Apple Patents 'Chameleon' Computer Case

Dave B writes "The Register has been fishing at the patent office again and found that Apple has a new patent for "a computing device [which] includes a housing having an illuminable portion. The computing device also includes a light device disposed inside the housing. The light device is configured to illuminate the illuminable portion". While this gives us the exciting prospect of an iMac that is all five fruit flavors at once surely the original iMac with its glowing power button, or indeed a-thousand-and-one other electronic gizmos represent prior art?" Update a couple of users noticed this Slashdot Story from 2002 which looks familiar.

Comments

Prior Art?

[Morgahastu]

What the poster failed to mention was that the patent also included that it was customizable via a software program. You could open the "case prefs" and sets your case to have stripes, polka dots, etc. I am sure it could probably be animated too.

I don't I've ever seen that.

Re:Prior Art?

[Emmef]

Doesn't something like this already exist on some cellphones?

Re:Prior Art?

[anakin357]

The article says the case would be illuminated by R, G and B colored lights, so it could be any color of the spectrum. Very cool! Prior art? Not quite so sure.

I think it is more along the lines of "I'm feeling red today."
Click, click click... "Ahh, red illuminated case."

Blue? Click, click.

I like the idea.

Re:Prior Art?

[Anonymous Coward]

The backlit keys on my aluminum Powerbook seem to fit this description.

Re:Prior Art?

[ravydavygravy]

What about a case that changes colour with system load - "oops, the server has gone a funny lava-red color - we'd better leave the room!"

Dave

Re:Prior Art?

[meringuoid]

Moreover, this isn't a silly software patent. It's hardware. It's a physical thing, a real invention. It's actual lights inside the case.

And it's a damn good idea. I wonder how programmable this is? Maybe the next xscreensaver will have options for controlling the case lights...

Re:Prior Art?

[ari_j]

Wait - computers don't actually do that? I guess I'm going to have to re-watch all those movies that I learned about computers from.

Re:Prior Art?

[krog]

This is obviously the first hack anyone is going to write for it. The color and pattern is software-controlled, and therefore application-agnostic.

Second, someone (it could be me) will figure out how to goatse your case.

Re:Prior Art?

[FireFury03]

I must admit, the idea is cool... but I'm not sure if it constitutes a non-obvious idea and I'm sure the case modders must've done this already.

It would be kinda cool for your windows machine to turn red when you get a virus or have the computer go blue when you get new email though. :)

Re:Prior Art?

[richieb]

The article says the case would be illuminated by R, G and B colored lights, so it could be any color of the spectrum. Very cool! Prior art? Not quite so sure.

Isn't a color CRT a prior art thing? It has RGB illumation devices and a illuminating surface and can be controlled by sofware..

Re:Prior Art?

[FatalTourist]

And more importantly: STOP dropping acid!

Re:Prior Art?

[danamania]

What the poster failed to mention was that the patent also included that it was customizable via a software program. You could open the "case prefs" and sets your case to have stripes, polka dots, etc. I am sure it could probably be animated too.

Last time a discussion of this patent was raised, the iBook and eMac power light came up as fulfilling some what apple's described. The on-light is undetectable while the machine is off, lights up a small section of the case, and seems software controllable - it acts differently under OSX and OS9, depending on whether the machine is awake, the display is sleeping, or the entire machine is put to sleep. (it pulses in os9 when the machine's display is asleep, but not when the osx display sleeps, and pulses in a different manner when the whole machine is asleep). It looks like this when the emac is on

What it ends up being in reality is just a white LED behind the translucent casing.

Re:Prior art?

[mledford]

I believe it is something every similar to the Ambiant Orb. Only, it's not self contained and the "actions" don't come from a radio source.

I imagine that it's something more like the old Be Box, where it had two rows of LEDs on the side edges of the case to show the processor load on each of the two processors inside.

Thus, this is using a software interface to light a color of the skin of the case to show something like...new mail has arrived. Or a movie has finished rendering. Allowing you to go about your business and notice that something has finished or happened without having to physically go sit at the computer.

You would just have to glace across the room.

Re:Prior Art?

[FinestLittleSpace]

it isnt a CRT

Re:Prior Art?

[PhotoBoy]

Plus I'm sure there are some case modders out there who have red, green and blue (and UV!) lights in their case controlled by software.

Re:Prior Art?

[Pitdog7]

I think the Mood Stone guy is gonna have a little something to say about this...

Re:Prior Art?

[caitsith01]

How about this? It may not do stripes but it pretty much does everything else we seem to be talking about - computing device, unlimited range of colours, programmable by software, entire outer surface changes, can be configured to represent various data sources...

At the very least, I would say this makes Apple's 'idea' a semi-obvious one, which might defeat its patent.

Re:Prior art?

[GeckoX]

Good call, very interesting.
It is a peripheral device, but yes the point is that it is controlled by events occuring on a computing device like email arriving etc.

Any lawyers have any insight on this?

Re:Prior Art?

[maxwell demon]

The article says the case would be illuminated by R, G and B colored lights, so it could be any color of the spectrum. Very cool! Prior art? Not quite so sure.

Well, my monitor has that, too. The illuminated side is the front side, and I can even show images on it. In all RGB colors, for sure. And it's certainly controlled by software.

Re:Prior Art?

[maxwell demon]

Instead of the Blue Screen Of Death, you now get a Blue Case Of Death?

Re:Prior Art?

[mbbac]

It would be kinda cool for your windows machine to turn red when you get a virus or have the computer go blue when you get new email though.Yes, it'd be nice to be able to change the color. With your description the Windows computer would always be red.

Re:Prior Art?

[midav]

Where are my mod points when I need them.

Obviousness of the patent is striking. I was in seventh grade I made (however, not invented) my first (and last) color music device, which, arguably is more complex than this hack, which implementation can be put into Reader's Excercises Section of 'Programming Serial Ports: 101'.

Hey, I already have a cool blue light tube in my modcase, I would suggest ThinkGeek start selling green and red ones:) Free advice guys, no strings attached (no responsibility for marketability either.)

Re:Prior Art?

[mbbac]

It would be kinda cool for your windows machine to turn red when you get a virus or have the computer go blue when you get new email though.

Yes, it would be nice to be able to change the color. But, with your description, the Windows computer would always be red.

Re:Prior Art?

[hardcode57]

Or it could just turn black when you try to run SP2 on it.

Re:Prior Art?

[SatanicPuppy]

You're thinking in terms of software patents. You can have a hundred hardware patents that do similar things as long as the mechanical stuff is different.

So toyota can still make a new 4 cylinder engine and patent it, even though there are dozens of patented 4 cylinder engines.

Too bad they aren't as liberal with software.

Re:Prior Art?

[wo1verin3]

Prior art from Hackers

Re:Prior Art?

[pimpinmonk]

UV? Is that for tanning purposes? Lord knows geeks need it more than anyone else...

Re:Prior Art?

[Lars T.]

Well, "a device that makes you loads of money" is a pretty obvious idea too, the actual implementation is the kicker. And if case modders had done it, they would have boasted about it, and there would be dozens of imitations.

Re:Prior Art?

[ViolentGreen]

t would be kinda cool for your windows machine to turn red when you get a virus or have the computer go blue when you get new email though. :)

I would suggest only having three colors, a normal color, a yellow warning color and a red "there is something seriously wrong" color. With many more, it would be very confusing.

Everyone complains about the simplistic color "threat rating" put out by the department of homeland security being confusing but this is a good idea? Yes it would be cool but not really practical. I'd much rather have a message on the screen telling me whats wrong instead of having to look up a color and see what it means. It seems like a huge step backward.

Re:Prior Art?

[FireFury03]

Yes it would be cool but not really practical. I'd much rather have a message on the screen telling me whats wrong instead of having to look up a color and see what it means.

I dunno about you but I don't have my monitor turned on all the time. It'd be pretty cool if it glowed blue or something when I have new email coz then I wouldn't have to actually turn the screen on the check.

Re:Prior Art?

[PhotoBoy]

:) It's usually for water cooling, you can get water dyes that show up under a UV light. There are some graphics cards, motherboads and hard drive cables that come with bits that will show up under UV too.

It helps raise your frag count at LAN parties... because everyone always forgets to bring sunglasses.

Re:Prior Art?

[Striver]

Instead of the Blue Screen Of Death, you now get a Blue Case Of Death?

yeah...but wouldn't "blue balls" be considered prior art?

Re:Prior art?

[MachineShedFred]

Sure, there is some kind of computer in there.

There are also different patented engines in every car manufacturer's products.

They all do basically the same thing, but they are different pieces of equipment, so they get different patents in order to protect the small things that make it a better / different design.

Hardware patents != Software Patents.

Re:Prior Art?

[spiff42]

My case does that, although not truecolor. I have 10 green and 10 blue leds illuminating the front of my case, controlled by a small uController, and interfaced by the serial port. So far I have it function as an averaging HDD-led. i.e. with heavy disc activity the light will fade in, then fade out again when disk becomes idle (this is all done in the uController). I also have a small application that can "stream" data to the uController to set the brightness-level to a certain value. Using this to monitor system load, network activity or something similar is trivial. A bit more tricky to implement is my idea of a visualisation plugin for XMMS or WinAmp. I haven't done it yet, but it is definitely doable.

/Spiff

Re:Prior Art?

[hippo]

They already have this in most nuclear power stations, if the core is a deep cherry red it's time to leave the building, if it's yellow it's time to bend over and kiss your arse goodbye.

Re:Prior Art?

[arose]

It's a physical thing, a real invention.

Yes and no. Compleatly obvious to anyone skilled in the 'art', case moding beeing the art in this case.

Re:Prior Art?

[StCredZero]

Except the machine will be running Max OSX, and you'll never see the "Blue Screen of Death."

Re:Prior Art?

[stu_coates]

...and if it's being /.'ed then it'd turn a rather nasty brown colour! ;-)

Re:Prior Art?

[Anonymous Coward]

Moreover, this isn't a silly software patent. It's hardware. It's a physical thing, a real invention. It's actual lights inside the case.

Actually, this *is* a silly patent. It's simply lights being controlled by someone clicking an button and reading a pref file, and changing the colour of the lights based on the contents therein. Sure, it hasn't been done before, but why is this patent worthy? Should there be a patent for *every piece of hardware ever created*, and for *every possible action that can be performed on that hardware*? Hardly.

Remember kids, not *everything* needs to be patented. Gee whiz, that sure is nifty, but why do we have to slap 20+ years of protection (read: prohibition) on it?

Re:Prior Art?

[System.out.println()]

I wonder how programmable this is?

Personally, I hope it's accessible via Applescript, and/or via a CLI command. There are a number of things I would like to use with this with involving AS: new IM? flash yellow! someone mentioned me in IRC? flash green! Somone's accessing my webserver? blue!

I'm excited :)

Re:Prior Art?

[System.out.println()]

Do hobbyists who don't share their work still count for prior art, though? /me INAL

Re:Prior Art?

[MntlChaos]

I wouldn't say that it is "compleatly obvious." Sure I've seen LED-illuminated cases, but cases that change color? and if you have, was it before 2002 (when the patent was filed for)?

Re:Prior Art?

[PhotoBoy]

OK, here you go: ABXZone

He doesn't explain how he did it but there's various pictures and a screenshot at the end of the thread of the software integrated into MBM.

Re:Prior Art?

[tbone1]

...and if it's being /.'ed then it'd turn a rather nasty brown colour! ;-)

No, that would mean it's running Windows ME.

Re:Prior Art?

[arose]

Just because no one did it doesn't mean that is a great invention. I'd say no one though it was worth the effort.

Re:Prior Art?

[delus10n0]

Of course. Tri-color LEDs and a bit of work will get you there. And I'm sure someone can google for case mods done with tri-color LEDs before 2002.

Re:Prior Art?

[mrchaotica]

Heh, your entire case will turn into the swirling beach ball of doom!!

(yes, I know it's not quite analogous to the BSOD)

Re:Prior Art?

[dekeji]

It's a physical thing, a real invention.

It's a physical thing. But in order to be a "real invention", it would have to be novel, rather than an obvious, trivial combination of existing elements. Light sources whose color you can tune have been around for decades, and so have been cases with light sources inside them, even light sources under computer control.

Re:Prior Art?

[pimpinmonk]

Ah. Sounds cool! Thanks.

Re:Prior Art?

[Anonymous Coward]

That is COMPLETELY different than the patent. RTFA. He has software programmable external lighting. Red and Blue. Apple has patented internal Red, Green, and Blue lighting coupled with some sort translucent material that will change the color of the case.

Re:Prior Art?

[SeaFox]

The article says the case would be illuminated by R, G and B colored lights, so it could be any color of the spectrum.

Well, according to another story on the front page today:

http://slashdot.org/articles/04/08/16/1418207.shtm l?tid=196&tid=1&tid=218

The RGB model only covers 55% of the visible spectrum, they would have to use MPC to reach 95% of the spectrum.

Re:Prior Art?

[irc.goatse.cx troll]

Or doom3

Re:Prior Art?

[pod]

The patent is for building the blinky lights device, not operating it. If you want to build a case that does the same thing, talk to Apple. If you want to write some app that changes the colours based on system load, look it up in the API document.

Re:Prior Art?

[waynelorentz]

There's already a device for this. It's called an Ambient Orb. I had one on loan for about six months. It was seriously cool. it would change colors with the weather, pulse when a storm was approaching, and could change color based on the status of your e-mail. I've been meaning to buy one of my own. Thanks for reminding me.

Re:Prior Art?

[krel]

That would be the grey, multilingual panic screen of kernelhood.

Re:Prior Art?

[ODD97]

Everyone in this thread seems to be looking way too far for Prior Art.
How about The Ambient Orb?

Re:Prior art?

[Aardvark99]

As a side note, I read on a blog the some team at microsoft had that orb thing hooked into thier software build and test system.

As developers submitted source code changes an automatic system would incorperate these changes into a working build of the software. After the system was built an automatic test system would see if application still worked.

If any part of this didn't work (it may run the cycle several times a day) their Or would change color. Something like green == build/system test working, red == complier failed... It was in some public place, so the everyone would see as people broke the builds...

Re:Prior Art?

[LionMage]

Interestingly enough, I set up a TiVo Series 2 last night for the first time, and noticed something. There's a LED back-light for the TiVo logo on the front of the unit, and this back-light can be configured in software -- there's a menu item to set the level of illumination behind the TiVo logo (or turn it off altogether). So software controlled variable illumination in a piece of hardware (specifically, chassis illumination) has certainly been done before, albeit not on the scale probably implied by the Apple patent. The TiVo faceplace is translucent; presumably, an array of LEDs could be placed behind such a plastic plate to provide patterning, but I doubt this has much value for a device that is going to sit under your TV or in a stereo rack next to it. I believe the backlight for the TiVo logo is also a monochrome white LED, so that's one minor difference.

Re:Prior Art?

[teh*fink]

But in order to be a "real invention", it would have to be novel, rather than an obvious, trivial combination of existing elements.

By that token, would you call the bicycle a "real invention"? Some might consider it an obvious combination of long existing elements. Furthermore, whether or not Apple's supposed invention is "trivial" remains to be seen (the iPod sure as hell isn't "trivial").

Re:Prior Art?

[StCredZero]

Note I said "Mac OSX." I remember the freezes from the old Mac II days. But my 15" Powerbook has yet to do anything even remotely resembling a "crash."

Not Prior Art

[Oculus Habent]

A "glowing power button" does not a "housing having an illuminable portion" make. That is a status indicator. A button, a light serving a unique and specific purpose is not prior art.

Re:Not Prior Art

[ari_j]

Not to mention that Apple would really have to smoke some bad crack to claim prior art against their own patent.

Re:Not Prior Art

[ari_j]

Can you cite examples?

Re:Not Prior Art

[hype7]

Not to mention that Apple would really have to smoke some bad crack to claim prior art against their own patent.

How do you think you come up with a patent for a colour changing "chameleon" computer case?

-- james

Re:Not Prior Art

[HaloZero]

Even if it doesn't fit on the iMac, PowerBooks and iBooks for generations (theirs, not ours) have had illuminated apples on the covers. Their lumen-strength is directly proportional to the brightness of the display when the case is open. Obviously off when the computer is closed/suspended.

Re:Not Prior Art

[Fulkkari]

Isn't it funny how everytime a new patent application is filled in, Slashdoters are desperately trying to find prior art for it. Sometimes it's quite reasonable, but not always. This time the application looks quite unique. If you don't really know any prior art, don't pretend like you would.

Re:Not Prior Art

[geoffspear]

Well, the first step in the process is to read the article summary (or, more likely, part of it), then pretending that one can prove a patent is invalid without ever reading the patent itself or understanding anything about patent law except that there might be something called "prior art" involved.

Let's face it... if patent law worked like most slashdotters think it does, the USPTO would have a really easy job. They'd just reject literally every patent application, because every idea you can have is built on the foundation of other ideas. It's like claiming that Einstein didn't come up with anything new because none of his ideas would be possible without Newton's work.

Re:Picard

[llamalicious]

There ...

are

four LIGHTS!!!!!!!!!

Re:Well...

[MoonFog]

It certainly is a patent issue

The term prior art is mainly used in the patent field.

Lasers?

[DarkMavis]

So do you suppose that these internal lights will actually be lasers like the ones found in laser pointers? how else would you be able to make the lights turn into dots or stripes?

Re:Lasers?

[krog]

probably by having multiple tri-color LEDs dimmed by pulse-width modulation.

I gotta say, it will be pretty neat having the entire case give me information about CPU/memory usage.

Re:Lasers?

[Anonymous Coward]

So do you suppose that these internal lights will actually be lasers like the ones found in laser pointers?

I think they'll actually have little frick'n sharks with the frick'n lasers attached to their heads

Re:Well...

[iainl]

Nope, its a patent thing. Patents are about saying "I came up with this idea first", while copyrights are about saying "The blueprints for this particular design are mine".

Making a wind-up radio is liable to fall foul of Trevor Bayliss's patent. Sticking a Freeplay logo on the front will be breaching his copyright.

Re:Well...

[christor]

No. See here.

Interactive Illumination

[Lord Grey]

From the detailed description portion of the patent:

[0090] In some cases, the light system 14 is arranged to cooperate with the electrical components 18. For example, events associated with the electrical components 14 may be monitored, and the light system 14 may be controlled based on the monitored events. As such, an illumination effect corresponding to a specific event may be produced. For example, the housing 12 may be configured to exude a blinking red coloration when an event has been implemented.

It looks like Apple is extending the "illuminated case" theme by making it more interactive. The patent is purposely vague about what the illumination is, taking (what seems to be) pains to avoid calling the illumination static. I think they're looking at displaying color bars, logos, icons, etc. on the case from the inside. It would be cool to see an entire case shaded (for example) from blue to red to indicate processor activity. Imagine a rack full of server systems with that capability, in a dark server room....

Now, I'm not sure how a so-called "interactive illumination" is much different than LEDs you see on the mondo-cool multiprocessor boxes, but the patent does describe something a bit different than the run-of-the-mill case mod.

Re:Interactive Illumination

[Rie Beam]

Yeah, and if someone gets Goatse'd, a little fluorescent man holding his anus pops up on the case.

Re:Interactive Illumination

[N Monkey]

It looks like Apple is extending the "illuminated case" theme by making it more interactive. The patent is purposely vague about what the illumination is, taking (what seems to be) pains to avoid calling the illumination static. I think they're looking at displaying color bars, logos, icons, etc. on the case from the inside. It would be cool to see an entire case shaded (for example) from blue to red to indicate processor activity. Imagine a rack full of server systems with that capability, in a dark server room....

I wonder what will happen if it ever works out that it can behave like a chameleon and then it suddenly disappears....?

Re:Interactive Illumination

[MadRocketScientist]

I think they're looking at displaying color bars, logos, icons

Wow, I can't wait to get one of these so I can install software to display ads directly on my case!

Re:Interactive Illumination

[ttrafford]

I wonder what will happen if it ever works out that it can behave like a chameleon and then it suddenly disappears....?

Yeah, don't bother- chances are your boss won't fall for that one either.

Quite interesting

[manavendra]

A machine whose shell changes colour at the user's whim :) - that would be fun than the boring old grey box for sure!

However, I'm not sure how programmable this light device is (The light source is a collection of red, green and blue LEDs, capable of being used to generate any colour entered as an RGB value), but this bit from the article flummoxed me completely:

punters demanding too many blue and red models and too few green and yellow.

Re:Quite interesting

[mehtajr]

It's a reference to the original fruit flavored iMacs; Apple had trouble keeping the stock numbers right due to varied demand for the five colors; Blueberry sold much better than Tangerine for instance. This was a problem because Apple demanded their resellers stock equal amounts of all five colors.

This dispute led some resellers (notably Best Buy) to stop selling iMacs.

Re:Quite interesting

[hatrisc]

programmable, simple...

void changecolor(int rgb) {
int err;
int fd = open("/dev/case", O+RDWR);
if (fd >= 0) {
err = ioctl(fd, CASE_RGB_VALUE, &rgb);
}
}

Are patents stifling or restricting?

[erick99]

If people and companies viewed patents and copyrights 100 or more years ago the way we do now, we would have possibly had exactly one artist who did pointillit paintings, one who did impressionistic, one who did abstract, etc. I wonder if we really have a need to patent or copyright things that are somewhat "basic"? Well, in my mind they are basic. But, that is just one person's point of view.

Cheers,

Erick

Re:Are patents stifling or restricting?

[krog]

Good thing no one has a patent on hyperbole -- you'd be in some serious trouble with the above post.

Re:Are patents stifling or restricting?

[martingunnarsson]

I guess Apple is sick of them coming up with cool new ideas/designs, just to be ripped off by a bunch of cheap-ass PC manufacturers...
On the other hand, I'm sure several case-modders has done something similar to this before, unless I've gotten it all wrong.

Re:Are patents stifling or restricting?

[kfg]

It's "Hear, hear."

An equivilent phrasing would be "Listen, listen."

While it has come to be a cheer of assent, it is really an admonition to others to pay attention to what someone is saying.

KFG

Re:Are patents stifling or restricting?

[RAMMS EIN]

This is what patents are supposed to be used for. There's an invention, and the inventor discloses the invention to the public, in exchange getting the exclusive right to the invention for a limited time.

This invention could not be protected by other intellectual property laws, such as copyright or trademark law. A patent is the only way, and an appropriate measure. The only basis I see for questioning this patent's validity is the presence of prior art. Aren't they basically patenting a LED display here?

Re:Are patents stifling or restricting?

[BarryNorton]

I think you're confusing patents and escrow...

(Also English and gibberish!)

Re:Are patents stifling or restricting?

[BarryNorton]

Perhaps the American system is different, but in the UK there are Design Rights to protect this kind of thing. Patents, on the other hand, are for technical innovations (and there's no innovative step here, imo).

Re:What's new?

[gl4ss]

well, it seems awfully a lot like something apple has about a year ago but this patent award seems fresh(12 august 2004).

maybe it's a refinement of that earlier patent, to actually show a way how to do it(software controllable RGB leds ie. ONE PIXEL MONITOR..)

This IS news!

[UncleBiggims]

The funny thing is that this actually IS news. But only because it is Apple. I for one am dying to see what the new iMac will look like. Even people who never plan to buy an Apple product are, at the very least, interested. However, if DELL had filed this patented then no one would really care. That says something about the importance of good design in the computer industry.

Re:This IS news!

[Anonymous Coward]

If Dell had filed this patent, slashdot would be up in arms screaming about patenting obvious ideas. But it's apple, we'll let them off.

Re:This IS news!

[krog]

Dude didn't you hear? They ported NextSTEP to the Mac!!! The days of cooperative multitasking are over!

Re:This IS news!

[BasilBrush]

What OS are you using that is less toy like than UNIX?

Re:This IS news!

[nuggetman]

Last time I checked Dell is making the machines running Windows XP

mac is built on that little thing... ah crap whats it called... its really big with all those computer science nerds. eu---eu.... eunuchs?

Re:This IS news!

[caitsith01]

Perhaps it just shows how important a mindlessly biased and unquestioning fanbase is.

If Dell did it and not Apple, I would still think it was pretty nifty. But apparently you would turn up your nose and possibly publish a mini-thesis here about how coloured lights are a tacky, show off Windoze thing and no substitute for a nice white egg-shaped thing that can run OS-X.

I imagine a debate about how PC gaming lusers are the only target market for something so stupid would then ensue.

Your comment is quite depressing. Like Apple, don't deify it.

Re:This IS news!

[UncleBiggims]

I can see your point. But what I actually meant was that if DELL had filed the patent my assumption would be that the implementation of an otherwise cool idea would fall short of the mark. For example, if both DELL and Apple were tasked to design , Apple's solution would undoubtedly become trend setting while DELL's simply would not. I will leave the the reasons behind this up to you. For my money, however, it is because Apple's designs are simply the best. (I don't like all of them... I hated the clamshell iBook.) Oh, and one more thing, I don't consider pc gamers to be lusers. :)

Re:This IS news!

[CountBrass]

Nah if Dell had patented it there'd be a lot of us being treated for shock: "OMG Dell actually came up with something original- ARGH!".

But it'll never happen: Dell only innovate in making the cheapest, most crappy computers they can get some dumb schmucks to pay for.

Re:This IS news!

[caitsith01]

Ok, point taken, I guess I missed the point of your post to a certain extent. I get very frustrated when people support Apple, all other things being equal, because they are 'better'.

However, I agree, no question Dell would probably screw it up design wise. And then blame Microsoft.

Re:This IS news!

[CountBrass]

I know, I too get frustrated by the fact that other people can afford Ferraris and I can't.

Fortunately I can afford to buy something better than a WinDOH!s PC: although I was too slow to persuade my employer to buy me a PowerBook ("oh sorry, would have done, but we've already bought you a Dell. It's a really nice Dell, well it was until it went bleep,bleep,bleeep and we had to reinstall Windows again").

Re:This IS news!

[ttrafford]

Ahhh! Slashdot is being invaded by Multics users!

Re:This IS news!

[Rew190]

Dell simply doesn't do very attractive things that stand out and make people go "ooooooh!"

Apple does, or at the very least does this much more frequently than Dell does.

Apple has the cool factor and are becoming very well known for making very cool/sleek hardware, so seeing a patent like this and what Apple could do with this is interesting. Hearing about it from Dell, who aren't known for any sort of cool factor in comparison to Apple, is not nearly as exciting.

I imagine a debate about how PC gaming lusers are the only target market for something so stupid would then ensue.

Right, the only difference there being that, oh, the lights I think you're referring to don't really serve any major purpose, but because this is Apple and the patent talks about software interaction, the lighting scheme would probably be more useful or used in some more intuitive manner (posters have already talked about having it change colors for CPU usage, iTunes plug-ins, etc). Working with Apple hardware and software for long enough tells me they'll do all of that plus have more useful ideas for it than most of us could think of. That's why it's cool.

Your comment is quite depressing. Like Apple, don't deify it.

Although the parent poster wasn't deifying Apple, I see nothing wrong about being excited by a potentially interesting technology coming from a company whose trackrecord has been outstanding in recent years in terms of innovation and practicality.

Just my opinion, anyhow.

Re:This IS news!

[Ohreally_factor]

We're being blitzed by a Multics astroturfing campaign! Everyone into the trenches!

Re:This IS news!

[Gorbag]

Genera (Symbolics LispM OS) is far less toy-like than UNIX. Go read "The Unix-Haters Handbook" and see why.

Re:This IS news!

[Gorbag]

Oh yeah, you can download the Unix-Haters handbook here.

Re:This IS news!

[BasilBrush]

That's as may be (never heard of it). But the OP is using Linux and Windows. Damn fool thing to then call Unix a toy operating system.

Ghees... Nature is sloppy in patenting things...

[-Maurice66-]

(next time I will RTFA)

I did not know mother Nature is this sloppy when it comes to patents. I thought the Chameleon would have been patented already.

Hum...

[SirLestat]

I guess it now make sense to call them iLamps ! Damn it was my favorite joke.

THIS gets a patent?

[16K Ram Pack]

For goodness sakes.

Someone should put together a "patent creation website". Take 3 things, put them together randomly and submit them as a patent.

In this example... case mode, interface card, software.

The guy who invented that fussbal table connected to the net should patent that.

Re:THIS gets a patent?

[argent]

Read Richard Feynman's autobiography (Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman):

"There are so many ideas about nuclear energy that are so perfectly obvious, that I'd be here all day telling you stuff, [...] Example: nuclear reactor...under water...water goes in...steam goes out the other side...Pshshshsht -- it's a submarine. Or: nuclear reactor...air comes rushing in the front...heated up by nuclear reaction...out the back it goes...Boom! Through the air -- it's an airplane. Or: nuclear reactor...you have hydrogen go through the thing...Zoom! -- it's a rocket....There's a million ideas!" I said, as I went out the door.

Next thing he knew they'd taken out three patents in his name from that conversation.

Re:THIS gets a patent?

[dasmegabyte]

Well, yeah. Water goes in, steam comes out, it's the submarine. That's obvious.

But how do you prevent the hot steam from raising the ambient temperature of the sub and killing everybody inside?

Through innovative cooling techniques that are not immediately obvious, that take a lot of thought, testing and research.

This is why patents are for SPECIFIC implementations. If Apple had just tried to patent coloured lights on cases, they'd have had no enforceable patent there. So they patented coloured lights, a system to get the light to the outside of the case, creating patterns, and software to control all this. Anybody who thinks a green neon tube is prior art for alternating coloured tiger stripes down the side of a case has a pretty imaginative definition of "non obvious."

Re:THIS gets a patent?

[argent]

Water goes in, steam comes out, it's the submarine. That's obvious. But how do you prevent the hot steam from raising the ambient temperature of the sub and killing everybody inside? [...] This is why patents are for SPECIFIC implementations.

I think it's clear that you haven't read the book. It's really a great read, well worth the entrance fee, so even if you don't care about patent abuse I highly recommend it. Seriously: I think everyone should read Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman at least once... it's one of those books I go back to over and over again.

gah

[vena]

patents protect a specific implementation. you can't patent the idea of putting a light in a box, you patent how you do it.

Re:gah

[AJWM]

patents protect a specific implementation. you can't patent the idea

That's completely, 180 degrees, wrong. I'd mod it down as overrated if I hadn't already commented in this topic.

Copyrights cover specific "implementations" (expressions), patents do cover ideas.

Now, the Patent Office in theory requires some sort of usefulness or utility to the idea to be patented, just putting a light in a box isn't a particularly useful idea in itself, you need to explain why you're putting the light in the box.

To make it easier to carry? Patent "a portable light source". To make pretty colors on the side of a translucent box? Patent "method and apparatus for illuminated boxes". To trap enough heat to cook something? Patent the "Kenner EZ Bake Oven" (a toy from the 60s/70s, before the safety nazi's worried about kids burning themselves). In high school I used a light in a box (controlled by a dimmer switch, and an insulated box) as an incubator for bacterial cultures (my GF was into microbiology). Need to sort slides (ancient pre-digital photo technology)? Put the light in a box with a translucent panel, patent the "light box".

If you have a refinement on somebody else's light in a box, you can patent that instead, although you need to refer to the original patent (and license it if you want to produce your invention).

Again, infringing on my well known patents

[BubbaThePirate]

I've already patented the concept, and actualisation of 'housing having an illuminable portion...[which] also includes a light device disposed inside the housing.'. I call it a House with a Light Bulb(tm).

Gimme my 699$ or suffer the litigatious consequnceses.

Same old, same old

[Anonymous Coward]

Peecee world/user response:

1) Ridicule
2) Ripoff

OS X
iMac
iPod ...

Re:Same old, same old

[Chuck Bucket]

Funny, that's the first thing I thought of: how in the coming months we'll see new cheap/plastic PC cases with a glowing base. Then Apple will fire out the lawsuits against the manufactures, but eventually this will be the 'new look' just like the translucent colored plastic of the orginal iMac is reflected in my translucent blue paper shreader.

Give Apple props for putting out well designed (technically and asthetically) consumer devices. Now if they could just give me a low power g5 powerbook, while insisting that the Airport extreme chipset makers open source the drivers so we can get proper G support under Mac hardware in Linux. Until then, my G3 iBook is still tops!

CGB#$

Re:Same old, same old

[Farrside]

Yeah, and then unfortunately,
3) Profit!!

Re:Same old, same old

[Chuck Bucket]

How so? I never saw basic things like a shredder or a stapler made of the same translucent/coloured plastic before the iMac, I really think it started the 'trend' if you will, and I anticipate the new one will do the same.

PCVB*(

This isn't new.

[labratuk]

This (or a very similar Apple patent) cropped up about a year or two ago. It was discussed then. Some people freaked out, some people used it as an opportunity to give Apple a blowjob, some people didn't care. I guess nothing changes.

A script kiddie's dream?

[Gilesx]

If the lights can be controlled by software (and I'm assuming it'd work in the same principle of one of the old Lite Brite toys), It'd be intersting to see whether any viruses could exploit this feature. I can just see a row of Apple computers with goatsex glowing on the side of them....

Chameleon Computer Case

[The Subliminal Kid]

Just what I need a computer that hides from me by becoming the same colour as the desk.

Let's look at the bigger picture...

[Gilesx]

Apple have some serious problems if a glowing case is a killer feature. I heard that their desktop PC market is starting to slide, and that really the smart thing to do would be to concentrate on consumer electronics, ie. iPod, but this is *ridiculous*

No matter how good the case looks, if the machine isn't up to spec, who will buy it? This whole thing just smacks of desperation.

Re:Let's look at the bigger picture...

[lachlan76]

No-one said that a glowing case is a "killer" feature. Apple have always done good design work, and this is just another thing to make the computer look good.

Why must you assume that anything which looks good isn't up to spec?

Re:Let's look at the bigger picture...

[oberondarksoul]

Well, considering that Mac sales are up 14%, I hardly call that a 'slide', but I'll give you that one because I'm just feeling nice. In any case:

This is unlikely to be the killer feature of the new iMac - it's not as if Apple's released a massive press release about it - but is another example of how Apple value new and innovative design. Consider the previous two designs of the iMac - the first, the all-in-one CRT model, sold well because of its case. Never mind the specs inside (which weren't top of the range, admittedly, but were and still are sufficient), it sold like hot cakes because of the case.

Same with the 'new'-style flat-panel iMac - after the adverts started showing, all that people seemed to be talking about the next day was that strange, yet undeniably cool lamp-shaped device.

Apple's current range of machines is all very desirable, and I'm sure the new iMac (which WILL contain a G5 - high enough spec?) will be just as, if not more so. But even if it weren't, you could guarentee that people would buy it if it looked good.

Re:Let's look at the bigger picture...

[Have Blue]

How the hell did you get from "Apple patents illuminated case" to "Apple's marketing and engineering strategy revolves entirely around illuminated cases"? One of Apple's engineers had a good idea and they want to be able to use it in future products without having it immediately ripped off like so many other things in the past.

Also, Apple isn't going to give up on the desktop anytime soon. The iPod may beat it in growth and units sold, but computers still provide far more revenue in absolute terms.

Re:Let's look at the bigger picture...

[Blimey85]

if the machine isn't up to spec Umm... last time I checked the G5's had some pretty damn nice specs. I don't know how you can possibly think Apple is deperate considering their latest machines. I agree that they were for a long time but Apple is on the rebound these days. They have killer machines and can finally take a moment to do something flashy like this.

Re:Let's look at the bigger picture...

[njfuzzy]

Why do you assume this is a killer feature, or somehow integral to their strategy to stay alive as a company. Apple spends a lot more on R&D than any other computer company of similar size.

Along the way, someone at Apple came up with this. They patented it, because it was their original idea. The patent application was recorded and posted on Slashdot, because some reader was interested.

So explain to me again your theory about desperation?

Prior art?

[pesc]

Is it like this?

Surely there is a computer inside that controls that case!

Re:Well...

[BasilBrush]

Sticking a Freeplay logo on the front will be breaching his copyright. ITYM breach his trademark.

Old news?

[ciryon]

I can't find a url now, but I'm pretty sure Apple patented some kind of computer casing that changes lighting depending on software events. This was at least a year ago. Is this the same thing or something new?

shoot your eye out

[millahtime]

I don't know about "Lasers". You might open the case and shoot your eye out.

Re:shoot your eye out

[mikael]

I don't know about "Lasers". You might open the case and shoot your eye out.

Great! A built in anti-theft device!

Not new

[loginx]

The register should probably read slashdot more often then...
This story was posted on slashdot two years ago

Re:Not new

[TheDredd]

There is a difference between applying for a patent and being awarded a patent. (Even though it doesn't always look that way any more)

No, Apple does not have a patent

[the eric conspiracy]

Apple has a new patent for "a computing device...

LOL. Slashdot and obviously the Register don't seem to be able to determine what a patent is. THIS IS AN APPLICATION, not an actual patent.

It was filed in Feb 2004 and PUBLISHED, not GRANTED on Aug 12. 20040156192 is the application number, not the patent number. Patent numbers are serial and are in the 6 million range.

Talk about egg on face.

Wurlitzer was first

[chiph]

You mean, changeable colors on your case, like a Wurlitzer Jukebox from 1934?

Re:Wurlitzer was first

[njfuzzy]

That wasn't digital, let alone "software controlled". I don't believe it used RGB to create the color. Also, it wasn't for a computer. Should I go on?

How exactly do you think prior art works?

Re:And... And...

[krog]

You're wrong -- if MS had patented this (say, for a color-morphing keyboard), I'd be all for it. It's a cool idea that no one has brought to market yet.

Luckily, Apple acted on it first -- as usual.

IP has run amuck!

[Phoenix-IT]

Our next major economic dowfall will be Intellectual Property related. The US consumer base will become fed up with exclusives, restrictions and pay-per-exhibit models of content & products. We will see people forming newsworthy general boycotts of things. Only then will legislation begin to really take notice of consumer fancy.

Re:IP has run amuck!

[spectrokid]

There seems to be an I.P. armsrace going on with all the large corporations building up their stock. Wonder what would happen if a serious crisis puts some of these big boys on the edge of the cliff. A global patentwar where MS, Apple, IBM and Oracle start sueing the hell out of each other?

The Ambient Orb

[Peter Cooper]

I have, sort of.. It's called the Ambient Orb. There are some variations between the ideas, however.

Got one...

[Anonymous Coward]

I already have a housing with an illuminatable region which can display patterns of colours under software control, and it is not any fancy thing-geek harware either. I call it a *monitor*.

The only way this patent differs is that the housing contains the computing device. A bit like an iMac in fact.

ACHTUNG!

[StoatBringer]

ACHTUNG! Alles touristen und non-technischen peepers!

Das machine control is nicht fur gerfinger-poken und mittengrabben. Oderwise is easy schnappen der springenwerk, blowen fuse, und poppencorken mit spitzensparken.

Der machine is diggen by experten only. Is nicht fur geverken by das dummkopfen. Das rubbernecken sightseenen keepen das cotten picken hands in das pockets, so relaxen und watchen das blinkenlights.

Apple Protecting An Advantage

[tabdelgawad]

Apple is a design leader, and there's a portion of the PC hardware industry that watches Apple designs and makes knock-offs on the PC side.

The question with patents is always: if this patent were not granted, would companies still have the incentive to innovate in this area with the same intensity? To the extent that this patent is original and non-obvious, I think the answer here is that the patent is justified. Apple has proven that they can innovate in this area, and they should be rewarded for this.

Re:Apple Protecting An Advantage

[AtariDatacenter]

"Because we all know that, without at least 20 years of protection, Apple would be sunk." Seriously, each time, they're patenting a fad. I think that's probably good for a five year period, but after that, its just overkill. It is like patenting parachute pants. And by the time the patent is granted, so is the interest in the fad that was patented.

Re:Apple Protecting An Advantage

[dekeji]

Apple is a design leader, and there's a portion of the PC hardware industry that watches Apple designs and makes knock-offs on the PC side.

Yes, and Apple watches the trends in the PC industry and knocks off their designs. Because they are smaller and more focused than the PC industry, Apple can take an emerging trend, patent it, and then sell gadgets around it.

The question with patents is always: if this patent were not granted, would companies still have the incentive to innovate in this area with the same intensity?

"Innovation" in the area of case modding? Oh, please. Sticking any kind of blinking, computer controled, colorful light inside a case is something teenagers have done for years. In this case, it happens to be a light whose color can be changed. Big deal, you can get those off the shelf.

Look around the web a little for case mods and you'll see that Apple's designs are hardly the most innovative out there, nor even the best.

Ah, the usual fallacies, eh

[Moraelin]

Guess one can never get enough of "waah! but what if someone had patented sex!" kind of fallacies on /. Was starting to get withdrawal syndromes after through a whole weekend without reading one ;)

But OK, let's play that game. Let's talk about paintings:

1. They'd more likely have to patent a device or method to make those paintings. So someone might have got a patent on something new like flinging colours at the canvas, but then someone else might just as well get the same result (or close enough) by using the old methods (using a brush). For which plenty of prior art existed.

(Just as this patent doesn't prevent you from having a lit case by other means than what Apple patented. You can still have your old cathodes or LED fans.)

2. For that matter, it might have stimulated someone to try more new stuff. So we might have 3-4 times more styles in the same period. Which is the whole purpose of patents: to stimulate researching _and_ publishing your research.

(And you could say the same about the situation at hand. We've had _years_ of noone even trying something more original than yet another LED fan or cathode behind acrylic window. By now every kiddie has one of those. So if it takes patents to get out of that loop and have a more original case, seems to me like a benefit of patents.)

3. Patents are not for ever. Copyrights amd trademarks do get extended. Patents expire no matter what.

I.e., if you talk about a 100 years interval, you may notice how the 20 years covered by a patent is only a fifth of it. I.e., combined with the previous point, we'd probably have a helluva lot more art choices after 100 years.

4. Patents encourage publishing your results, as opposed to keeping everything super-secret. Art is a bad example there. But there are a ton of technological processes that one could have kept secret. Or which _are_ being kept secret. Patents encourage companies to share this information with the rest of the world instead.

5. Patents get licensed all the time. I'm sure that if someone absolutely needed to do something impressionistic before the patent expired, they could have negotiated a license.

(And in this case, if IBM or MS absolutely needed to do their own lit cases, I'm sure they can persuade Apple.)

Re:Ah, the usual fallacies, eh

[misterpies]

"1. They'd more likely have to patent a device or method to make those paintings. So someone might have got a patent on something new like flinging colours at the canvas, but then someone else might just as well get the same result (or close enough) by using the old methods (using a brush). For which plenty of prior art existed."

But inventing a method to make paintings is exactly what the pointillistes did. They researched how the brain interpreted colours, working out how large to make spots of primary and how close to put them together for the viewer to see them as one dot of colour. Another earlier method for making pictures was perspective. Lucky Brunelleschi didn't patent that. ("A method for giving 2-dimensional figures the appearance of depth by mapping parallel lines extending into the distance onto the plane such that they meet at a single point....")

Re:Ah, the usual fallacies, eh

[destine]

Hmmmm. OK, well I agree with you on some of your poins, but I have to say, your first point is kind of off. Someone very well could have patented, in this totally fake and unneeded scenario, a method for pointallism. That's the problem with patents on unique methods. If the first person to do it, could have patented it then the others might not have not have been able to use it. The problem is innovations are being patnented here that are just not that original, unique, or unobvious. Even if it stimulated more people to try new stuff because of outrageous licensing agreements then it may have stifled more then it helped, but really that's umprovable conjecture.

But let's say someone did in fact patent a method for creating a work of art using a method that makes for less realistic more fluid pictures that exist to say make the viewer think more about the painting and what each piece of that painting means. 20 years is a pretty long time really when you are living it. Heck half the people here aren't 20 years old. ^_^

As for the fifth point, most artists and especially the impressionists of that particular time were very poor. Very very poor. They were the original starving artists. Some artists just didn't have a talent or a need to express themselves with realism but rather preferred a more fluid and interesting painting.

Art is generally though, a bad medium to discuss patents. Patents are for science and they have their uses. And the amount that the patent system has given to science is phenomenal. But this is just not that original in my opinion. My car stereo does the same thing. The ambient orb does the same thing. It's not a new concept and sticking peanut butter between two chocolate cookies shouldn't be a patentable item. Now if they have a unique way of creating light, that might be more patentable, but just putting a user variable light inside of a box and calling it science is just not a great idea or a decent way to spend my tax dollars.

Re:Ah, the usual fallacies, eh

[Herbmaster]

4. Patents encourage publishing your results, as opposed to keeping everything super-secret. Art is a bad example there. But there are a ton of technological processes that one could have kept secret. Or which _are_ being kept secret. Patents encourage companies to share this information with the rest of the world instead.

5. Patents get licensed all the time. I'm sure that if someone absolutely needed to do something impressionistic before the patent expired, they could have negotiated a license.

Encourage, sure, for whatever that's worth. One of the features of a patent (as opposed to a copyright) is that if you can make money selling your patented product, you can do so, but if you can make more money NOT selling your product but holding on to its patent (maybe you developed it, more likely you're in a competing business and you acquired it), you're free to do that, too. So effectively you can patent something out of existence for the period the patent is valid, because no one can sell a product which uses your patent.
Copyrights, by definition, apply to "expressions" as opposed to ideas, i.e. published works. If you choose not to publish something (well, to put it in writing), you don't have a copyright to it, and anyone else can use your idea to make their own published work (they can't steal what you never made available to steal). And if you choose to publish it, at the very least, it's subject to the rules of fair use. Fair use has taken a lot of abuse recently, but it's still a real thing. E.g. you can't stop people from talking about your work just because you have a copyright on it.

Re:Ghees... Nature is sloppy in patenting things..

[erhnamdjim]

Unfotunately, if you hooked up the chameleon to change colour accoring to computer status, the only colour it would turn is black...Mind you, there would also be some really neat audio feedback as well

What

[Azureflare]

Why do you think patents only exist for "killer features?"

Come on man, companies patent everything, and I mean, EVERYTHING, to protect themselves, so that if someone decides to rip off their cool method for software customization of lighting in a case, they have some way to bring them to court, or at least get some payback.

I don't know if it's really a good thing, but that's just standard practice among companies these days.

Too many techs here, not enough dreamers...

[Anonymous Coward]

Nobody sees where this is going, do you?

I sawed it!

[WormholeFiend]

Your chameleon case?

Re:MOD ABUSE!

[Gigahertz]

there should be a 'Wrong' modifier for when its an obviously incorrect message...

Re:Prior Art? Um, ambient orb, anyone?

[newrisedesigns]

Ambient Orb. Your Mac would likely turn red when the stock market dives or when the National Weather Service has a warning in your area.

Programmable? It'd better be. I know that I'd likely pull apart a new Mac to figure out how to change the lights as I see fit.

There will probably be a Dashboard widget to control the lights or set a source like (NYSE or NWS) to change the lights according to those trends.

Isn't this a monitor?

[tod_miller]

"The light source is a collection of red, green and blue LEDs, capable of being used to generate any colour entered as an RGB value."
"Illuminated portion"

So if you consider the monitor to be part of the case, or indeed, the computer (or an embedded display).... well taking it in a wider context. If the case can be set to change colour evenly, from a simple progam running in the OS, this is quite cool.

The computer could even auto configure a taseful colour to match your curtains (or whatever you point your webcam at...)

Apple are pushing things that others don't see as important, and this will give them an edge.

My girlfriend said out of the blue "When we buy a new PC, should we get an Apple?" (We had jsut passed an old (closed down) computer shop, that had a large Apple logo on the side...

girlfriend ( P ) Pronunciation Key (gûrlfrnd)
n.
1. A favored female companion or sweetheart.
2. A female friend.

5 Colors At Once??

[Anonymous Coward]

gives us the exciting prospect of an iMac that is all five fruit flavors at once

You mean White?

Irony: Previous RGB light patent

[shoppa]

In the late 90's a company named "Color Kinetics" was granted a patent on making arbitrary colors by mixing R, G, and B sources. Since then they've gone around driving other companies out of the business.

What ever happened to "too obvious"?

[erroneus]

Isn't one of the disqualifiers for a patent being awarded when an idea is too obvious?

I think patents should REALLY be re-examined for some of this. (I am sure people agree on that point) The invention of the wheel is a great and patentable idea. I don't think it's great and patentable to put a wheel on anything to make it mobile!

Making a scheme of colored lights to create an effect or mood is patentable. But putting lights on a case should not be. It's just taking existing stuff and using it. It's not a new technology. It's the application of existing technology. I don't think that should be patentable.

Yes, I realize what I am saying qould probably disqualigy about 80% of all the most recent patents. Damnit! It should! Software patents most of all should be disqualified for that reason. There just aren't all that many pentable software ideas out there.

Of COURSE these are just my opinions and I wish I could be a patent decision-making guy. But just like other things (like the katie.com thing) voicing opinions on Slashdot can make a difference. People *ARE* reading.

Re:What ever happened to "too obvious"?

[Anonymous Coward]

The *idea* of putting colored lights in a case may in fact be obvious; but, as has been stated before in this very thread, ideas are not patentable, implementations are. Apple most likely has a cool idea for a specific implementation of the lighted case idea -- probably one that completely spanks the case mod kiddies in terms of style and elegance -- and *that* is what they are patenting. Take a look at the details of their patent, then see if you can say that the implementation is obvious, or cite prior art.

Re:MOD ABUSE!

[SatanicPuppy]

Agreed. Redundant and overrated are pretty much used that way though.

Glowing keyboard for Mac desktops?

[Anonymous Writer]

I wonder if this means that Apple will implement the same glowing keys feature that is present in the 15" and 17" Powerbooks on their desktop models. That's a great feature for allowing the use of a computer in the dark. In this case, the whole computer can light up when the lights go down. Great for getting that "computer tan".

Useful? Yup.

[Anonymous Coward]

Patent issues aside, I like the sound of this feature. Xserves are already pretty nice for 'admin by eye', but this sort of design takes that to a new level.

I've got new mail. How do I know? The Mac's pulsating yellow. Device 3 on that RAID's getting sick - it's turned a nasty shade of puce. We need to tweak our load-balancing: that server's green, but that one's red.

Shit. They've all gone red. Start blocking links from slashdot.

Re:Well...

[iainl]

"ITYM breach his trademark"

D'oh! You're right, of course. Breaching his copyright would be using an identical form factor without the logo.

On board camera could make it invisible

[Wonderkid]

By using a built in camera to scan its vicinity and match the skin's casing to its environment the computer (or anything else for that matter) could be made to vanish. If a thief breaks in, he or she would find it a lot harder to find!

Apple thinks out of the box again! ;-)

[Lispy]

nt

Re:Prior Art? Use My Game Box!

[Sfing_ter]

I has lights inside, and internal veiwables, fans and other 'blinky' stuff! USPTO here I come3!

Conspiracy!

[Have Blue]

• Apple gets sick of computer world copying things they come up with.
• Apple announces intent to use case lighting in the future.
• Everyone else starts building hideously ugly lighted cases (seriously, it does NOT make your computer cool, and when Dell tries it it will look even worse).
• Apple releases computers that look halfway normal and laughs all the way to the bank.
• There's no step... uh... 5!

your CAR as prior art

[CrudPuppy]

last time I checked, my VW GTi is a computing device and has tons of internal LEDs illuminating portions of it's shell (red and blue LED dashboard, green turn signals)

I guess VW just trumped the patent with prior art, and probably 3-4 other car makers

Re:your CAR as prior art

[cinderful]

That's quite a stretch of the imagination . . .
but a car is not a computing device - it's primary function is driving

Regardless, the description beyond that isn't even remotely close.
Headlamps and illuminated dashboards != LED-lit computer housing

Re:your CAR as prior art

[CrudPuppy]

I thoroughly challenge your knowledge of a car's computing system. my car has more computing power than most computers 5 years ago.

yeah, the PRIMARY function of my car is transportation, but that doesnt make it any less of a computer.

Re:your CAR as prior art

[ACPosterChild]

And it doesn't make it any more of a device that's able to change its external color and patterns at a whim, either. You're just being facetious.

Re:You people are forgetting Slashdot Rule #1

[emorphien]

I've not forgotten.

Color means information

[phildog]

One very cool application for changeable housing colors would be to convey information, like the Ambient Orb does. (Available at Thinkgeek for a probably exorbitant markup :-)

I could see a sysadmin type writing a tiny bit of code make their case glow red when getting slashdotted, predicting the weather like the Ambient beacon (link above), etc. I think Ambient is a very cool company and I'd like to see their design principles ripple outward into other companies' products.

Mathmos aduki, anyone?

[serviscope_minor]

Doesn't the Aduki lamp do just this.

First link from google.

Re:Mathmos aduki, anyone?

[njfuzzy]

That's a lamp. The patent being discussed is for computers.

Clearly, given the amount of information available about (and to) a computer is going to be orders of magnitudes greater. Also, a computer is an integral part of a workplace. So, I would say that on the informational and aesthetic ends, this patens is very different because it is for a PC, not a lamp.

The really interesting thing is...

[TheHonestTruth]

The really interesting thing is that patent applications by default publish at 18 months. This one published after 7 months. I think Apple had to request early publication, which makes me wonder why they would. Typically you'd love to never have you application publish until it is granted and then get money from people already practicing your invention. In this case, early publication has put competitors on notice, which is typically not a good thing. Weird.

And as mentioned, this is a published application not an issued patent. I love that the Reg uses "finally" in describing the "granting" of the patent. A typical prosecution time is a couple years, not a couple months. Having a patent granted in 7 months would kick ass. But again, this is just an application.

And for those crying "prior art!" note that the application claims priority back to 2001. I dunno what case modders were doing three years ago, or if the glowing orb thing on thinkgeek was around, but it makes your prior art case harder (though still not that weak of course).

-truth

PS if everything is so obvious, why haven't you patented it? People here are like Nostradamus fans: everything is obvious (predictions are accurate) after the fact.

Re:The really interesting thing is...

[Ost99]

PS if everything is so obvious, why haven't you patented it? People here are like Nostradamus fans: everything is obvious (predictions are accurate) after the fact.

Because getting obvious ideas patented costs lots of money, and is not worth anything if you can't spend even more defending it in court.
How well do you think Joe Casemodder would do in court defending a "put lights inside my cool boxen" patent if Apple or Dell decided they didn't want to pay for his "patented technology"?

- Ost

Re:The really interesting thing is...

[TheHonestTruth]

patenting costs money

Filing a patent application will cost you under $400 if you are a small entity (e.g., a single inventor). And no, you do not need an attorney. I bet most slashdotters could scrap that up in under three months.

there are so many obvious things that nobody could possibly list them

My point is that to slashdotters, myself included until I started working as a patent agent, everything is obvious. But it's not. Not at the standard of the PTO, not at the standard set by the courts. Many patents, including software patents, are actually fairly narrow, and not as obvious, nor as broad as people here claim. Plus people here don't know the prosecution history of the application. The inventors may have given up claims to certain aspects of the invention during the back and forth of the process.

the people you're berating consider patenting the obvious to be immoral

I disagree. I think people think that suing using a patent that is "obvious" is immoral, or suing the litle guy. I bet if Red Hat patented something obvious for "defensive purposes," yes, there would be a mumor of discontent, and an eyebrow raised, but not nearly the outcry as Amazon getting one click (and no, I am no justifying the granting of that patent). Amazon is not a proven "good guy" so their obvious patents are not deemed ok yet by the slashdot crowd. Yes, there are those that consider all patents immoral. But most people here only bitch when it's a bad guy getting the patent. But guess what? No one is going to sue the little guy. Little guys have no money. Tangent to copyright: Who is SCO suing? Joe Bob developer? No, IBM. Chrysler. Auto-Zone. Name a patent infringment suit where the Assignee was a big corporation and they sued a single developer. Th small developer isn't worth the lawsuit. Only someone like Microsoft has the real money to burn on litigating developers because it fits their strategy. Most companies bet the farm when they bring a patent suit because they are long and expensive.

While I'm ranting, it drives me crazy when people here say "Company X was doing this exact thing four years ago! Prior art!" when in fact it is not the exact same thing and may have been considered anyway during prosecution but the examiner thought that it wasn't. The fact is, everyone does things different and you carve out your little piece of the pie. But people on slashdot just see the pie, claim a pie in its entirety is an obvious invention, and have a fit.

-truth

Re:The really interesting thing is...

[TheHonestTruth]

How well do you think Joe Casemodder would do in court defending a "put lights inside my cool boxen" patent if Apple or Dell decided they didn't want to pay for his "patented technology"

Well since all lawyers are scumbags, and if Joe Casemodder really had a case, I'm sure noooo one would take the case pro bono for a piece of the settlement, huh? Fact is, Joe Casemodder probably doesn't have a case (nyuk, nyuk). Truth is, Apple or Dell would probably pay Joe Casemodder his licensing fee unless it was something unreasonable. Quick scenario:

Joe Casemodder sends Apple a letter saying "You are infringing on my invention. Please send me a nickel for every machine you ship." Based on Apples Q2 results (first I could find) that comes to 749,000 macs for a total of ~$37,500 for the quarter. Typical patent litigation cost... let's say $200,000k for searching, attempts at invalidity, and discovery alone (typical litigation all the way through can approach 1 million). They can license his tech for a year for 3/4 of what the early phases of a litigation costs. Plus avoid all the bad publicity ("Big bad Apple won't pay litt Joe Casemodder his due"). Companies will always license if they can. It is a lot cheaper in the long run.

-truth

Re:The really interesting thing is...

[Ost99]

Joe Casemodder sends Apple a letter saying "You are infringing on my invention. Please send me a nickel for every machine you ship

Do you think Apple will lisence the pattent away for a nickle a PC to Dell?

No? Then why should Joe Casemodder?

And my first point still stands, obvious patents costs so much to get approved for any normal person can't afford it. It's a game played by corporations to screw us over.

- Ost

Re:The really interesting thing is...

[TheHonestTruth]

And my first point still stands, obvious patents costs so much to get approved for any normal person can't afford it. It's a game played by corporations to screw us over.

Putting your statement about nickels aside, a couple things:

1) anyone can file a patent application. You do not need a lawyer, so legal fees are not necessary, and they are the primary factor in cost.

2) I just don't believe your statement in light of 1). If we are going to have a discussion about it, I would be glad to start quoting filing fees or point you to the PTO website.

It's really not as expensive as you think. MAX for filing an application, and that includes using the lawyer to do it, is $15,000. Many patent boutiques, to undercut the big firms, will do it for $5,000. Please provide numbers rather than making sweeping generalizations because as it stands, your argument is weak without facts. Even assuming a large entity filing, it's only $770 to file the application. That's less than my half of one month's rent.

Back to the nickels, actually, yeah, I would be surprised if Apple only charged Dell a nickel. According to Dell's Q2 results, they own 18% of the computer market. If Apple owns 3%, and they shipped 711,000 (according to a different source I found), that means Dell shipped, guesstimating, 4.26 Million PCs. At a nickel a pop, that's about $213,000 for one quarter. Likely not enough to counterbalance not having an exlcusive discriminating feature. But what you're not looking at is that Dell is a competitor and Joe Casemodder is not. They can license Joe's tech, without harming themselves, for likely a lot cheaper than what they would charge Dell. And that's why they would license from Joe before they did Dell, and for a lot less.

-truth

My morning Flamebait...

[teamhasnoi]

Now if only /. would license this technology for their IT, Apache, Games and YRO sections...

;)

Umm...

[MachineShedFred]

Yeah, because the iMac has always had the best hardware available in it.

Did I mention that many of the statistical people that monitor such things have said it (the iMac) is the best selling computer of all time? Perhaps style matters more than how many billion times per second it can process a NOP while you are reading Slashdot.

Mini Blinkenlights

[POPE Mad Mitch]

Time for me to buy a semi-translucent case and fit my Mini-Blinkenlights project inside. Last Xmas i started a project to build a scalable, miniature version of the CCC blinkenlights project that i could put in the window of my house. I got one 8x8 tile completed, and had it displaying scrolly messages and the like. Each panel uses a few quids worth of components (a PIC plus a few transistors) plus 64 LEDs of your choice, and hooks upto the PC via the serial port.

It should be pretty easy to change it to do full colour for each pixel, if it wasnt for the expense of the LEDs to do that.

A small movie shows a sample scrolling message displaying on it http://sucs.org/~arthur/blinken.mqv

Practical Uses?

[buckhead_buddy]

The idea of a mood ring isn't too far off from the actual implementation. Heat sensitive liquid crystals would react to your body heat and change color (and sometimes pattern in some rings). They'd say various colors equated to different moods e.g. green = normal body temp = calm, yellow = hot = stressed, red = very hot = horny.

There are many ways color could be put to use.

In a computer lab situation, all students are taking a quiz. The color reflects the student's "questions per second" rate of progress through the quiz. Blue = Quick Pace, Green = Average Pace, Red = Slow Pace. (or any sort of gradients between these). Blue might be indicative of a really sharp student or one who's cheating. Red might indicate a dumb student or one held up by technical problem.

Again in a school lab, but where the students are given free research time to roam the web. The case may show green for sites on an approved "white list", some form of amber on an off-site list based on a computed content rating, a red color for black listed sites or ones with highly offensive content rating.

A boot up progress bar? As the machine starts up the colors fill the neutral body color from grey to blue from bottom to top and the whole case seems like it's being filled with water as it indicates where it is in the boot process. (Aqua?)

A mode (initiated from the server) that would turn all the machines cases to indicate 802.11 signal strength for a period of 10 seconds. Allowing you to adjust the base station's antenna or position to give good signal strength to everyone in the room.

An accessibility feature for deaf users (or an option for computers in mute) to strobe to the would-be sound strength being generated by the computer with color indicative of volume. While you won't be able to make out the content of what's being said, you could distinguish between a system beep when played over the sound of your game of risk. All without interfering with the real screen's content area.

Any other thoughts?

Re:Practical Uses?

[Animaether]

Hmm...

I dunno.. make a scrolling Viagra banner ?

Seriously - how long before this might get 'hacked' by third parties for offensive or advertising purposes ? :)

At the same time.. scrolling banner - I'm thinking 'stock ticker', or 'google news headlines'.
Not sure about the resolution of it all though :)

Re:Practical Uses?

[mrchaotica]

That "Ambient Orb" thing people elsewhere in the thread are talking about is a stock ticker -- it watches one stock, and glows red when it goes down, and green when it goes up (I think you can make it do other stuff too, though)

Re:Practical Uses?

[mrchaotica]

about some of your ideas: the test question rate and web browsing ones have some privacy implications, and the boot up progress bar wouldn't work, because the controlling software wouldn't have loaded yet (similar to how the software brightness and volume buttons don't work until the OS loads)

My idea for this is to have it be a generalized system monitor; i.e. monitor everything (cpu load, network usage, number of programs, number of iChat buddies online, unread mail, etc) in different areas of the case. They could all blend in together, and look sort of like light reflecting off of water (or rather, an oil slick since it would be colorful)

Re:Practical Uses?

[Animaether]

Yeah.. not quite the same as a ticker, though :)

And boy are those things expensive :/

Re:Practical Uses?

[mrchaotica]

I agree, especially considering I remember seeing an article a while back (maybe not here) about how to make one yourself for much less money.

Threat level laptop

[Anonymous Coward]

Now everyone can have a laptop that outwardly reflects the level of threat from terrorists - possibly deterring future attacks!

Colors going out of control...

[netglen]

What a great target for the evil virus/worms writers. Maybe this will get some people to start writing some stuff to target the software controls for the 'case color'. Make the case strobe in weird colors or randomly change the colors at random times.

What's with the 11-digit (!) patent number?

[antispam_ben]

The number given 20040156192, and I KNOW the number of patents granted is increasing greatly, BUT ... My name is on US Patent 5,982,862 issued 1999, and I'd be VERY surprised if 20,034,173,330 (over twenty BILLION (US billion, 10^9) patents have been issued since then.

I think I see, it's parsed as the year 2004, then the number issued in that year, 0156192. Thus the USPTO has issued a little more than 156,000 patents so far this year. Using this numbering, there can only be 10 million patents issued per year.

But I digress. Back to commenting on the original story:

With patents like this being issued, this patent numbering system can't last much longer than a decade, if that.

Re:What's with the 11-digit (!) patent number?

[servoled]

It is not a patent! This is a published patent application which use the format YYYY#######. Thus this is the 156,192th patent application to be published in the year 2004. Granted patent numbers are (mostly) sequential and they are somewhere around 6,750,000 right now.

The register didn't bother to do any research before green lighting this story.

Re:You people are forgetting Slashdot Rule #1

[Rew190]

Slashdot Rule #2:

Never step back and use common sense.

Microsoft is a company that uses its monopoly to bully around competition and stifle competition. They've given us buggy software, a shitty OS, and bloatware.

Apple is a bit of an underdog that has brought us OS X, the iPod, the iTMS, etc.

Although Apple has done some things in the past that are pretty ruthless, they still don't compare to the shit that MS has done, and will do again.

So yes, in comparison to the Goliath that is MS, Apple is a good company that produces innovative and sleek products. If Apple's recent trackrecord is any indication, announcements like this GENERALLY mean that there's something cool on the way, not "well, this patent is going to be used to fuck the user or competition."

Patents aren't for ideas

[porkchop_d_clown]

they're for implementations.

Bell didn't get a patent for the idea of a telephone - people had been trying to make telephones for decades. He got the patent for a working implementation of a telephone.

This is what makes all those "Hey, I saw that idea 20 years ago in a Bond movie" posts so laughable. Da Vinci drew sketches of aircraft hundreds of years ago. That didn't stop the Wright brothers from patenting their designs.

Design patents

[Perianwyr Stormcrow]

This looks to me like it's going to be a design patent when it's approved (you can tell these at a glance by the prefix D on the number,) which is a very specific sort of patent and very different from what you may normally think of in terms of patents.

A design patent protects a particular aesthetic or functional design, not any process or underlying technology.

So, it's quite reasonable that Apple would get a design patent, I'm sure they have a great many of them already. Design patents are also not particularly strong- all you have to do to get around it is make a significant alteration and you're generally all right.

Re:Well...

[Qzukk]

Actually, there is a patent class for the design of a device, this is used to patent faucet designs, doorknobs, vases, etc.

The blueprint for something may be copyrighted, but that just means I can't run off a copy of the blueprint without infringing. However, I can (or at least used to, it seems every year copyrights become stronger and stronger and cover things they were never intended to) fire up autocad and design something that looks like it without having to worry about copyright.

Apple vs Alien

[pdamoc]

Alienware has some of this crazy lighting into the cooling system.

Re:Really handy in racks too ... NOT

[System.out.println()]

If you're rackmounting an iMac (which is almost certainly where this device will be used) then you have bigger issues than the extra $2 the light will cost.

Thirty year old prior art.

[AJWM]

Think mainframes, with their massive arrays of blinkenlights.

In particular, the Burroughs B6700 (and similar models, although the B6700 I have hands-on experience with) had a large rectangular array of lights on one panel of the case, (12x16 I think, for the top two double words (48 bit words) of its stack) that by default displayed the Burroughs "B" logo during idle time but could also be (and was) configured to display different patterns, text, and animation (although it took some creative hacking).

Hackers will love this.

[Rai]

Whenever the feds bust in, the computer can blend in with the background and hide itself.

Re:IP on case mod

[njfuzzy]

It isn't a "mod" if the case COMES THAT WAY.

depends on 'resolution'..

[Skibbering]

If this simply involves project a few colours onto parts of the case, it might have short-term appeal.

But if it could project an image onto the case, it would be much more interesting! It could even project the screen contents onto the back of the case (Note to self: careful where you view that monkey porn!)

Either way.. it could potentially be useful. If you were a lab admin with a lot of Macs, you could have each set up to glow red when infected with a virus, blue if the network connection goes down etc.

Where Can I get one?

[rspress]

If Apple released a G5 iMac that had this feature and an upgradable video card and one PCI slot I would buy it in a heartbeat.

While Apples all in ones have made them a bundle of cash they need to look forward and offer at least some upgrade potential to the machines. At least an upgrade to the video card and one PCI slot for expansion. Even with the cool color changing feature I would not buy another Mac that could not have the video card updated and at least one PCI slot.

Re:

[the web]

ACK! Where did my computer go!?

the above post is a troll...

[oscast]

the above post is a troll...

there were never any yellow or pink iMacs. if he worked at the Apple store like he claims to have done... then he would have known this.

Re:the above post is a troll...

[CordMeyer]

There were pink iMacs

looks like Ford beats them to it

[ikea5]

Info on the 2005 Mustang from FordMedia:

"The color-configurable cluster uses six light-emitting diode (LED) lights that are selectable in order from green, blue, purple, white, orange and red. The technology allows customers to blend the primary colors to create more personalized backgrounds."

"The LEDs are filtered through innovative "light-pipe" fittings on the sides of the speedometer, tachometer and vehicle operation indicator panel to create the numerous color options."

Slightly flawed analogy

[lxt]

By that logic, patents on LCD screens would be invalid because of the same 'prior art' - they too are RGB illumination devices / surfaces and can be controlled by software.

Cobalt Qube

[Ungrounded Lightning]

The Cobalt Qube had a panel that was illuminated by green/(red?)/off LEDs at both ends. Their changing state tracked the IPL and the bar was solid green when the system was up and running.

powerbook keyboards

[xcjohn]

um, i may be mistaken, but this description sounds awfully similar to the backlit keyboards on the newest line of powerbooks.

Re:Dear flamebait moderator fucktard

[ObiWanKenblowme]

So "mindless and unquestioning" is not flaming, but "fucktard apple fanboy" is? I guess it's a fine line...

Seriously, fuck you.
Kudos. I was on the fence before, but that part really swayed me to your side of the argument.

Re:I'm probably late to the show with this one but

[AbRASiON]

Flamebait?

It's a joke you pompous cocktards - AND a futurama reference..... HELLO?
Some of the mods here re-define clueless.

Great, and when this comes to Windoze boxes

[multiplexo]

it will just be one more thing for script kiddies to 0wn on them.

"The Arglebargle virus takes control of the case lighting control software and locks the system into cycling between the colors 'Pepto-Bismol pink', 'institutional pea-green' and '1985 IBM PC/AT beige/grey'." - From a future CERT advisory.

Patents like this should have a 3 or 5 yaer limit.

[mewphobia]

This is a pretty trivial thing. Sure, Apple wants to make their computers stand out, and they were a bit inventive when thinking of this. But it could be a useful tool for heaps of computers. Why not just limit the patent to 5 years, so Apple can say "we had it first" and everyone can use it after it's been embedded in the market as an apple feature?

Re:Ambient Orb (maybe)

[Bastian]

Methinks the Ambient Orb might have a chance at being prior art. It contains electronics and the case (a frosted glass globe) changes color using LEDs inside.

Whether or not the electronics count as a "computing device" remains to be seen, but if the Ambient Orb people have a patent than Apple might be infringing on it.

Hear! hear!

[whatthef*ck]

And dreck like this gets modded as 'funny'.

How I would use this

[Saint Fnordius]

If I read this right, then this may be the way that I can being back the rainbow colors to my Mac's apple logo!

The other use is that I could change the color to match the graphite, cheap silver paint or beige of the Intel/AMD machines for a little stealth work and sneak my Mac past the IT trolls.

Whee, time for some Hollywood-style computing, baby!

Re:What are you thinking apple?

[blanks]

How did this get marked as flamebait? Its a fact that this is how Apple has worked in the past. No compatition for manufactures of hardware, no compatition for mac machines, the itunes, fairplay, and now case mods.

Re:ad Smells Like a Mac

[flyneye]

see what happens when you give MACcies mod points: scientologistlike censorship of the views of outsiders.
Mac is a bad cult and you should kidnap any relatives you have with one.destroy the machine and send your loved one out for months of deprogramming.
just read the above post modded down to troll instead of up to insightful.

Prior Art? YES! My screen is prior art!

[hadaso]

> why do we have to slap 20+ years
> of protection (read: prohibition) on it?

Don't forget: publicly funded protection.

Actually I do have a gadget with lights controled by software. It's called a "screen". If you don't think about these as lights, then think about those really big ones in the streets. Probably someone already did this lighting control already in the sixties, or perhaps in the fifties.

Come to think about it, the same thing is done with office buildings: software conrols the light in offices at night-time, creating text and pictures of light usinf office windows. Another one I know of was an arra of lights that people could light up by sending SMS to a certain number (each SMS lighting one lamp and also contributing to charity, until the whole picture is lit).

Re:You people are forgetting Slashdot Rule #1

[callipygian-showsyst]

I think NeXT brought you MacOS X!

And Pixo did the iPod.

Re:Don't worry...

[HuguesT]

One (compound) word: meta-moderate.

I found that if I send a comment, have it moderated up and I meta-moderate, presto, instand mod points.

Re:You people are forgetting Slashdot Rule #1

[Rew190]

Good points. To my knowledge (could be way off), NeXT was Jobs' project that him and a bunch of ex-Apple guys worked on, and didn't pixo just do the software on the iPod, not the design/etc?