Slashdot Mirror
Apple Patents Tablet Mac (with Photos)
jkheit writes "I wrote a quick news item over at the Mac Observer that might be of interest. Apple patents a tablet Mac. The new photos confirm that this device is a touch-screen Apple tablet. You can see it here."
They are very simple illustrations, not photos.
Would a Mac tablet ever see the light of day? This is not intended as a
troll/flame, but how big is the market for a niche product from a niche
computer manufacturer?
A mirror of the photos^H^H^H^H^H^Hillustrations is here.
"I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey
My iBook isn't going to happy when she sees that come home with me. :(
Boobies never hurt anyone. - Sherry Glaser.
It looks, should they make it, to be smaller and lighter than a "current" tablet PC. Kinda like an oversized PDA. Like a Newton and a Powerbook got freeky in the back room...
Its so pure, I think I'm going to cry...
Seriously though, I am hoping to see something like this in the near future. Hopefully it will be 'announced' in the next Macworld Boston. Inkwell is such a nice pice of software, it would be great to see it being used in a tablet.
3 degrees of separation from Vladimir Putin
It's actually a revolutionary new transportation system which will enable people to get about without requiring gasoline. In snow you simply stand upon it and carve your way downhill or grab a fender and glide along behind traffice. In the summer attach trucks and wheels and you've got it finished.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Sorry about the misleading title. (A case of fingers before brain) There are illustrations from the patent, not photos. (Perhaps this can be corrected). Anyway, my apologies on that.
Some of us pointed that out to the editors before it was published, but they chose to ignore us (surprise, surprise, surprise)
"I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey
Though the pictures don't indicate this, I wonder if they could also be filling in a few final functional gaps to turn the iPod into a full-blown PDA? Tantalizing as that might be, it's probably unlikely as well, seeing as how they're making bigger margins on the iPod Photo than PDA manufacturers are making on their product...
Crow T. Trollbot
I hope this is a case where thry come thru with it. It looks COOL!
San Francisco Photographers
-truth
I had a steady B+ in my AI class until I failed the Turing test...
Ummm the mp3 market used to be a niche market. Who has about an 80% market share now?
I noticed that in Apple Quartz Composer, there is mention of a TABLET pen location. I tried this with my Wacom Graphire, and no luck. At this point, I figured that apple must be making new drivers for existing tablets. Well, I guess it's an APPLE BRAND TABLET PC!!! Whoohoo!.
-truth
I had a steady B+ in my AI class until I failed the Turing test...
"Like no one has ever thought of making a tablet before? There has to be more to this if it is true."
Ya, but this is exactly what people said when Apple made the iPod.
Apple likes to swoop on good ideas that have been poorly implemented in the past. MP3 players, jukebox software, online music stores, video chat, etc etc. None of this stuff was new, but Apple found a way to make it more accessible and desirable.
"Things are more moderner than before- bigger, and yet smaller- it's computers-- San Dimas High School football RULES!"
Billions?
When the iPod went mainstream it ate everyone's lunch, but at first it was a niche product from a niche computer manufacturer. Now white headphones are becoming as ubiquitous as cell phones.
I'll reserve judgement until I see an iTablet, but the general idea isn't making me all gooey inside either. Who's to say whether it'll make the light of day.
I'd be very surprised if Apple launched an iTablet. Totally shocked if they dusted off the Newton idea.
Very funny, Jobs. And this is different from my palmpilot how, exactly? Oh, yours is bigger, you say?
-- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
What killed the Newton was syncronization. All the stuff I wrote on the newton was difficult to transfer to the Mac. All my contacts on the Mac was difficult to reliably syncronize to the newton. Don't tell me how to do it. I have used a newton from the day it came out until they day they kiled it. I have all the tools, cards, utilities, whatever. I still ahve 2000 sitting in it's leather case in my house.
So, as soon as palm V came out, small, sync, everything, I was all over it. It was could not be a writing machine, but I could live with that. My Newton became more trouble than it was worth.
But Apple now has sync, at least for what can fit on the .Mac drive. It does not sync macs, and I have found nothing that will do so quickly over 802.11b, but you can do calendars, contacts, mail, and good number of documents, which is has made my life so much easier.
So, this tablet PC, which will have bluetooth and airport, can do what the newton never could. Be an effective remote terminal. You can carry it around for an hour or a day, and, within a few minutes, all relevent changes can be transfered. You can take it to the coffee house, sync to .Mac, and by the time you get back home, your big machine can be updated.
Am I sorely afraid I will buy this thing. Yes. I don't really know what I would use it for, which is the rub. If it is like an iTablet, consumer priced, it would be fun to have. If it was PowerTablet, the investment would be difficult.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
It's ok, it's only a computer, and it doesn't have a personality.
Quiet, you'll hurt it's feelings!
Now I understand why they have been so stuck on 1 button!!!
:-)
A touchpad!
Oooohh.. Jobs was ahead of the curve all along...
- Apple - RSS
- Microsoft - (RSS)
- Google - (RSS)
- Yahoo! - (RSS)
- IBM - (RSS)
Courtesy of PatentMojo.comDoesn't this violate the Etch-a-Sketch design patent?
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
>how big is the market for a niche product from a niche computer manufacturer?
You mean like the iPod? Pretty big, I'd say, depending on the application.
Steve Jobs has made comments about the iPod not lending itself to being a decent video player due to its tiny display. A tablet, on the other hand....
Who moderates the meta-moderators?
Tiger (10.4) has a built-in feature that allows you to rotate the screen.
Go the the System Preferences and then hold down the option key while you click the Displays button. You will see a pulldown thats labeled "Rotate". Select it and you will see your screen rotate.
All I have to say about this is: 20030076303.
Figures. I get to moderate for the first time in weeks, and it's a topic I really need to comment on. ;)
That said, just because Apple has a patent doesn't mean they're going to ever build the thing. Personally, though, I hope this turns out to be the announcement at WWDC. I'd love to have a tablet Mac, just for reading places like here on the couch. My laptop is nice, but not too comfortable... though the keyboard is more useful for chat or long replies.
It's certainly a niche design, so I could see Apple patenting a decent design that their engineers came up with even if they never build the product. That way, they can always change their mind later if the market really wants an Apple tablet.
Words per minute I can type: about 80 Words per minute I can handwrite: about 15 Why do I need a tablet again?
Music - www.richardmac.com
i got one right here...
granted, it's not a high-res display, and the redraw rate really sucks, but it does come in a nice pink.
for a minute there, i lost myself...
iPad.
this is rather like apple's patent on the itunes interface. problematic by itself, and depressing if it becomes a precedent for future patent maneuvering.
This is obviously the PowerBook G5. Not shown is the processor, which will be incorporated into the power supply. :)
"The objective of securing the safety of Americans from crime and terror has been achieved." -- John Ashcroft
I heard there was some guy who wrote a top ten list of his favourite activities on a pair of tablets. That's gotta be prior art!
First and formost, cool. I would have given it consideration, without a doubt. If Apple turned the 12" PB or iBook into a table, that would rock. Now the "doodles" (I find it hard to call them photos, and as drawings they look like basically every other tablet) don't seem to show a keyboard. I've seen pics of PC tablets that the screen can be "reversed" making it a tablet, or used like a normal laptop and I think that's a great idea.
Now what would be REALLY cool would be to make the iBook: Touch (like the name? Come on Apple, use it!) have a touch screen (simple on/off with high resolution), but make the PowerBook: Touch even better. Whether they develop it themselves or partner with Wacom or something like that, that would rule. It would have pressure sensitivity (256 levels?) and angle sensing like the Wacom tablets. Think how great that would be for graphic artists.
Now that might not be cheap. Mass production may help, but Wacom sells the Cintiq montitor/tablet that is 17" and 1280x1024 with 512 levels of pressure for $1799 MSRP. Maybe they'd have to make it an option. So even at 1024x768 if they cut down the resoltuion of touch (64, maybe 32 levels? And the size would be smaller, only 12") they could make it cheaper.
It would be awesome. If anyone could make a tablet that would be great and really cause tablets to take off (instead of being the failure I've heard them called), it would be Apple.
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
...no one apart from Apple will be allowed to make a tablet Macintosh?
TIHS ILLEGAL MONOPOLY MUST STOP!!!
Repton.
They say that only an experienced wizard can do the tengu shuffle.
Also, while Apple only has like 4% of the PC market, they have a MUCH bigger chunk of the laptop market.
But let's face it. If Apple wants to release a niche product at a premium, the are free too. If it stays niche, then no problem. If the market explodes, it would get cheaper (economies of scale and all that).
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
Labtop
I do not think that word means what you think it means.
moo.
Regular "new idea" patent: You have to prove that this is a new way of doing something.
Design patent: registers a shape/style/whatever. I expect the Apple patent is one of these.
FTFUSPTO: Definition of a Design A design consists of the visual ornamental characteristics embodied in, or applied to, an article of manufacture. Since a design is manifested in appearance, the subject matter of a design patent application may relate to the configuration or shape of an article, to the surface ornamentation applied to an article, or to the combination of configuration and surface ornamentation. A design for surface ornamentation is inseparable from the article to which it is applied and cannot exist alone. It must be a definite pattern of surface ornamentation, applied to an article of manufacture. The Patent Law provides for the granting of design patents to any person who has invented any new, original and ornamental design for an article of manufacture. A design patent protects only the appearance of the article and not its structural or utilitarian features. The principal statutes (United States Code) governing design patents are: 35 U.S.C. 171 35 U.S.C. 173 35 U.S.C. 102 35 U.S.C. 103 35 U.S.C. 112 35 U.S.C. 132 The rules (Code of Federal Regulations) pertaining to the drawing disclosure of a design patent application are: 37 CFR 1.84 37 CFR 1.152 37 CFR 1.121 The following additional rules have been referred to in this guide: 37 CFR 1.3 37 CFR 1.63 37 CFR 1.153 A copy of these laws and rules are included in the Appendix of this guide. The practice and procedures relating to design patent applications are set forth in chapter 1500 of the Manual of Examining Procedure (MPEP). Inquiries relating to the sale of the MPEP should be directed to the Superintendent of Documents, United States Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402. Telephone: 202-512-1800. Types of Designs and Modified Forms An ornamental design may be embodied in an entire article or only a portion of an article, or may be ornamentation applied to an article. If a design is directed to just surface ornamentation, it must be shown applied to an article in the drawings, and the article must be shown in broken lines, as it forms no part of the claimed design. A design patent application may only have a single claim. 37 CFR 1.153. Designs that are independent and distinct must be filed in separate applications since they cannot be supported by a single claim. Designs are independent if there is no apparent relationship between two or more articles. For example, a pair of eyeglasses and a door handle are independent articles and must be claimed in separate applications. Designs are considered distinct if they have different shapes and appearances even though they are related articles. For example, two vases having different surface ornamentation creating distinct appearances must be claimed in separate applications. However, modified forms, or embodiments of a single design concept may be filed in one application. For example, vases with only minimal configuration differences may be considered a single design concept and both embodiments may be included in a single application. An example of modified forms appears in Appendix II. The Difference Between Design and Utility Patents In general terms, a "utility patent" protects the way an article is used and works (35 U.S.C. 101), while a "design patent" protects the way an article looks (35 U.S.C. 171). Both design and utility patents may be obtained on an article if invention resides both in its utility and ornamental appearance. While utility and design patents afford legally separate protection, the utility and ornamentality of an article are not easily separable. Articles of manufacture may possess both functional and ornamental characteristics.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
How about the "iPad"...?
Organic free-range music... yum!
With the speed of the patent office being what it is, maybe this is a patent for the Newton, finally being granted.
moo.
..iPod interface, not iTunes. Get your facts straight before whining. It's a design patent. Don't make me have to explain what that is. Please.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/08/13/apple_tabl et_mac/
Eat it.
-FweE-
I've posted this a couple of times before, but it works here as well.
This is a remote. Or Apple's version of one. Look, apple's already said that they veiw thier media in a modular way. That's because they are a weird amalgamation of a software and hardware. This model really affects thier design in a fundamental way. They view both as feeding the other. Unlike Microsoft. Or Sony. Both of those companies don't have the (ability) (balls) (forsight) to realize that you really do benefit from doing both. That's because the new tech market is turning towards usability as it's prime selling point. Witness the iPod. But you know this.
Now, think about the home media center. What is the primary user interface element? The remote. For all intents and purposes, the equipment has acheived a level of abstraction in our heads. What do the butttons on a TV do? Who cares? The remote can do it. My AV receiver doesn't even have all the bottons on the face. Only on the remote. And this abstraction yeilds some interesting results.
One, that you handle your remote more times in the average day than a book or your keyes. We don't even realize how much time we spend with these damn things. They are integral. And they almost uniformly suck. How many remotes do you use? How much fumbling? Your universal remote does most things. But what about when you need to schedule and rank your DVR? The remote falls apart. The fuction is mapped to some button that is not intuitive. It's a giant mess. Sort like the MP3 market ummm.... four years ago.
While the remote is bad at it's primary function, it falls apart completely when it comes to digital media. Enter microsoft with their assinine "Media Center PC" Why God, why? Why do you need a whole new computer in your living room? You already have a computer somewhere in your house. But Microsoft is a software company. They need to sell the software. They're trying to break out of this with the Xbox. And they will haves success. But it's a lackluster implimentation of the central problem: the remoteis the media center, see. How are people going to interact with the Xbox? With the controller and a TV monitor. This is crummy, in my mind, because if thier view of media is to add another box to the den that just happens to deal with my digital media as a second fuction, I call bullshit. Let each componant do what it is primarily good at. The Xbox controller , even if it includes that rollerball thing, still is a poor way to interact with media. It'll be good for gamers, sure. But that will color the rest of it functionality. It already has, really. See, there's no big, legible display to speak of on the damn thing. So you abstract the abstract. The Xbox took over your media and the controller takes over your Xbox, which makes you look at the tv screen as the navigation aid. I'm not sure if I can exactly explain why.... but this feels icky to me.
So, this is where Apple steps in. The Airport express is an important clue. The idea is make a centeral computer and stream over the air the media to a router near the media center. But make the router "magic" Using, I don't know, Rendevou...err... Bonjour. Which just got released for the PC, yes? Pieces are starting to fall into place. So, what's misssing is a remote that doesn't suck for your media that can interact wirelessly with your media. Something like a big lcd touchscreen. And only like an LCD screen. Nothing else. It's the display and the input. Simple. Elegant. Getting cheap. This is a thin client, really. But it won't be marketed as such. No, it'll be the iPod for the rest of your life. It'll be your remote. It'll be your newspaper. It'll be your media manipulator (edit movies, work on garage band tracks, retouch photos). It will be your morning newspaper. It will be the thing you pick up when you put your iPod down. Think about it. All the technology is there. But it's maddening to use, especially for average consumers. They are maing a remote. They just have to be.
A MacOSX tablet would rock. Tablets may not be that exciting by themselves but with OSX? UNIX wherever you are, turn the thing into a terminal and watch videos on it streamed off your mac mini in the other room; instant on feature lets you use it to take notes at lectures; capture video with built in videocam; use your soon to be released ipod/motorola phone combo thingy as a remote control to change the channel, etc. Sure, it's all stuff you can do with a mini laptop and a TV set now but when Apple does this it will be much snappier, trust me ;)
I imagine that is referring to an interface to Inkwell. Inkwell is primarily useful for users of Wacom tablets. You know, those things that let you draw with a pen? Well, Inkwell will let you use it for handwriting recognition and as a mouse as well. Inkwall has existed in OS X since Jaguar (Mac OS X 10.2). To sum it all up, this is nothing new and is no golden arrow pointing towards the amazing future of Apple tablets. Please be careful not to throw misguided bread crumbs out that the Mac rumor sites will try to build nests out of.
Beware, Nugget is watching... See?
Yea - who woudl ever buy a "niche" audio player from a "niche" computer company.
Oh, btw, I think I heard in some recent news that Apple is going out of business
.
-shpoffo
Never mind, scratch that. Can I buy your new iMac after you mess up some of the settings on that one too? It can fund your new G5 ;)
You could make a good arguement that the Newton was the original implementation of the tablet computer.
Note that this patent is for a finger touchscreen tablet like a PDA, and my tablet has a wacom pressure-sensitive pen digitizer in the screen.
:-), but not so useful as an art / design machine (my understanding is that to have both pressure-sensitive pen and finger, you would need two seperate, difference hardware systems on the screen, which would be expensive).
This is interesting. A year ago, I was predicting that Apple would get on the tablet bandwagon (and possibly pull off another ipod), because tablets are so suited to art, which is ostensibly one of apples big markets. (I have a normal wacom digitizer on my desktop, but I find I prefer to use the screen digitiser of may tablet for photoshop, etc, - even though the CRT of the desktop beats any LCD on a portable).
Yet their design is for a finger touch screen. This would make for perhaps a better interface than pen for something simple like an ebook or portable video player (a video ipod allowing you rent DRMed movies from apple
I have a convertable tablet (it operates in slate and laptop mode), and my experience is that it is a vast improvement over laptops when in laptop mode, but slate mode, while kind of cool, it typically limited to low-input tasks like watching DVDs, because I type at twice the speed I write.
So I doubt this tablet is going to be marketed as a mac. It may contain a mac, but it's going to take aim at more specialised tasks.
Unless they stick one of those laser keyboards on it that convert any flat surface into a keyboard. It's about time someone built one of those into a slate computer.
And now that epaper is becoming possible, ebook readers that failed to suck might be another ipod waiting to happen.
this is rather like apple's patent on the itunes interface. problematic by itself, and depressing if it becomes a precedent for future patent maneuvering.
A design patent is not quite the same as what one normally thinks of when talking about patents. Basically all this move indicates is that nobody can release a tablet that looks like what Apple would design. It's meant to prevent rip-offs, not stifle innovation. Of course, I fully expect someone to claim that rip-offs are innovative.
Don't become a regular here -- you will become retarded.
no, the mp3 player market faltered for a while before Apple picked up the slack.
The tablet market has faltered for a while too, let's see what comes of it.
Damn MS and OneNote. I live by OneNote on my laptop (not even a tablet) PC, and am desperately trying to find a way to run it in Linux short of a full-blown VMWare environment...
I wonder how long it will take Microsoft to copy this great idea...
- X
- Y
- Tilt X
- Tilt Y
- Pressure
- Tip Button
- Lower Button
- Upper Button
Also worth noting from the ADC Library documentation (for Cocoa) above:Important: Tablet events are available in Mac OS X v10.4 and later versions of the operating system.
On a similar note, Quartz Composer showed up in Mac OS X 10.4 as well. Note the pictures in the ADC document as well. They depict a tablet connected to an iMac or Apple display. It seems to me that none of this is talking about a tablet PC. If it is, they sure went through a great deal to hide it.Beware, Nugget is watching... See?
Whoops! Research please!
Apple Computer is a huge computer manufacturer. In fact, they are the 5th biggest in terms of recent US sales figures, and sales are increasing more rapidly than any other manufacturer. [Source: IDC, 4Q2004 report]
So even though Apple only holds 3.8% of the market:
1. Dell @ 17% of market
2. HP, @ 16% of market
3. IBM, @ 5% of market
4. Gateway, @ 4% of market
5. Apple @ 3.8% of market
And there you have it. They may be small compared to Microsoft's 95% OS penetration, but they are large in terms of being a product manufacturer, neatly falling in the "2nd tier by volume" along with IBM and Gateway.
actually, I'm referring to their dubious patent on the iTunes software interface. and no, I don't require your explanation of design patents. they are harmful, and must be neutralized.
I sure can.
here
"I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey
Labtop
It's the top of a labrador. Apple is going to release the top of a labrador retriever.
Don't get the first version; it's full of bugs.
Apple actually built a prototype Mac (System 7) tablet back in the mid-90's. They got as far as the "prototype" plastics being made and did a small run for internal testing (maybe a couple of dozen?). I saw some in use in the Tokyo office in '96 where they were being used to test the (Japanese language) handwriting recognition software. They were sturdy enough for day to day use and were left in the lunchroom for employees to use (the idea was to get lots of input with different people's handwriting styles). I don't recall why the project was killed then.
An MP3 player is just a modern Walkman. The "Walkman market" hasn't been "niche" for about twenty years.
"Niche" != "immature".
The tablet PC market is niche. It's niche because its practical applications - advantageously over existing alternatives - are very small.
MP3 players have never been a niche market. They've been am *immature and growing* market, but the idea of a "pocket music player" hasn't been a niche market since the late 70s/early 80s.
...iPad. Like a pad of paper, to draw on, to write on, read notes, and present art or view video. the name would converge with the Pages software metaphor, and of course fit in the i* naming convention.
I can see it as a good product for kids, students,\ artists and business people having to make a presentation of any sort. The apple cool factor really appeals to all those markets, and could help the iPad over other tablet designs.
It seems like it's a 5.5 x 8.5 design, which is exactly the same size as my note books in college, and my sketchbooks in art school. that size format is perfect for college because of the desk size in most lecture halls, and is really great for rough sketching. That's also about the size of Vintage International's novels.
It's bigger than most PDA's but I could really see this as a huge revitalization for that market, as well as the subnotebook/tablet market. I always thought the biggest deficiency of the PDA was the lack of natural handwriting input, the small form factor, and the lack of backward software compatibility. The Subnotebook/tablet really didn't appeal to me because of the keyboards were too small (and i have small hands!), no handwriting recognition, too many hardware features and they seemed too thick for me.
Convergence between these two categories could be a real money winner if apple tries to keep the feature set down following the success of the mini. leave out the modem, Ethernet, maybe video out, non-upgradable memory, USB, Firewire, and instead go with wifi, bluetooth, Dock connector, stereo minijack, and combo drive.
I could see something like this come in at $749 and really start where newton left off. Newton was folded, largely because it was way before its time and it was introduced at a point in Apple's development where everything was based on creating more margin. now that they are more consumer oriented, something like this could really fly.
It's doubtful that Apple currently has any real intention to follow through with this.
So Please! Encourage them a bit http://www.ipetitions.com/campaigns/tablet_mac/.
Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
That is why we have trademarks.
No, actually, it isn't. A trademark is entirely different. For example, a trademark prevents someone from putting your logo on their product, whether it looks like your product or not. A design patent prevents someone from copying the design of your product, no matter what logo they put on it.
It is a dangerous precedent for design elements to be patentable.
Except it isn't a precedent at all -- design patents aren't a recent thing. They were incorporated into patent law in 1842. It seems like they are among the least dangerous parts of current patent law.
Don't become a regular here -- you will become retarded.
i tend to believe him because he was actually shooting a photo documentary about the invention of the newton at the time.
(Or, I'd wish it to be.)
A wireless screen for the Mac mini (or other desktop). Imagine that you have a Mac with screen, keyboard and mouse on your desk. You pick up the screen, which nicely slides out of the stand that charges it, and walk away, around the office or your flat or whatever, now using the same computer as a tablet Mac. You sit down in the couch, and it is a remote control to your Airport Express.
The screen itself has no real processing power or storage. Not more than is required to run some remote desktop client. Maybe it can serve as a remote BT hub for other peripherals (let's say a headset and a webcam, and suddenly it is a videophone).
Maybe it can be used on its own without an owning computer, like a screen for a iPod photo or iPod video.
Now, if they did this, a natural next would be a battery pack for the Mac mini, allowing me to have a "computer brick" in my backpack, and a really sleek tablet mac in my hand that'd punch a whole lot more power than those PC tablets.
And no, that's not the same as a PowerBook -- anyone tried typing standing up away from a desk?
Of course, this is all just wishful thinking, but some parts of it just might come true. Please?
Copyright can provide protection for patterns on products, e.g. the rounded white square with the central silver Apple logo on the top face of a Mac Mini.
This operates similar to copyright but with a much, much shorter term - up to 15 years depending on circumstances. Apple generally will not be able to protect products using unregistered design right because it is a US corporation - they may be saved if the designer is a "qualifying person", e.g. an EU citizen. US corporations do not benefit from unregistered design right because the US does not provided an equivalent right.
There is an EU-wide version that have a term of only 3 years from first publication.
These are available in UK and EU flavours and are granted by the UK Designs Registry and OHIM respectively on application. Both have a term of up to 25 years and are equivalent to US Design Patents.
Registered designs can protect patterns and shapes but the registration may be revoked if the design fails to meet certain novelty and individuality requirements.
The unregistered rights, namely copyright and unregistered design right, differ from registered designs in that copying must be proved in order to enforce them. For registered designs, infringement is simply a matter of whether the alleged infringing design looks sufficiently like the pictures in the registered design.
Next up, the suppository Mac...
Why innovate when you can just rip off Microsoft?
I worked on the O/S and some utilities for this. It was announced at an WWDC as the Hancock and was canned in favor of the Newton. It was based on a Powerbook Duo, and like the Duo, would dock into a desktop setup. I google'd someone's essay about Apple's previous tablet computers (including Hancock).
As I recall, portable CD players that would play MP3 CDs were considered the player of choice for geeks in the know. (Burned the to cd as as filesystem)