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."
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
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
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
Incidentally, it does, however, cover uses such as the Mac OS' Location Manager, which switches network-related settings according to the user's location.
Location Manager is one of the coolest features the old Mac OS had. I always wondered why Microsoft didn't shamelessly copy it, considering what a pain in the ass it was to change network settings in Windows (especially in the days when you had to reboot for them to take effect)-- it never occurred to me that Microsoft actually might respect someone else's (especially Apple's) patent instead of ignoring it and figuring their army of lawyers will protect them from any repercussions.
~Philly
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: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.
think "the Wheel" is already in the database?
yes, it is.
There are actually many wheels in th USPTO database. But no one got a patent on the concept of the wheel itself because before the 1980's you had to actually make something innovative to get a patent. Since then... well let's just say a friend of mine got the patent on using electric motors in robots. He doesn't enforce it, but I convinced him to frame it and stick it on his wall a couple years ago for laughs. (He actually did invent a new motor for walking robots but the lawyers put in a claim on motors in robots because they didn't find any prior patents and the patent office accepted the claim.)
The USPTO gives bonuses to patent examiners for accepting patents, it's system engineered for abuse.
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."