Enron'. It describes how an entire system of good and benevolence can be immediately changed to reflect a new "persona" when the petent owner chooses from a list of available personae to threaten using a random method of selection.
Aimed at IBM it may be, but to us the patent's abstract recalls UNIX as yet undefined features system, demo'd in to no-one at SCO's Worldwide Imagination Conference last month. When that facility is enabled in the new version of the SCO Linux, codenamed 'Penis', users can instantly activate their own accounts by selecting from a menu of users in the top right-hand corner of the menu bar.
Switching this way doesn't log the current user out of the system, or kill his or her apps, it simply changes the system's settings and application states to those of the user who'd just switched in. The change is engaged with a rather cute rotating anus graphical metaphor.
At WWIC, Darl admitted that IBM had beaten SCO to market by offering such a feature in AIX, but he claimed SCO's implementation was the better of the two.
That would imply, surely, that IBM has a solid prior art claim? SCO's prior art is about as clear as a Dali painting when viewed on PCP.
No. The current application, filed last November and updated this past June, turns out to be a continuation of a patent, number 6,512,666 filed in August 1995, long before Windows XP arrived, and finally granted in January 2003 with the same title. That patent is also assigned to SCO.
The downside - if SCO's intent is to outwank IBM; we're only guessing here - is that the patent refers to multiple personas of a single user, not multiple users. While Panther's approach to as yet undefined features might perform its magic by treating multiple users' preferences as different personas of a single, virtual user, it's questionable whether the original patent covers such a use.
Incidentally, it does, however, cover uses such as the UNIX Location Manager, which switches network-related settings according to the user's location. The patent extends that idea to cover other, more personal settings and data, that might depend on the user's location/identity, ie. the computer's owner as public individual and as company employee.
Whatever, SCO's continuation application applies the concepts relevant to as yet undefined features retrospectively to the original patent. The continuation application is reworded to imply the kind of functionality delivered by Panther's as yet undefined features. There are references to "said persona being one of multiple personas available on the computer system and associated with one or more users of the computer system" a concept seemingly missing from the original patent. The later application also refers to linking personas to passwords - another pointer to as yet undefined features.
So the new application clearly associates as yet undefined features with multiple personas, essentially allowing SCO to claim it has owned that technology since 1995.
And, of course, this is perfectly permissible under US patent law, an intellectual propery attorney of our acquaintance told us. Continuations can be and are filed to retrospectively add claims to already granted patents. Sometimes that's because the inventor is appealing against claims that were originally disallowed, more often it's done to s
Doesn't the Unix su command qualify as prior art? That's about the fastest way to switch users I've found, at least when you need to log in with a password.
It's good to use your head, but not as a battering ram.
Yo momma's so rich, she has a basement for you to live in!
Even if the Apple method is superior, how are they going to get a patent for the concept of fast user switching, even they admit that MS had it before them. I could see them getting some kind of patent for the particular way they do it, but for the concept in general its a little late.
Unless you're familiar with Location Manager and can disagree with that implementation, I don't believe there *is* prior art.
... AppleScripts to manage everything else
:: 'Multiple users - Machine' then it does appear valid that Fast User Switching is a continuation of the original patent Apple holds regarding the technology that is Location Manager.
Or rather, that Mac OS (Classic, not X) *is* the prior art, and that *Apple* owns the original patent, of which this is merely a continuation if you read the article.
Location Manager allows a single user to change multiple settings on a computer with a single selection:
Wireless Plugged
Wireless Unplugged
Netless Plugged
Netless Unplugged
Wired Plugged
Wired Unplugged
At Home
At Work
Roaming Unplugged
So that with a single selection the user can change:
Bandwidth settings on Qucktime and the network
Power/Battery/Energy saver settings
Screen Saver settings
Printer settings
Network settings (DHCP and Proxies)
Browser settings
If you look at 'Multiple locations - User'
su is *not* fast user switching, it is just changing the user locally in a terminal; and it doesn't change the settings of the machine, applications, or even the environment *outside* the terminal, unlike FUS or Location Manager.
GPL Deconstructed
Has anyone here actually read the patent that the Register article links to?
/. story now), with only their wild guess as to what Apple is actually patenting.
It covers "Multiple personas for mobile devices".
It's a hell of a stretch to go from that patent to fast user switching. The Register even admits it's a inaccurate description of user switching, although they underplay it.
That patent sounds like it would more accurately describe a handheld device that could serve multiple roles (like a mp3 player, a movie player, a camera, a phone, etc) and could rapidly reconfigure it's GUI to accommodate whichever 'persona' the user wanted.
I'd say this is just the Register blaring sensationalist bullshit to get attention (and succeeding wildly since they have a front page
"The worst tyrannies were the ones where a governance required its own logic on every embedded node." - Vernor Vinge
The process has the discs rotating along their edge against a horizontal or inclined surface.
"God, root, what is difference?" - Pitr, userfriendly
Shift-F1 :0 :1- Shift-F8
Login
startx --display
Alt-Shift-F2
Login
startx --display
Alt-Shift-F7
Alt-Shift-F8
Alt-Shift-F7
Alt
Been there, done that...
su actually stands for "Switch User" I believe, and you can in fact switch to any user:
SU(1) OpenBSD Reference Manual SU(1)
NAME
su - substitute user identity
Okay, I know people are challenged to read the articles, but you should at least read your own post. Like where it says "su - substitute user...", giving a vital clue as to what "su" really stands for.
Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
Christ on a fucking stick, this guy got it right.
This isn't a patent on 'fast user switching', this is a patent on switching multiple incarnations of the same user--as El Reg says, "persona switching".
Multiple people in one person's head, not multiple people in one room.
Mikey-San
Karma: +Eleventy billion (mostly affected by watching Celebrity Jeopardy)
If Mac OS panther would use its Fast User Switching to isolate unfamiliar applications it would render even the most deceptive and destructive trojans harmless.
a nd box.html
Read more and vote if you think that Apple should implement such a feature.
http://home.quicknet.nl/mw/prive/dennis.scp/s/s
u r just proving my point.
a KVM seems to do this, and doesn't use any CPU cycles...but I guess two machines is cheating
I,
.login file or .profile file or .aliases file shared between multiple user accounts if you so desire on UNIX. You simply create the one file, and then create a symbolic link for all of the various users (not argueing this techniques merits, just that it can be done).
Understand your point. But, how about this.
It's quite easy to have one "master"
Then any change made to the one file such as the aliases file immediately changes all of the users, whether they are the same physical person or not.
At my former company we used a very similar technique to make sure that everyone in the company could log in from any of our networked unix boxes and have the same environment that everyone else had.
It was a great productivity enhancer since if I couldn't remember an alias' arguments for example maybe the guy I'm working with next to me remembers it since he works using the same base enviroment.
From your argument what my former company did/does sounds like the same thing to me. I'm confident we weren't the only ones using this sort of technique.
Caution: Contents under pressure
There isn't really prior art to this: Apple is only patenting Fast User Switching on mobile devices such as cell phones, and a Specific Implementation (tm). So if you kept Alt-F1 and Alt-F2 on a Linux-based cellphone their patent couldn't be used to sue you.
With Apple, how the user interacts with the OS forms the Feel of the OS's Look and Feel. This patent does make some sense, and is entirely in line with Apple's history of patents...
(Cue cheesy balalaika music)
When I used to be Dan on my powerbook five seconds ago, I couldn't do anything. I couldn't get my e-mail from work, I could only browse the net at 56k, and all my Brittney Spears mp3's would play back in Swedish.
Then I got Apple's fast user switching.
Now I'm named Barbara. I can browse the internet using bluetooth, I've got access to corporate VPN's Dan never did, I've got a Hello Kitty background on my desktop, and everyone in the chat room thinks I don't have a penis. This just rocks!
My name is Dan..er..Barbara Wickowski, and I'm an insurance salema..er..saleswoman.
Ergonomica Auctorita Illico!
There are some people that if they don't know, you can't tell 'em.
It works out of the box on RedHat 9, probably 8 and 7.x as well though I don't have one of those handy. Another nice feature of RH is it's configured for ssh tunneling/X forwading out of the box. Just ssh to the target machine, type the command and !poof! window pops up on your desktop. (Well maybe ....p..o..o..f... depending on the speed of your connection). No need for VNC for remote GUI access and it's secure to boot.
It's funny how M$ is so opposed to sharing that they won't implement something as nice as x forwarding through ssh. Everyone in the house can have a nice computer that way, because machines that are adequate terminals are cheap. Any old 100 MHz box makes a usable xterminal and everyone can log onto a faster computer and share it. With reasonable uptimes, you don't have to worry about slow startup because you never need to turn the thing off. The free software way, everyone has a computer they "own" but everyone else can use whatever you manage to set up and everyone also has a share of the nicest computer in the house at the same time. My wife and I use differnt programs on each of out computers at the same time with modest hardware and neither of us notices the other's resorce use. "Oh no," microsoft thinks, "then two people might use Word at the same time!", what could be worse? The Microsoft way forces one user at a time sharing but perversly - no privacy whatsoever because they promise to read your files in the EULA. Everyone else in the world offers reasonable tools, Microsft had better wise up. They can't keep the world ignorant forever.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Why bother to shove your brother or sister out of the way when you could just login to the the machine with xforwarding? If you MUST have a pretty desktop, just xforward kdesktop and kicker. Nautilus can be used this way too. M$ is so clueless it's not even funy.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
You rock... It looked a little intimidating at first but I had a look at /etc/X11/gdm/gdm.conf and found:
Remove the comment before the '1=Standard' then reboot and you're good to go. (Yeah, I know, you don't need to reboot, just do a 'killall gdm-binary' but I'm trying to make this look simple.)
Bad news is the lock screen buttons and the screen saver don't seem to work on the second desktop. I've poked around but can't seem to find a fix... Guess this is getting pretty far off topic.
In a related article wozniak plans on patending the personal computer. I know I'll get modded -- Come and get me.
"Talent does what it can; genius does what it must."
How could they get a patent for technology that has existed much before either company was ever created? Unix has been using this technology for ages. Mainframe operating systems have this feature too, and its an extension of the dumb-terminal idea. So... How would this work?
First of all--well, duh...
Second of all--you don't make your point sound any more valid (and you don't sound any more intelligent, for that matter) by calling me "Menstrual Babe." Besides, I find it offensive. I hope your post will be moderated down, because I don't want people see how you embarass yourself calling me that way.
Karma: Positive (probably because of superiour intellect)
If we think that Windows users are going to be wanting to do all that with Linux boxes we must be fucking nuts.
Thank you very much indeed. We might need people like you here in Mensa. Smart, eloquent, individualistic, always meritoriously getting straight to the point and saving the day just in time. You are a tribute to human kind.
Karma: Positive (probably because of superiour intellect)
Anyone know if KDE/Gnome or even Xfree is planning something like this?
Here is a link to how to very easily get KDE to have its own little "start new session" button. Took me about a minute and a half to set up. I hear Suse has this working by default, and I would bet that Mandrake and Redhat will follow suit soon, given how easy it is.
Ambition is a poor excuse for not having enough sense to be lazy.
Mac OS X method:
Step 1: Select new user from the login menu.
Comment: Grandma and Grandpa can handle that.
LINUX method:
Steps 1-26: Linked in parent. 3 pages long.
Comment: Grandma asks: "What's a gdm.conf file?".
This starts an X session on top of the current console-----> startx -- :`tty|tail -c 2` vt`tty|tail -c 2`
Apple zealot mods mod -1 The Truth!
elitist hypocritical fucks.
Circa 1985: I remember something called "the switcher" that would allow you to rapidly switch between desktops on the 512K macintosh. (The original 128K thin mac) didn't have it. It was a neat effect, with the desktop sliding right off the screen and the new one sliding into its place. There were no multiple user logons, but this was the first example I remember of multiple desktop switching.
My rights don't need management.
RTFA
Prior art
su -
Microsoft released a powertoy for Windows XP called "Super Fast User Switch" (heh). Unlike the normal user switching in XP, it allows direct user switching without going through the Welcome screen. It was fast (less than one second on my box), and the rotating login images were quite aesthetic as well.
It has since been pulled, but if you search around for it the installer name was FastUserSwitchInstall.exe.
I have to wonder if Apple isn't trying to maneuver MS into a position of having to maintain their Office suite for Mac OS X. We just witnessed a five-year span where a standoff (or "agreement") between the two companies ensured continued Office for OS X development, thereby staving off a lawsuit by Apple against MS. I wonder if Apple reinstating their patent on fast-user switching isn't a way to position MS into another similar agreement. Who knows? Curious move on Apple's part.
--Rick "If it isn't broken, take it apart and find out why."
Has anyone here actually read the patent that the Register article links to?
/. story now), with only their wild guess as to what Apple is actually patenting.
It covers "Multiple personas for mobile devices". That patent sounds like it would more accurately describe a handheld device that could serve multiple roles (like a mp3 player, a movie player, a camera, a phone, etc)
A laptop is a mobile device too. In fact, the patent explicitly makes a distinction between a hand-held computer and a portable computing device (see claims 34/35, 43/44 and 50/51 from the patent). In the desciption it states that: "Computers are becoming increasingly [...] portable. [...] Laptop, notebook, and sub-notebook computers are virtually as powerful as their desktop counterparts." In other words, the class of portable computing devices referenced in the patent includes laptops.
It covers "Multiple personas for mobile devices". It's a hell of a stretch to go from that patent to fast user switching. The Register even admits it's a inaccurate description of user switching, although they underplay it.
The term 'user' as used in Unix is really just a persona. It's certainly not equal to a person since the root and guest accounts are not directly related to a person. They are more like roles, aka personas. Multiple personas seems to be an valid description of (fast) user switching.
I'd say this is just the Register blaring sensationalist bullshit to get attention (and succeeding wildly since they have a front page
Unfortunately, I haven't got the time to examine the entire patent (it's very long), but your criticisms don't seem to hold water. So for the time, I'll have to give The Register the benefit of the doubt.
PS. Quotes were edited for readability.
The Drowned and the Saved - Primo Levi
That's pretty fast..... I think there's prior art.
Eat at Joe's.
I think Mr Jobs is trying to head the bull off at the pass. Considering the past relationship with Mr Gates and his "creative initiative" he is not trying to nail down every quick switch, just keep a firm hand on his implementation. Jobs has until 2004/5 to lock down his creations so that thay do not just become R&D for other companies. He can be a banana about a lot of things, but I do not begrudge him defending what little marketshare he has with vehemence. Be well William
Sun had this years ago, we have java stations which are like 4 yrs old now, which did fast switching, login to a session with your smart card in the station, pop it out and you session is saved while the terminal returns to a login screen.. pop that baby back in any other terminal on the network and your session returns pretty much instantanously!
lightyears ahead of this point and click...
Well, Microsoft will likely do one of the following things:
They will file their own application, copy at least one of Apple's claims exactly and invoke an interference proceeding in the USPTO, where the parties must show who was the first to invent. This is different than the "first to file" rule used in many countries, for in the U.S. it is the first to invent, provide they are diligent in furthering the invention, that owns the "rights" to it. This could also mean that Apple could end up with foreign rights, as they were the first to file (and assuming they filed internationally), and Microsoft could end up with domestic rights, if they were truly the first to invent.
The second option is that MS could attempt to invalidate the patent either by submitting prior art documents to the USPTO during the pendency of the application, or wait until they get sued and do it in court. The problem with the prior, is that all MS could do is submit the art (which is limited to public documents and does NOT include code and the like that wasn't published publicly, (e.g. complied programs that were out there)) and MS cannot argue or rebut Apple's arguments. Finally, anything they share with the USPTO and the examiner views it and allows the patent nonetheless, has little, if any, weight left to it during a trial. Of course the problem waiting for a trial is that damage accrue.
Third, they could take a license, prior to issuance of the patent, as a "know-how" license (one can't really license an applied for patent as it's not a "right" yet), and receive a patent license following issuance. It'd probably be cheaper now and a reasonable royalty rate will likely attach if the claims of the issued patent is substantially similar to the published patent and Apple provide actual notice (a letter) to MS of this issued patent and, of course, MS is found to infringe it.
Or, MS could simply buy Apple. Heh.
Stop undressing me with your eyes. I'm ugly naked.
First there was login, kindof quick if you're a good typer.
:0'?
Then there was su, slightly quicker if you're a good typer.
Then came screen, ^a1, ^a2... seems pretty quick to me!
Then came sudo, awfully fast, especially when combined with keybindings in screen.
Oh, you meant silly GUI switching? Fine. But why switch users when I can just 'sudo -u luser mongo-app --display
Maybe I really want to see a different desktop theme? Ok, how about binding those to virtual desktops....
All those patent lawyers must be bored, they've twisted the USPTO to the point where it's just a funny rubber stamp and mask outfit, so they need a new challenge!
VNC (and other similar products) has long allowed you to produce multiple persistant X11 desktops, allowing you to log in once, create a desktop, and disconnect without dropping the desktop.
Sun's Java stations (and other similar products) allow the use of a smartcard to log on to a diskless workstation and start-up a personal VNC-like desktop.
Sounds like a lot of prior art, albeit in bits and pieces. The only possiblity for a patent may be in the combination all the individual parts.
Nothing for 6-digit uids?
Sheesh, everyone in Linux clamoring that their OS can do User Switching too. It's like they're jealous or something.
C'mon now. It's plain to see that fast user switching is a better solution than just virtual consoles, or even multiple X servers. For one, security. I can safely transfer control to someone else without worry of them messing me up. This safety isn't necessarily from deliberate attempts to cause harm. I have a user account for people who don't know my computer, thus they have a nice little box they can check their email in. An accidental keypress can dump you back in the other environment.
Second, it fractures the metaphor. When you "log in" a GUI then you are identifying that machine as "you" for the duration of that session. Everything that computer does, it should do as "you." Fast User Switching is a clean extension of the metaphor to allow for multiple users at a time. The console and multiple X terminals is not.
For the people who just advocate using su or sudo to switch shells, that's fine. For advanced users, that's very possible and doable. Remember OSX has a pretty schwag terminal app built right in should power-users want it. But the average user doesn't understand it, doesn't want it, doesn't need it. However, they do need a way to switch users.
Slashdot. It's Not For Common Sense
It's called "timesharing", and we had it back in the '60s. If they mean switching the display among multiple graphical contexts, Linux has had that for ages.
My ericsson cell phone had profiles for home,work,meeting driving etc. for as long as I can remember. This is an obvious improvement for someone trained in the trade and hence not patentable. Something has to be innovative AND NON-OBVIOUS to be patentable.
... to pass judgement on an issue that is called out in the most speculative of speculative "reporting".
The patent clearly says "mobile device". So unless it's an iBook or PowerBook, it doesn't apply to OS X, but to perhaps something like an iPod.
Even if it does apply to the PowerBook or the iBook, it is possible that they are trying to patent "Expose", which allows you to switch between different running apps, for example. Or perhaps they are changing the context of the desktop to switch between different "modes". For example, many of us may conceive of different "virtual desktops"...
So maybe they came up with an innovative way to switch contexts of the same user from one app suite to another.
The bottom line is that none of us know, including the author of the Register article, so why get your panties in a bunch?
If you don't like software patents, then fine, but otherwise I don't see how this is even news since no details are rightly known.
Read the abstract of the patent... it sounds nothing like su:
A computer system is disclosed which may adopt one of many personas, depending upon the role that its owner is currently playing. The computer system includes a central repository of extensible personas available to all applications running on the computer system. Each such persona has associated therewith a suite of parameters, or specific values for parameters, which are appropriate for conducting computer implemented transactions under a particular persona. The computer system further includes a graphical user interface which allows the user to switch from persona to persona by selecting a particular persona from a list of available personas displayed on a display screen of the computer system. By selecting such persona, the user causes the computer system to globally change the entire suite of parameter values so that subsequent transactions conducted with the computer system employ the parameter values of the current persona.
Now, my question. How are Locations and Multiple Users compatible? With multiple users, the other users are still active in the background. So, the foreground user should be running in his location . But, the background users should be running in their locations. What if the locations aren't compatible?
For example:
Maybe there are two levels of settings. There's a global level that effects system settings like sleep times, network settings and so forth. Then, there's a set of more local settings that affect application preferences. I don't know. Just curious how they'll get this all to work together well...
Justin DubsSurak is hard.
First I thought hmm, sounds like some scripts I put on my suse (now redhat unfortunately) laptop. But I see where they're coming from.
Now it sounds just like my Palm, it has similar settings and a location manager too. Of course there are Apple people in there.. You have to go back before location manager to the Selector when you could switch between ports graphically back on the mac classic.
Okay...the whole patenting thing is getting a little out of hand...
We used to do this on a Solaris X11 back in the day when a SparcStation was hot snot. You could either use X Session Manager, which would remember what programs you were running. Or some people would run multiple X11s on one box and had a little script to flip over to it.
Any plain old Linux box is capable of running multiple users at one time at one keyboard+mouse+monitor. Xlock and ctrl-alt-f8 works if you happen to run two X servers.
I think this shows there is prior art, and that apple is ignorant of it's Unix roots.
Also Sun's thin-clients allow you to carry a card with you, with your cryptographic key on it. You pull the card out of the thin-client. walk over to another one and your apps and everything are still running. (since the run on the server). This is the inverse of what the patent mentions, but probably a lot more useful.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Gimme a break, Apple, and anyone else who claims to have recently invented fast user switching! Fast user switching worked fine on the Raytheon PTS-100, The IBM equivalent to the PTS-100, and the ARINC (I don't recall the model) since before 1975. You could have up to 5 users simultaneously logged in and switch between users with just 2 keystrokes, ie. "ba, bb, bc, bd, or be." So, Apple is going to slap a patent on something that has been in use for nearly 30 years? Hellllooooo! Anybody upstairs?
From the patent:
[...]
18. The computer of claim 14 wherein the pointer is a stylus.
19. The computer of claim 14 wherein the computer is a hand-held computer.
In other words, this only applies to PDA's and tablet PC's.