Slashdot Mirror


Upside Down Phone Patent

An anonymous reader noted that "A patent has been filed for the "Upside Down Phone", which features the keypad on top and the screen on the bottom. The idea behind the upside down phone is, apparently, to allow faster texting by have a more comfortable position for the thumb to work from. A quick check of this seems to confirm the theory, making this one of those "Why didn't I think of that?" moments."

291 comments

  1. Wow amazing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How about a phone with no buttons ? I'll patent that....

    1. Re:Wow amazing by utopianfiat · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Too late, iPhone's got you there.

      --
      +5, Truth
  2. "Why didn't I think of that?" by alexhard · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I don't know..maybe because the hands will be right on top of the screen and you won't be able to see anything?

    --
    Infinite time means everything that can happen, will. You being you is absolutely incidental. You do not exist.
    1. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
      I don't know..maybe because the hands will be right on top of the screen and you won't be able to see anything?

      Or the fact is that he's just repositioning the keypad...doesn't seam innovative at all. What I were to patent one with the keypad on the side, or on the back, or ...wherever. It's not like he invented a keypad the rearranged the numbers or letters so that the most common text messages are easier to enter....you get my point.

      Anyway, he just wasted a lot of money for a stupid patent that no one will use .. .or he'll use it to patent Troll.

    2. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by AoT · · Score: 2, Informative

      not if you hold it right.

      I had a job during the summer where I had to do a lot of data entry into phones and I ended up holding the thing upside-down and using it that way because it was easier.

      Of course, this was all on a bicycle, so that makes a difference as well.

    3. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by Radon360 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I agree. Maybe I'm missing something, but the idea seems to go against simple ergonomics. I would compare it to the early versions of the Garmin hand-held GPS receivers. Several models had their buttons above the screen. You had to "drive" it with two hands; one to hold it and one to run the keypad with a finger so that you could navigate through the menus. It was my major gripe about their GPS at the time, and the reason that I went with a Magellen GPS receiver back then (I have since purchased a Garmin eTrex).

      I suppose if the intent is that proficient SMS users would simply tap out their message without looking, then it might work. But for people with big hands who need to see what they're entering, it would present too much of a visual interference issue.

      Once, someone suggested building in voice recognition for entering an SMS...My reply was, "why don't you just call them instead."

    4. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by rbarreira · · Score: 1

      Once, someone suggested building in voice recognition for entering an SMS...My reply was, "why don't you just call them instead."
      Because it's usually more expensive. That would be a great idea for a cellphone - voice recognition + voice synthesis + SMS for extremely cheap and slow voice calls.
      --

      The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
    5. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by gregmac · · Score: 1

      So what makes you think the cell phone companies have any interest in developing (or supporting on their networks) a phone that has voice recoginition for SMS? Remember, it's them you're paying to make those 'expensive' voice calls..

      --
      Speak before you think
    6. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by simm1701 · · Score: 1

      10p per text, for 160 characters...

      Or 20p per minute (on an average tarrif with about 200 minutes thrown in anyway)

      I don't know about you but I can say more in 30 seconds than I can write in 160 characters!!

      I only find texts handy when you are not able to talk (eg in a pub and its too loud or in the office and dont want to be over heard) otherwise just call the person - its a novel use for a phone I know (maybe it should be patented...) but there you go

      --
      $_="Slashdotter";$syn="OTT";s;..;;;sub _{print shift||$_};s!ash!Perl !;s=$syn=ack=i;tr+LLEd+BLAH+;_"Just Another ";_
    7. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by Xanius · · Score: 2, Interesting

      But didn't we already solve this problem with the phones that open up and have a full keyboard set up in qwerty?

    8. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because you also didn't think of orienting the keyboard vertically on one side for either thumb or split for typing with both thumbs. On this mode the screen would need to be rotated 90 degrees too.

      - bigPaise

    9. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by hummassa · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't know about you but I can say more in 30 seconds than I can write in 160 characters!! I somehow doubt that. But I'll try to sample it for you -- these are examples of voice calls/text messages I exchange every once in a while:

      00:00 <wife> hello
      00:02 <me> hi
      00:04 <wife> everythink ok at the office?
      00:08 <me> yeah, alright
      00:10 <wife> would you please bring home some stuff from the market? I need two packages of diapers, two baguettes, ham, cheese, lettuce, and half a kilo of grinded meat.
      00:22 <me> diapers, bread, ham, cheese, lettuce, meat; six things, ok...
      00:32 <wife> thanks, love you
      00:34 <me> mee to, bye
      00:36 <wife> bye
      00:37 END CALL
      text message:

      bring 2 pkgs diapers, 2 baguettes, ham, cheese, lettuce, 1/2kg grinded meat, ok? kisses luvya
      for a total of 93 chars (95 if you count the "ok" or 105 if you count the "ok luvya too" answer)
      --
      It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
    10. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by rbarreira · · Score: 1

      With the added advantage that you don't have to write down the damn shopping list, it's on your SMS memory already.

      --

      The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
    11. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by Xanius · · Score: 1

      It would average out if you did the reply because it's two messages. So it would still be 20 cents to do the whole thing. However, most married couples use the same provider for cell phone service which nullifies any charges for the call, unless you have one of the few carriers that still doesn't give free calling if it's the same company.

    12. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by neverpsyked · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Have you ever watched a group of 16-year-old kids texting? Believe me, they aren't interested in seeing what they're writing.

      "Dood, com 2 mx plc aeter schl."

      --
      What if this weren't a hypothetical question?
    13. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by Iamthefallen · · Score: 1

      To save another character, you can also type "ground" rather than "grinded".

      --
      Wax-Museum Fire Results In Hundreds Of New Danny DeVito Statues
    14. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by fang2415 · · Score: 5, Informative

      One of us *did* think of that.

    15. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by ivucica · · Score: 1
      How about she just calls and says:

      <wife> hey there, sorry to bug ya, i'll be quick
      <you> mhm
      <wife> bring two packs of diapers, two baguettes, ham, cheese, lettuce, half a kilo of grinded meat.
      <you> ok, i'll do that
      <wife> cya
      optimization?
    16. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by ATMD · · Score: 1

      You had to enter data into phones while riding a bike? What kind of crazy job was that?

      --
      Nobody else has this sig.
    17. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      That's not necessarily the case. For one-handed phone dialing, the typical use would be palm-up with the thumb pressing the buttons, with the fingers and the base of the thumb holding the phone, and the thumb itself doing the dialing. I just did that with my phone and I can see the entire screen. My thumb did not obstruct the screen. It might seem awkward, but it's much better than one-handed dialing with the conventional arrangement with buttons at the lower end.

      If you mean that you dial two-handed, then yes, the screen is going to be covered by the other hand and this phone won't be suitable for two-handed dialing. I don't think this phone design would threaten the two-handed use because there are so many phone designs available that it seems there is something for everyone.

      I did think of this before but didn't think of patenting it.

    18. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by magicchex · · Score: 1

      Thank you! I was looking for that post but found your reply before I made myself redundant.

      --
      How many fulltime jobs can one man have?
    19. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by Dan+Slotman · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Anything is innovative once you see it. The summary's question, "Why didn't I think of that?" illustrates this point. Ideas are more scarce than we would like to believe. Columbus gave a simple test that humorously backs this argument.

      In the story, Christopher Columbus attends a dinner which a Spanish gentleman is giving in his honor. Columbus asks all the gentlemen in attendance to make an egg stand on end. After all the men have tried and failed, they state that it is impossible. Columbus then places the egg's small end on the table, breaking the shell a bit, so that it can stand upright. Columbus then states that it is "the simplest thing in the world. Anybody can do it, after he has been shown how!"
    20. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by dawhippersnapper · · Score: 1

      I just tried it on my treo 700w, your fingers are near the top and your thumbs are up there too, the screen is down low enough that you see it just fine, not one bit of it is obstructed. And I'm a big guy with fat fingers.

      --
      Freedom is fragile and must be protected. To sacrifice it, even as a temporary measure, is to betray it.
    21. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by leenks · · Score: 1

      Nah

        hey there, sorry to bug ya, i'll be quick
        mhm
        bring two packs of diapers, two baguettes, ham, cheese, lettuce, half a kilo of grinded meat.
        ok, i'll do that
        there is no need to snap
        i'm not snapping, i'm just a bit busy trying to get this algorithm to scale
        oh, so now you don't even have time to talk to me?
        I can talk to you when I get home, I need to work right now
        oh I see, well good luck!
        thanks
        cya
        wait - what was that list ag....

      damn.

    22. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by ivucica · · Score: 1

      it all takes practice, i say... :)

    23. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by rblancarte · · Score: 1

      Sounds like bicycle messenger.

      RonB

      --
      It is human nature to take shortcuts in thinking.
    24. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by beckerist · · Score: 1

      Next up: I'm patenting my idea for a TV remote with the volume on the right and the channel changing button on the left. Oh, and the power button is near the bottom, the number keys are all in Roman Numerals and it only works with Durabrand brand TV's. Innovative, eh?

    25. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by slugstone · · Score: 1

      With the added advantage that you don't have to write down the damn shopping list, it's on your SMS memory already.

      Or the spouse could email you.

    26. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by yulek · · Score: 1

      yeah, i guess email vs. im vs. phone doesn't make any sense either... o.O

      sms is great when you want to give quick info to someone without requiring a respone (especially a voice one). like say you want to invite 10 folks to a party you just heard about. what's better? to call and interrupt 10 folks one at a time? or to SMS them the time and location and let them decide?

      other nifty uses:
        . send a shopping list to your spouse who's at the store
        . send directions to someone looking for your house
        . pass notes in class without instructor's knowledge
        . receive reminders from google calendar
        . receive and respond to service outages via nagios

      etc. etc. etc.

      --
      in this age of communication i'm just not getting through
    27. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do you want to combine all those nice innovations into one patent?

    28. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by Goaway · · Score: 2, Informative

      I don't know of a single company that both manufactures phones, and sells connectivity. Your point makes no sense.

    29. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by Jamil+Karim · · Score: 1

      Sounds like he must have been a typecyclist.

    30. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by Retric · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The problem with that story is once your break it it's no longer an egg. It's the same with this keyboard idea many have considered placing the keyboard on the other side but considered it useless to not have the screen visible while you type. To truly be a "novel" solution it needs to not just be "new" but also useful. Otherwise several people may have considered and rejected the idea. Which is why you can patent using an existing drug to treat a new disease. Drug patents are not just about the drug but how to use or make it.

    31. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by ozbird · · Score: 4, Funny

      I had a job during the summer where I had to do a lot of data entry into phones ... this was all on a bicycle, so that makes a difference as well.

      I find your ideas fascinating, and I would like to subscrib*CRASH*.

    32. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by The+Empiricist · · Score: 1

      That posting is dated January 20th (2007 I assume). The patent's international filing date was November 9, 2006. Thus, the Slashdot posting would not anticipate the patent application. It might bolster an argument that the claimed invention is obvious, but it probably would not defeat the patent application if it was the only evidence of obviousness.

    33. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by ATMD · · Score: 1

      Sounds to me like an accident waiting to happen.

      Health & Safety, anyone?

      --
      Nobody else has this sig.
    34. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seems enough to bust the patent to me.

      If an invention has been described in prior art, a patent on that invention is not valid.

      Thus spoke Wikipedia.

    35. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by Dan+Slotman · · Score: 1

      You are supposed to type with your thumbs, with your fingers underneath. The screen rests on your fingers, and you read it between your palms. It'll work just fine.

    36. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by letxa2000 · · Score: 1

      Someone else: Once, someone suggested building in voice recognition for entering an SMS...My reply was, "why don't you just call them instead."

      You: Because it's usually more expensive.

      Don't know what you pay, but I get so many free minutes that I can't use them all. SMS, on the other hand, costs 10 cent per message (and I think it just went up to 15 cents, didn't it?). It's far cheaper for me to call than to SMS.

      SMS are the biggest scam. 15 cents for 160 bytes of data... call it 200 after overhead. But if you have free minutes, you probably consume that much bandwidth in about 1/5th of a second or less. How the cell companies ever convinced people to pay more for a far less demanding system should be a study in modern marketing.

    37. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So by the simple fact there is a dent in my car, does it make it no longer a car? I'm confused...

    38. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by Retric · · Score: 1

      1) Look at the picture.

      2) Simulate that picture with a phone.

      3) Using your right thumb touch the top left side of the device.

      4) Note: you're covering 1/4 to 1/2 of the screen with the base of your thumb.

      5) Realize it's a dumb idea to use this layout with a standard size phone and move on.

      PS: Obviously, you can use that layout with something that is not in the shape or give up using some portion of the screen but it's a bad idea for something phone sized.

    39. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by squiggleslash · · Score: 4, Funny

      Good story, and it reminds me of another story, involving - interestingly enough - Christopher Columbus again.

      In the story, Christopher Columbus attends a meeting involving Craig McCaw, Christopher Gent, Steve Jobs, and the entire staff of Nokia. Christopher asks all the people in attendance to design an easier way of entering text messages into a cellphone. After all those present have tried and failed, they state that it's impossible to get better than iTAP. Columbus then pulls out a whopping great IBM Model M keyboard, attaches it to his phone, and types in his text message. Columbus then states that it is "the simplest thing in the world. Anybody can do it, after he has been shown how!"

      Columbus then went on to patent his invention, but in one of the great tragedies of science and technology, received nothing in royalties due to the slight issue with his "solution" being as idiotic as his more famous attempt to stand an egg on end.

      It's a sad story, I know.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    40. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      Most consumers don't buy phones from the manufacturers. They buy phones from the cell company at a discount in exchange for a lock-in contract. The bigger cell companies can, and often do, removed features from stock phone firmware or have the manufacturer do so for them.

      So in short, if it's developed, have fun buying your phone at full price and getting your carrier to let you use that fdeature on their network under their contract terms.

    41. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by rbarreira · · Score: 1

      Your "free minutes" theory doesn't work for me, I use a prepaid card in the countries I've lived at.

      --

      The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
    42. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by rbarreira · · Score: 1

      Which won't work very well if you don't have access to email where you are.

      --

      The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
    43. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by rbarreira · · Score: 1

      Then you probably still pay for a whole minute. At least you would with my operator.

      --

      The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
    44. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you own a cell phone manufacturing company? Or are you an executive at one of the mobile carriers? I presume you are neither. In that case, your opinion really does not count, since you will NOT be the person willing to pay for this patent if it is granted. I am not a patent lawyer, nor am I in any way connected to the process of granting patents, but if a person wants to patent his idea, more power to him, and if it proves to be attractive for others to use it, more money to him.

    45. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by Xayma · · Score: 1

      The patent was filed beforehand though. So it wasn't prior art at the time of filing (or inventing).

    46. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      If the patent predates the comment the comment can't be prior art.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    47. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you own a cell phone manufacturing company? Or are you an executive at one of the mobile carriers? I presume you are neither. In that case, your opinion really does not count, since you will NOT be the person willing to pay for this patent if it is granted.
      And why does that mean his opinion doesn't count?

      Cell phone makers and mobile carriers will only want to pay to license this patent if people are going to want to buy these phones. Therefore, his opinion certainly does matter, as does the opinion of any other prospective customer.
    48. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by Miamicanes · · Score: 1

      And if you're a Sprint or Verizon customer, you can't use a phone not purchased directly from the carrier, period. Well, ok... there are whispered rumors among the technorati elite that Verizon occasionally can be persuaded to look the other way if you manage to rip the firmware from a Verizon phone and reflash a Sprint phone that's an identical hardware twin... but Sprint won't ever allow it.

      Which really, REALLY sucks if you want a first-gen Alp (a.k.a. Access Linux for Palm) phone, or a WM5 phone with both a touchscreen for Graf^h^h^h^h block input AND a hard keypad (common in Asia, utterly unheard of in the US).

    49. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by ivucica · · Score: 1

      In Croatia, it's per second ^^
      Croatia rules

    50. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by cibyr · · Score: 1

      Which shows how screwed up the patent system is - I highly doubt KlaymenDK had read the patent or had any contact with the "inventor", yet if he wanted to make a phone as he'd described he'd be in violation of patent law.

      --
      It's not exactly rocket surgery.
    51. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by Miamicanes · · Score: 1

      > Because it's usually more expensive.

      True in most places, but not in the US. Here, most people pay nothing for cell phone voice calls at night and all weekend, and have so many hundred or (with multi-phone pooled family plans) thousand peak minutes of airtime to burn that they might as well be unlimited. In contrast, text messages tend to cost 10-25 cents apiece (beyond the first 25-100, which might be included with some data plans) unless the user spends the extra $5-15/month for unlimited text messages, too.

      In fact, I'm working on a project right now to metaphorically staple an IVR front end onto a European SMS app so it can be used in America. When it was originally rolled out here in SMS-only form, nobody would use it. When asked "why?" the nearly-unanimous response was, "Voice calls are free. Text messages cost money."

    52. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by Goaway · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I don't live in the mobile backwaters, and I've bought every phone I have from the manufacturer and used all its features freely.

    53. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Okay, I can understand a lot of the 'Dis Patent business! It is... craziness,' sentiment here on Slashdot, but what exactly is your issue with the chronological priority for whether a patent is valid or not?

      How is it 'unfair' that this person thought of it AFTER THE PATENT HOLDER, and so won't get to distribute it herself?

      Unless you are implying that he or she couldn't make her own phone from off the shelf parts?

    54. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by Dun+Malg · · Score: 1

      Anything is innovative once you see it. The summary's question, "Why didn't I think of that?" illustrates this point. I assume you meant "obvious" rather than "innovative". Trouble is, this idea is nothing new. Take a look at any Garmin handheld GPS unit made in the last decade has the keypad on top, screen below. Prior art, if you ask me; but it's not patented, so it doesn't count. This is no better than the usual "same old stuff... with a computer or on the internet" patents.
      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    55. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by tytyguy · · Score: 1

      thats retarded as you can at http://www.cellphoner.net/

    56. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by cibyr · · Score: 1

      If I come up with an idea - all by myself, no prior art that I'm aware of - why *shouldn't* I be able to use it just because someone else thought of it first?

      --
      It's not exactly rocket surgery.
    57. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by rynthetyn · · Score: 1

      It's not just whispered rumors, it's entirely possible, and as long as you authenticate the phone through Verizon's website instead of calling them or going into the store, they have no way of knowing that you didn't buy it from them. Of course, you do have to find your way to the right websites in order to learn how to flash it, but I'll leave that as an exercise for the reader. It's also possible to flash Verizon phones to other companies' firmware and then use those phones on Verizon's network. At the moment, I've got a RAZR, purchased from Verizon, running Alltell's firmware and operating happily on Verizon's network.

      --
      Eagles may soar, but weasles don't get sucked into jet engines...
    58. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by gregmac · · Score: 1

      Manufacturers sell to the carriers, who then sell to the consumers (typically). If the carriers see voice recoginition and SMS as taking away revenue from voice calls, they probably aren't going to buy the phone. If they don't want to buy the phone, why does the manufacturer bother building them and putting in the R&D to get full domain voice recoginition working on a cell phone..

      --
      Speak before you think
    59. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by amorsen · · Score: 1

      Once, someone suggested building in voice recognition for entering an SMS...My reply was, "why don't you just call them instead."

      SMS's are polite.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    60. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by simm1701 · · Score: 1

      you mean you dont have imap on your phone?

      --
      $_="Slashdotter";$syn="OTT";s;..;;;sub _{print shift||$_};s!ash!Perl !;s=$syn=ack=i;tr+LLEd+BLAH+;_"Just Another ";_
    61. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Because it would be impossible to prove that you didn't know about the patent and invented everything yourself?

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    62. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by rbarreira · · Score: 1

      Yes. All I want in a phone is to make/receive calls, SMS's, clock and date and a phone book. I don't buy expensive phones.

      --

      The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
    63. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by simm1701 · · Score: 1

      Me neither - I will only take phones that are for free on a contract renewal - and I'm not exactly on a heavy use contract. imap seems to be a pretty much standard feature on phones these days - I've just got the v3 razr (the first one) and even that has it

      Access to my inbox is far more useful than sms - especially given how much of a pain entering sms messages is - even when you are quite good at it

      --
      $_="Slashdotter";$syn="OTT";s;..;;;sub _{print shift||$_};s!ash!Perl !;s=$syn=ack=i;tr+LLEd+BLAH+;_"Just Another ";_
    64. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by rbarreira · · Score: 1

      The phone I currently use is much simpler than that!

      --

      The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
    65. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by golgotha007 · · Score: 1

      later that day...(if using SMS)

      "Honey, I'm home!"

      "Great, did you get the items I asked you to buy?"

      "What items? Oh, looks like I have a new SMS on my phone.. Oh it's you. oops!"

    66. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by Prune · · Score: 1

      He's obviously trolling. No one is that stupid. I can't figure out why you bother replying.

      --
      "Politicians and diapers must be changed often, and for the same reason."
    67. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by Goaway · · Score: 1

      We don't all live in crazy backwards land, you know.

    68. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by Dabido · · Score: 1

      I'd be even more impressed if you can successfully punch information into drummers. :-)

      --
      Sure enough, the cow costume was hanging up next to the superhero outfit and sailors uniform. (S,Spud)
    69. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by Radon360 · · Score: 1

      SMS's are polite.

      ...and easily taken out of context just like every other form of written communication, perhaps even worse considering their short and limited nature. Don't get me wrong, I use SMS on a daily basis, and agree that it's convenient when sending information that would otherwise need to be copied down, or for replying with a simple response to keep from being tied up in a longer phone call.

      I think most people missed the point in my final comment

      Once, someone suggested building in voice recognition for entering an SMS...My reply was, "why don't you just call them instead."

      The point was the irony of having voice recognition text entry on a phone for the purpose of communicating in written form when you could go directly with voice. It would be akin to reading a written document to someone over the phone for them to copy down, word for word, when you both have a working fax machine at arm's reach. Sure, it can be done, and there may be some extenuating circumstances that would make it advantageous to do it that way, but normally you'd go for the most efficient means and not the most extravagant.

    70. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by The+Empiricist · · Score: 1

      It wasn't really a stupid idea. In copyright law, independent creation is a defense to infringement. Patent law does not provide this defense. Ascertaining the better approach is definitely worthy of debate. There's even a good article recommending software patent reform through a combination of a mini-patent registration system and an independent invention defense against claims of infringement.

    71. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by AoT · · Score: 1

      That works better if they're upside-down as well.

    72. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by Dun+Malg · · Score: 1

      I would compare it to the early versions of the Garmin hand-held GPS receivers. Several models had their buttons above the screen. You had to "drive" it with two hands; one to hold it and one to run the keypad with a finger so that you could navigate through the menus. It was my major gripe about their GPS at the time, and the reason that I went with a Magellen GPS receiver back then (I have since purchased a Garmin eTrex).

      You're supposed to hold it in the palm of your hand and operate the buttons with your thumb.

      Also, I fail to understand your assertion that putting the buttons below the screen allows you to operate it with one hand more easily. In one handed operation your fingers are busy holding the unit, leaving only the thumb loose.
      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    73. Re:"Why didn't I think of that?" by amorsen · · Score: 1

      The point was the irony of having voice recognition text entry on a phone for the purpose of communicating in written form when you could go directly with voice.

      I understood the irony. It is still a feature I would like and use. Because SMS's are polite, whereas phone calls interrupt.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
  3. haHA by TinBromide · · Score: 5, Funny

    Gonna get rich! I just filed a patent for the upsidedown laptop, where you pull up the keyboard and look down at the screen.

    Makes it easier for those of you who type with your feet. (I'm looking at YOU, AOLers...)

    --
    Is it sad that I am more likely to recognize you and your posts by your sig than your name or UID?
    1. Re:haHA by matt74441 · · Score: 0, Redundant

      I have an even better idea. I'm going to patent a keyboard and screen that somehow allows you type with your head up your own ass. Now if I could only keep it from smelling.

    2. Re:haHA by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

      Well, you know you are upside down when your feet smell and your nose runs.

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    3. Re:haHA by emurphy42 · · Score: 2, Funny
  4. Garmin GPS did this 10 years ago by cvd6262 · · Score: 5, Informative

    I bought a Garmin GPS12 back in '98 that had the screen on the bottom. It made for great one-hand used.

    I guess adding "cellphone" to a design is just like adding "on the Internet" to a business plan.

    --

    I'd rather have someone respond than be modded up.

    1. Re:Garmin GPS did this 10 years ago by Distan · · Score: 1

      You beat me to the punch, but I was going to post the same thing. I found the Garmin interface to be much easier to use than the competitors at the time (like Magellan), mainly because the "buttons on top" made it simpler to operate one handed.

      The disadvantage is that if you have the device mounted (on the dashboard of your car, or on a panel of your boat), your hand tends to block the screen while you punch the buttons. Buttons on bottom works better if you need constant view of the screen while you operate the device.

      Captcha: mating

    2. Re:Garmin GPS did this 10 years ago by montyzooooma · · Score: 5, Funny
      "I bought a Garmin GPS12 back in '98 that had the screen on the bottom. It made for great one-hand use."

      Whoa! There's GPS porn?

    3. Re:Garmin GPS did this 10 years ago by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess adding "cellphone" to a design is just like adding "on the Internet" to a business plan.
      You (and all those moderators who thought this was 'informative') are suffering from hindsight bias. If it were really that obvious, why aren't you rich?
    4. Re:Garmin GPS did this 10 years ago by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You (and all those moderators who thought this was 'informative') are suffering from hindsight bias. If it were really that obvious, why aren't you rich?

      Garmin's still around, so I assume it worked for them since they thought of it first almost a decade ago.

      You seem to be suffering from USPTOitis, a common syndrome where getting paid to say it's innovative trumps the fact that it has been used for a decade now.

    5. Re:Garmin GPS did this 10 years ago by elcid73 · · Score: 1
    6. Re:Garmin GPS did this 10 years ago by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

      Only if you hike in the Grand Tetons. Oo la la!

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    7. Re:Garmin GPS did this 10 years ago by Devar · · Score: 1

      Yup. I still use a Garmin GPSMap76 which is pretty much exactly the same design albeit much newer :). So again keys-top screen-bottom isn't new at all.

      --
      It's a Bagel.
    8. Re:Garmin GPS did this 10 years ago by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      "I guess adding "cellphone" to a design is just like adding "on the Internet" to a business plan."

      Be thankful for that. "On a cellphone" means (erm.. in theory, I should point out) they wouldn't be able to go after Apple for making an iPod with a control interface a the top with the screen below. (There's lotsa other reasons they wouldn't be able to go after it, I wanted to use that on simplistic terms as an example.) The theory is that if you specify a narrow purpose for it, you won't be able to patent something that the entire market ends up having to license from you. Reality isn't quite in tune with that theory, shit still happens, but that's why 'on a cell phone' is patentable.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    9. Re:Garmin GPS did this 10 years ago by spun · · Score: 1

      Let's not forget Lake Titicaca. In case you didn't know, it's right near Lake Poopó. I shit you not.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    10. Re:Garmin GPS did this 10 years ago by necro81 · · Score: 1

      Well, the obvious solution is to have a device that's orientation-aware, possibly using an accelerometer, that could flip the button mapping and screen orientation depending on whether it is held one way or the other.

      Wait a minute...

      [rushes to go file patent application]

      -1, Obvious

    11. Re:Garmin GPS did this 10 years ago by AoT · · Score: 1

      If I had a GPS I'd most certainly use it to avoid that type of porn. /shudder

    12. Re:Garmin GPS did this 10 years ago by McNally · · Score: 1

      Whoa! There's GPS porn?
      Depends what kinds of curves you're into.

      And some of those contours can be... provocative. ...mmmmmmm.. contours.
    13. Re:Garmin GPS did this 10 years ago by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seen the Baltic Sea on your GPS?

    14. Re:Garmin GPS did this 10 years ago by ByTor-2112 · · Score: 1

      If you check Garmin's product line, I believe the auto-specific units don't have key configurations like this, or are capable of manually switching orientation modes. The hand-held units that have keypads at the top. I can't believe this thing was patentable!

    15. Re:Garmin GPS did this 10 years ago by RealGrouchy · · Score: 1

      I guess adding "cellphone" to a design is just like adding "on the Internet" to a business plan.
      Except most businesses already have their priorities upside-down.

      - RG>
      --
      Hey pal, this isn't a pleasantforest, so don't waste my time with pleasantries!
    16. Re:Garmin GPS did this 10 years ago by SeaFox · · Score: 1

      Whoa! There's GPS porn?
      Imagine how easy to find it is!
  5. Not Why Didn't I Think of That by ISoldMyLowIdOnEbay · · Score: 4, Insightful

    More

    How the H*ll Can You Patent That?

    1. Re:Not Why Didn't I Think of That by rolfwind · · Score: 3, Interesting

      And why the hell can you patent this?

    2. Re:Not Why Didn't I Think of That by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Im sorry sir, but if you wish to continue holding your phone upside down your going to have to pay the $500 royalty."

    3. Re:Not Why Didn't I Think of That by jfengel · · Score: 1

      Because nobody had done it before. A gazillion cell phone models exist, and none had done this.

      There are a gazillion cell phone models because they're all looking for some sort of differentiator. Why should you buy this one rather than that other one? They put a lot of time and effort into thinking of new models.

      Either this is the first time somebody came up with it, and the patent is a way of rewarding that ingenuity, or it's been tried before and rejected as useless, in which case the patent is pointless.

      We can debate whether the amount of time the patent is issued for is appropriate. We can debate whether it's worth the effort of rewarding this novel design with anything other than an industry award. We can certainly debate why the patent office issues a patent to anybody with a sheet of paper and letting the courts sort it out.

      But this strikes me as a classic patentable idea: novel, presumably useful, and (given that we didn't have any before despite a gazillion other models) non-obvious.

    4. Re:Not Why Didn't I Think of That by monsted · · Score: 5, Informative

      Too bad Bang & Olufsen has done it for a few years now.

      http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/cellphones/serene-cellp hone-from-samsung-and-bang-olufsen-155610.php

      You may now rip that patent to pieces.

    5. Re:Not Why Didn't I Think of That by lixee · · Score: 1

      But this strikes me as a classic patentable idea: novel, presumably useful, and (given that we didn't have any before despite a gazillion other models) non-obvious.

      None of the above; It's patentable simply because the system's broken.
      --
      Res publica non dominetur
    6. Re:Not Why Didn't I Think of That by mobby_6kl · · Score: 1

      >How the H*ll Can You Patent That?

      The same way you put an asterisk in "hell" and capitalized every word in a sentence.

    7. Re:Not Why Didn't I Think of That by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      screen on the bottom of the phone is not innovative it is a minor mod like patenting moving the zero key to the top of the keypad.

    8. Re:Not Why Didn't I Think of That by db32 · · Score: 1

      Exactly. One would think that Australia or China has prior art for using phones upside down.

      --
      The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
    9. Re:Not Why Didn't I Think of That by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here's another example that I saw some days ago:

      http://linuxdevices.com/news/NS2319525658.html

  6. I guess.... by mdm-adph · · Score: 1

    ...it's because we designers were always thinking of phones as little computers. Though I might be wrong, I'd be willing to bet that the person who thought this up has never worked in designing computers before -- the idea is too fresh and clean. Either that or some designer was drunk one night and used his phone upside down for hours, and then decided to patent it the next morning. :P

    --
    It is by my will alone my thoughts acquire motion; it is by the juice of the coffee bean that the thoughts acquire speed
    1. Re:I guess.... by backwardMechanic · · Score: 3, Funny

      Whoa, slow down excitable-designer-person. This too fresh and clean idea is a phone, with buttons for pressing and a screen for watching. It's been done before.

    2. Re:I guess.... by j00r0m4nc3r · · Score: 1

      "I designed WHAT?!?"

    3. Re:I guess.... by mdm-adph · · Score: 2

      bah -- sometimes silly little things like this can lead to spikes in sales.

      Just look at shoes with air pumps. :P

      --
      It is by my will alone my thoughts acquire motion; it is by the juice of the coffee bean that the thoughts acquire speed
  7. Layout patent? by FredDC · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How is it possible to patent the layout of something? I'll just go and patent a much used way of laying bricks on top of eachother and everyone who builds a house has to pass by my bank account first? This patenting is getting way out of hand!

    --
    09 f9 11 02 9d 74 e3 5b d8 41 56 c5 63
    1. Re:Layout patent? by LordEd · · Score: 1

      much used way
      This is where your idea can not be patented due to prior art.

      However, I have never seen a phone with the screen placed on the bottom.
    2. Re:Layout patent? by FredDC · · Score: 1

      I know their is prior art for building houses, as there is for this idea in fact. I was just trying to make clear that patenting a layout of something is just plain stupid! I can think of many ways to put things next, above, under, ... eachother. The point is that you shouldn't be able to patent one of the possibilities...

      --
      09 f9 11 02 9d 74 e3 5b d8 41 56 c5 63
    3. Re:Layout patent? by thosf · · Score: 1

      I completely agree. Maybe Ford should patent their vehicle "user interface": e.g., steering wheel on the left side, accelerator pedal for right foot, brake for left foot, radio in the middle of the dash. They could even stop building cars - just live on royalties from other car manufacturers who build cars that use Ford's "patented" User Interface. I'll bet that the patent examiner who permitted this is probably making over $60,000 a year. (another reason to roll back big government). I think that I'm going to file a patent for all 26 letters of the alphabet (both uppercase and lowercase). This way, when ever anybody talks or writes, I get patent royalties.

    4. Re:Layout patent? by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 1

      >This patenting is getting way out of hand!

      Out of hand, eh? Easy solution! Invent an upside-down patent system! :D

    5. Re:Layout patent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That'd be a design patent, see MPEP 1500: http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/document s/1500.htm

    6. Re:Layout patent? by RESPAWN · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the idea. ;)

      --

      If Murphy's Law can go wrong, it will.

    7. Re:Layout patent? by servognome · · Score: 1

      I was just trying to make clear that patenting a layout of something is just plain stupid! I can think of many ways to put things next, above, under, ... eachother. The point is that you shouldn't be able to patent one of the possibilities...
      Layout is not necessarily trivial. Just look at the layout of your keyboard, it's designed to work in a specific way to improve productivity.
      --
      D6 63 0D 70 89 81 BB 8E 7B 7C 5F 5D 54 EA AB 73
    8. Re:Layout patent? by KylePflug · · Score: 1

      Good sir,

      the brake is most certainly NOT for the left foot. Please stop driving that way.

    9. Re:Layout patent? by kram2598 · · Score: 1

      As far as i can remember, the QWERTY layout of keyboards is not to improve productivity but is designed to make interference/collisions less likely between the die-arms of mechanical typewriters. Other keyboard layouts exist that are designed for typing efficiency but never really caught on. Of course, this doesn't diminish your point. Layout is not necessarily trivial.

    10. Re:Layout patent? by tgd · · Score: 1

      You and the GP need to read up a bit on the history of Patents, because clearly neither of you understand them or understand how they've impacted various industries.

      Hint: every tiny detail of how cars worked has been patented. And expired a hundred years ago.

      In fact the cries about patent problems these days at best mirror, and in reality are probably less seriousthan they were in the 1800's.

    11. Re:Layout patent? by letxa2000 · · Score: 1

      Oh come on, the brake pad industry thanks him for it... as do ambulance-chasing attorneys.

  8. Patent, Patent, Patent by homey+of+my+owney · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Well it's true, there are a lot of things that seem to be common sense that aren't yet patented. For example, my upcoming patent for a simple gesture to signify the consummation of a business deal. I like to call it the handshake.

    1. Re:Patent, Patent, Patent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, hey, hey! That sounds awfully similar to my upcoming patent for a simple gesture to signify consumating yourself! I like to call it "flipping off".

    2. Re:Patent, Patent, Patent by saskboy · · Score: 1

      If you're going to do that, I'm going to patent the gesture one can make to the patent office for accepting ideas that waste their time, and court time. I call it the middle finger salute.

      The cell phone idea is strange, since you have your head turned down more now to see the screen. Although it's similar to what they did with laptops - moving the keyboard against the monitor, instead of the front edge of the base.

      --
      Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
  9. Is this the new Nokia? by mgblst · · Score: 1

    I hope it was side talking as well!

  10. what you're used to by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    making this one of those "Why didn't I think of that?" moments.

    This is simply because people don't think about ergonomics or what logically makes sense. Rather, they view things in terms they are familiar with. So since cellphones have always had the buttons on the bottom, everyone just assumed that's where they should go. The same can be said for interfaces in software development. Look at all the sourceforge projects that have GUIs. How many of them are just rehashes of the same bad interface design ideas lifted from Windows?

    1. Re:what you're used to by Zenaku · · Score: 1

      In interface design, intuitiveness is one of the most important factors, and making your interface similar to the countless interfaces the user is already familiar with makes it more intuitive for him.

      Thus what has been done in the past becomes a design consideration itself. Even a brilliant new interface that by all other measures is more intuitive and easy to use can be a bad design if it confuses the users by being too different from what they already know.

      The prevalant design ideas from windows didn't become ubiquitous by being good -- but they are now good because they are ubiquitous.

      --
      If fate makes you a motorcycle, you become a motorcycle.
  11. Nothing new by earthloop · · Score: 4, Informative

    Ericsson did this way back in 1999 with the "Hedvig".

    Project was cancelled, one reason being users didn't like the upside down configuration.

    1. Re:Nothing new by earthloop · · Score: 5, Informative

      (Replying to my own post, ugh!)

      Pics of Hedvig can be found here:
      http://semania.mobilmania.cz/content/view/87/2/

    2. Re:Nothing new by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Never mind the phone, the whole site you linked to looks upside down.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    3. Re:Nothing new by Poruchik · · Score: 1

      I agree, this ain't gonna fly. People are just too (stubborn, lazy, unwilling) to try something like this. It's too different.

      I had a Nokia 3650 (with its weird circular button layout). I've only seen one other person with one, and I am in New York City.

      --
      $signature =~ s/$signature//;
    4. Re:Nothing new by chris_eineke · · Score: 1

      Or maybe people took it as an electric shaver. I doubt it was water-proof. :P

      --
      "All you have to do is be fragile and grateful. So stay the underdog." Chuck Palahniuk, Choke
    5. Re:Nothing new by OwnedByTwoCats · · Score: 1

      Sorta like the upside-down keyboard (i.e. keyboard at the top of the base, right under the keyboard, rather than the tip of the base closest to the user) in Apple's first PowerBooks. I don't know why Apple didn't patent this; I don't know of any other laptop that had this feature in 1991, and by 1992 they all did.

    6. Re:Nothing new by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Sorta like the upside-down keyboard (i.e. keyboard at the top of the base, right under the keyboard, rather than the tip of the base closest to the user) in Apple's first PowerBooks. I don't know why Apple didn't patent this; I don't know of any other laptop that had this feature in 1991, and by 1992 they all did.

      What? None of my laptops have a keyboard under the keyboard. What would I need two keyboards for?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    7. Re:Nothing new by Bob_Geldof · · Score: 1

      I've had that phone for years, and am only now going to replace it with something that doesn't die randomly. It was even a hand-me-up from my little sister. People usually have two comments:

      "Oh, how cute." (green face plate)

      or

      "Dear god that's a huge phone." 4.59 oz ~130g

      As much as I love it's features, it's time to put it to rest. If only I could find a decent replacement for Card Deck (Solitaire Games) for my new Nokia 6103. I think the biggest issue for me will be getting used to sending SMS without the lovely circular keypad. I got used to it quickly and haven't looked back, until now.

      --
      887321 = 337*2633
    8. Re:Nothing new by OwnedByTwoCats · · Score: 1

      D'oh!

      s/right under the keyboard/right under the display/

  12. Turning Patents Upside Down by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    one of those "Why didn't I think of that?" moments.
    Sometimes known as an "obvious" invention. Which the law is supposed to prevent from being patented, if it were not abused by a patent regime administered to hand out as many artificial monopolies as possible.
    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:Turning Patents Upside Down by geoffspear · · Score: 1

      Of course, most brilliant inventions seem "obvious" after you've heard of them.

      --
      Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
    2. Re:Turning Patents Upside Down by orgelspieler · · Score: 1

      I think you've got that backwards. If you are thinking "Why didn't I think of that?" you are also thinking "I didn't think of that." If you hadn't thought of it before, then it's not obvious. More importantly, nobody "skilled in the art" thought of it either. If they had, they would have patented it. A lack of an existing successful product is considered "objective evidence of nonobviousness," at least in US patent law. (IANAL, but I have recieved an infringement letter.)

    3. Re:Turning Patents Upside Down by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And most ideas that are obvious after they're stated were obvious before they were stated. While all ideas that were obvious before they were stated are still obvious afterwards.

      Taking an invention and running through all the combinations of directions of placement is not "novel". If I take AT&T's patented keypad and patent it with the numbers running right-left, or down-up, or both, that's an obvious invention from the prior art. So is putting the keypad above the display.

      These patents are exceptions to the freedom to express information that are justified only by the necessity to protect the risky investments in invention that competitors would just use to start without the disadvantage of spending first on inventing, then on commercializing. This patent is an obvious example of using the initial investment in inventing the "top display" phone, then competing with it after investing practically nothing in the "bottom display" variation. It's a scam.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    4. Re:Turning Patents Upside Down by Embedded2004 · · Score: 1

      Is this idea *really* knew for people? I remember talking about this in the late 90s -- I think some devices actually shipped in this configuration as well.

    5. Re:Turning Patents Upside Down by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No, it's a trivial variation on the existing (patented or not) device. The lack of a patent does not indicate that no one thought of it, or would have. Why does this variant need patent protection of its "investment" in its unique design, so others can't compete with it starting with a full bank account? In fact, that is exactly what this design does, competing with existing designs, deriving its design from their substantial investment.

      Patenting isn't an "I thought of it first" lottery. It's a major exception to free info exchange justified only as protection of substantial risky investments from competitors. Which investment would otherwise not have been made without the protection. Otherwise these monopolies come too cheap, and interfere with "progress in science and the useful arts".

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    6. Re:Turning Patents Upside Down by stevesliva · · Score: 1

      If you hadn't thought of it before, then it's not obvious.
      There's the rub-- if the solution is obvious, but the problem obscure, then doesn't the first person to think of an obscure problem get the patent?
      --
      Who do you get to be an expert to tell you something's not obvious? The least insightful person you can find? -J Roberts
  13. No more dirty screen ? by Rastignac · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The screen (at the bottom) won't be touched by the ear, so it will stay clean.
    No more dirty sticky traces on the screen !

    --
    -- Rastignac was here.
    1. Re:No more dirty screen ? by Daemonstar · · Score: 1

      But now it'll be near your mouth; I'm not sure that's any better. :P

      --
      I don't reply to Anonymous posts; if you have something to say to me, identify yourself or I won't reply.
    2. Re:No more dirty screen ? by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      Instead, it'll be touched by the cheek, so it'll get all nice and greasy....

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    3. Re:No more dirty screen ? by elcid73 · · Score: 1

      which was a nice perk I mentioned when I wrote about this

    4. Re:No more dirty screen ? by lemon_dieter · · Score: 0

      The screen (at the bottom) will be touched by the beard, so it wil......

      On second thought, I'd rather cleanse my cellphone display of upper jaw grease than of beardy mouth grease.

      --
      Spending Resources on Defense leaves Less to defend.
  14. Baseball caps by xs650 · · Score: 2, Informative

    What's next, a patent on wearing baseball caps backwards?

    As another poster said. my 7 year old Garmin MAP12 handheld GPS had the screen on the bottom and buttons on the top.

    1. Re:Baseball caps by clonmult · · Score: 1

      But that wasn't a phone ....

      And as another posted said, Samsung/B&O have had their Serene upside-down phone on the market for quite a while now. Prior art is obviously of no interest to the patent office, or those applying for patents on concepts that are real to other manufacturers. Bunch of eejits.

    2. Re:Baseball caps by digitig · · Score: 1

      I am posting to inform you that you are in breach of my patent regarding the filing of sarcastic replies on internet discussion boards. My invoice for royalties is in the post.

      --
      Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
  15. Sidetalkin' 2.0: Upsidedowntalkin' by Flipao · · Score: 1

    Can't type, must enjoy visual....

  16. I do this every day... by knarf · · Score: 1

    ...with my original N-Gage when I use it as a book reader. It fits nicely in my hand, with the D-pad above the screen where I can use it to flip the pages. The book reader software takes care of rotating the screen in whatever direction I want i to be...

    --
    --frank[at]unternet.org
  17. 'Texting' by bytesex · · Score: 3, Funny

    Brought to you for the people who do the most 'texting' (shudder at the term); British teens. So what if you gave one of 'em, when, in a rare moment, they use their phone for its intended purposes, a big push on the phone: they'd press all the buttons at once with their zitty cheecks. You'd have to scrape all that pus out from in between the buttons. Yek.

    --
    Religion is what happens when nature strikes and groupthink goes wrong.
    1. Re:'Texting' by noidentity · · Score: 1

      Mod parent -1: Not suitable while eating

      (eating my breakfast... well, was)

    2. Re:'Texting' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Likewise. I was eating a cream-filled doughnut until I hit the word "pus." Now I'm cleaning the barf off my shoes.

    3. Re:'Texting' by gordo3000 · · Score: 1

      I doubt british teens even come close to the texting done by Japanese... well, everyone in this country.

      It probably has something to do with basic calling rates sitting around 40 cents a minute(on a cheap plan).

  18. seems reasonable by orgelspieler · · Score: 1

    I don't think this is obvious. The common "Why didn't I think of that?" feeling that many people are getting right about now is evidence enough for me. And it's definitely useful for people who text a lot. But has it been done before? I haven't seen anything like it, but I never really paid attention to mobile phones and such. (I know, I know; I'll mail my Geek Card back to HQ)

    1. Re:seems reasonable by drewzhrodague · · Score: 1

      For those of us that do think of things like this (and many others), it is more of a forehead smacking "I wish I could have afforded to patent that idea when I thought of it" moment. I think the requirement for a lawyer and an expensive application fee keeps lots of us would-be inventors from even getting in the game.

      ...now where did I put those writings about my soylent bulk animal farming aparatus...

      --
      Zhrodague.net - I do projects and stuff too.
    2. Re:seems reasonable by Zenaku · · Score: 1

      That's right on. I've had plenty of ideas that were later patented, but unless you actually plan to develop and market the idea yourself, it isn't even worth seeking a patent. The minimum fee to have a qualified patent lawyer write up an application that sufficiently describes the idea and protects all the possible variations of it with well worded claims is about 12K. (This from my buddy the patent lawyer).

      You can write one up yourself, but unless you are really damn good at legalese, it will have holes in it that any potential competetor could drive a truck through. And if you pay the money to have it done by a law firm, you will never see that money again unless someone else develops your idea and you sue them and win -- which can be hard, since you never developed the idea yourself and they likely have a team of corporate lawyers.

      --
      If fate makes you a motorcycle, you become a motorcycle.
    3. Re:seems reasonable by orgelspieler · · Score: 1

      So maybe the anon. reader meant "Why didn't I think of *patenting* that?" I totally agree with your sentiment, though. When I was just a tot, my little brother and I talked about making a change counting machine that would charge people some percentage of the total amount. We laughed to ourselves, "who would be stupid enough to actually use such a thing?!" Years later, imagine our dismay at seeing a shiney new CoinStar machine at the local five and dime. (sorry for the late reply, but I just became a dad, so I've been a little busy) :-)

  19. Non-obvious by Cauchy · · Score: 1

    Well, I must admit that this is certainly non-obvious. In fact, even after flipping my phone upside and playing around, I still find it non-obvious why the hell anyone would do this. I can safely predict that this is one patent I won't feel tempted to violate.

  20. I can't help thinking that... by TheSHAD0W · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...the iPhone can do this in software. :-P

    1. Re:I can't help thinking that... by bcmm · · Score: 1

      Can it? The iPhone doesn't allow third-party stuff, remember?

      --
      # cat /dev/mem | strings | grep -i llama
      Damn, my RAM is full of llamas.
    2. Re:I can't help thinking that... by ZOmegaZ · · Score: 1

      Only if Apple pays royalties!

    3. Re:I can't help thinking that... by glesga_kiss · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it probably will, when it comes out. However, most of the other full screen phones already do this, in addition to a landscape mode. Been that way for several years. This patent is worthless.

    4. Re:I can't help thinking that... by rbarreira · · Score: 1

      Did anyone mention third-party software besides you?

      --

      The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
    5. Re:I can't help thinking that... by bcmm · · Score: 1

      Well, as it is Apple, I presume it doesn't allow that sort of config change by default?

      --
      # cat /dev/mem | strings | grep -i llama
      Damn, my RAM is full of llamas.
  21. You know what they say about guys with big hands? by rsilvergun · · Score: 1, Funny

    Big Gloves.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  22. So now... by Mopar93 · · Score: 0

    ...if we all turn our existing phones upside down and memorize the keypad that way, will we be in violation of the patent? Or can this ability prevent the patent from being accepted?

    A previous poster mentioned the Garmin unit that is layed out this way. I've got one too, a different model of Garmin, but still, the screen is at the bottom and the buttons are at the top. The thing actually looks like a cell phone almost. Seems like Garmin could fight the patent as they thought of it first.

    -Maurice

    --
    FixingTheWeb.com Helping to keep the bad guys out...
  23. A gold mine by Ambitwistor · · Score: 1

    Wow, can you get patents for turning anything upside down? Dibs on the upside-down ping pong ball!

    1. Re:A gold mine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ha, your upside-down ping pong ball is inferieur to my inside-out ping pong ball (patent pending)

    2. Re:A gold mine by FredDC · · Score: 1

      Still nothing compared to my pong ping ball (patent pending)!

      --
      09 f9 11 02 9d 74 e3 5b d8 41 56 c5 63
  24. Marketing Gimmick by phoenixwade · · Score: 1

    No way this is expected to fly as a patent.

    I expect that a manufacturer is using /. to drive a concept test data collection. We'll see a product or not depending on the survey.

    --

    --
    A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort.
    1. Re:Marketing Gimmick by xs650 · · Score: 1

      "I expect that a manufacturer is using /. to drive a concept test data collection. We'll see a product or not depending on the survey."

      If that were so, MS wouldn't have released any new products since /. started.

    2. Re:Marketing Gimmick by Rob+Kaper · · Score: 1

      If that were so, MS wouldn't have released any new products since /. started.
      New products? They barely have.
  25. Plenty of Prior Art by LordSchnitzel · · Score: 3, Informative

    Here's a phone by B&O that came out in europe two years ago: http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/cellphones/serene-bang- -olufsens-upside-down-cellphone-210756.php

  26. No comments by El+Nigromante · · Score: 1

    This is similar to the 1 click buying case.

    I assume this is only a request not yet approved. A patent must fulfill several requirements (at least in most countries)... to not be already invented, to be really innovative and to not be evident from the current state of the art.

    If they want software patents for doing this kind of things, I have to agree with those that are against.

  27. Hooray for patents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That is such a great idea that the company came up with it should be granted exclusive license to its use for 17 years. After all no one would come up with such innovations without the patent system.

  28. hmm i could see this being implemented.. by TheShadowzero · · Score: 1

    i could see this working even on normal ("non-upsidedown") phones, when you want to text simply flip the phone over and an accelerometer will flip the screen orientaton. kind of like how the iphone will do it

    --
    If history repeats itself, why can't we study the future?
    1. Re:hmm i could see this being implemented.. by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      Why would you need to flip the screen? I can read stuff just fine upside down or mirrored, or whatever orientation. However, it would be a nice feature, but I'd stick with my current phone and read upside-down instead. Even if I was shopping for a new phone then I wouldn't specifically look for this feature. If the phone I wanted had this, then that's a plus, but I wouldn't consider getting a phone specifically for this reason, when reading upside down is just as easy.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    2. Re:hmm i could see this being implemented.. by TheShadowzero · · Score: 1

      SO why does Apple feel the need to have the iPhone change orientation when you make it horizontal? Because it is convenient. Would you rather read things right side up or upside down?

      --
      If history repeats itself, why can't we study the future?
    3. Re:hmm i could see this being implemented.. by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      Like I said, It's a nice feature, but I wouldn't buy a phone solely for this feature. Sometimes it's even a non-feature. My camera figures out if I took a picture with the camera turned, and the proceeds to show the image rotated so that it's upright. However, because the pictures and screen aren't square, the picture now only takes up half the area of the screen. Which means I don't get a very good view of the picture. I would rather they left the picture to be viewed as normal. You can turn this feature off, but then when you download the pictures, you have to rotate them all yourself. I just wish the camera would show them full screen, and still put them on the computer properly rotated.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
  29. Next story? Upside-down slashdot! by neonux · · Score: 5, Funny

    "A patent has been filed for the "Upside Down Slashdot" which features the comments on top and the fucking article on the bottom. The idea behind the upside down Slashdot is, apparently, to allow quicker reading by not having to RTFA. A quick check of this seems to confirm the theory, making this one of those "Why didn't I think of that?" moments."

    --
    @neonux
    1. Re:Next story? Upside-down slashdot! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How's this? (Mozilla browsers only)
      #article {
      display: -moz-box !important;
      -moz-box-orient: vertical !important;
      -moz-box-direction: reverse !important;
      }

    2. Re:Next story? Upside-down slashdot! by grimJester · · Score: 1

      Whoa! Like, every post could be the first post until the next post was posted. Brilliant!

    3. Re:Next story? Upside-down slashdot! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "A patent has been filed for the upside-down human, featuring unhindered escape of lighter-than-air odoriferous gases without them passing the nose." Of course some people would have to stoop to make themselves heard.

    4. Re:Next story? Upside-down slashdot! by pipingguy · · Score: 1

      Thanks for ruining April 1, jerk!

  30. My next idea: The upside-down upside-down phone by johnfink · · Score: 1

    I'm filing for a patent on a device with the screen on top and the buttons on the bottom. That way, your thumb and that muscle there will not obscure the screen as you're operating the buttons. Now if you'll excuse me, I need to go quit my job, because I'm about to be rich.

  31. lol... by Wicko · · Score: 1

    turn it right side up!

  32. well, if that flies... by djasbestos · · Score: 1

    Then I'll patent a phone with the keys oriented to the side...oh wait...damn. I guess I'll have to patent a sandwich with two patties of meat encasing a piece of bread, mustard, onions, and pickles. And whatever else you normally put on a burger.

  33. PATENT APPLICATION == DENIED: PRIOR ART by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    nuff said

    1. Re:PATENT APPLICATION == DENIED: PRIOR ART by denis-The-menace · · Score: 1

      you must be new to slashdot.

      After 2-3 months you come to learn that all parts of government are corrupt and/or incompetent.

      --
      Obama's legacy: (N)othing (S)ecure (A)nywhere and (T)error (S)imulation (A)dministration
  34. Arr crap by KlaymenDK · · Score: 1
    Dated 2007-01-20: http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=21793 0&cid=17697282

    What's wrong with the interface? Describe one you think would be better, maybe someone will implement it. Okay, I'll gladly bite! Here are a few pet peeves of mine:

    For one, why does the display always have to be 'on top of' the keypad? You have to hold the thing with both hands, or nearly drop the phone while reaching for the * 0 # keys. Instead, flip it around so the display is *below* the keypad. Go on,try it with your own phone, right now (just ignore for now that your keys will be upside down):
    -- One-handed typing will be much easier, as you can hold onto the phone more firmly while typing. Also note how the 'thigh' of your thumb will not obscure the display.
    -- Two-handed speed-texting will be much more 'private' because your thumb's thighs will keep your display hidden from everyone but you (the teens will love this!). I've blogged about this before, too (if you can call it that, as it was before "blogging" was called that).
  35. But I did think of it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've been saying this for 5 years now. Bastards stole my idea.

    The phone is much more stable upside down, and you can still reach the keys easy.

    It also stops thieves snatching it your hand (or you accidently dropping it in the toilet) as your typing a text.

  36. I claim prior art! by korbin_dallas · · Score: 1

    If you scan Slashdot from some months back I described this very concept.
    No really I did. Ugh. Geex can you patent anything now? Wheres the prototype?
    The plans, etc.

    --
    They Live, We Sleep
    1. Re:I claim prior art! by Aladrin · · Score: 1

      I dont remember if it was you, but I definitely read someones reply on one of the iPhone stories kvetching that they didnt put the keypad at the top of the screen, and I believe they stated they hoped someone made a mod. It was obvious that the person had not -just- thought of the idea, but had wanted it for years.

      According to other posts (and pictures) theres already been at least 1 phone made in this configuration. Its not a new idea.

      Im glad theres prior art to stop this idiotic patent, but I kind of wish it had gotten denied for being obvious, instead of prior art.

      I think patents should be given for ideas that actually take time and investment to prove out. "Ill reorder the knobs" is not something that should be patentable. "Ill create a new interface from scratch" is debatable. "Ill create a new technology/process that will do X" is definitely a patent.

      Thatd make too much sense, though. -sigh-

      --
      "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
  37. It's the very idea! by way2trivial · · Score: 1

    not the product, that smells......

    --
    every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
  38. Patented by imarsman · · Score: 1

    I'm having a "Why is that patentable?" moment.

  39. Low hanging fruit by fishbowl · · Score: 1

    In a few years, all the obvious low-hanging-fruit patents we've seen in recent times, will be expiring and things will level off. Let them patent *everything they can think of* obvious or not, NOW, and look forward to all these patents expiring together, which will be equally hilarious.

    --
    -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
    1. Re:Low hanging fruit by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      except its not a few years, iirc its over two bloody decades.

      thats arround half your working life (assuming you start work at 20 and retire at sixty-something)

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    2. Re:Low hanging fruit by fishbowl · · Score: 1


      >thats arround half your working life (assuming you start work at 20 and retire at
      >sixty-something)

      I've been following the software patent issue since 1977.

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
  40. not on Blackberry! by keithhackworth · · Score: 1

    This would work great using a device with one hand. It's much easier to hold while typing than the conventional method. However, it doesn't fare so well with a two-handed device. I tried to turn my Blackberry upside down to see if it had the same benefit - nope, it's very awkward. Since you have nothing above it to hold the device (where you would normally use your index, middle, and ring fingers), the "natural" thing to do is use the sides of your thumbs to hold it up. But since you use your thumbs to type, it would then easily be dropped while typing. In this position, you have to support the device on your pinkys to type. It feels like nothing is really supporting the phone while typing. In additon, your thumbs cross the screen making it difficult to see.

    Keith

    --
    Support bacteria. They're the only culture some people have.
  41. bin done by b00le · · Score: 2, Informative

    The Serene phone from Samsung/Bang & Olufsen http://www.serenemobile.com/ already does this -- even lets you switch configurations.

    1. Re:bin done by mtenhagen · · Score: 1

      And again another "upside down" phone, the Curitel Identity (GA-400B)

      --
      200GB/2TB $7.95 Coupon: SAVE90DOLLAR
  42. I already have one of those... by stokes · · Score: 1

    The only problem is that the screen and number pad are also upside-down.

  43. Prior art: I've been doing this for years by aborchers · · Score: 2, Funny

    I just stand on my head and use my right-side-up phone!

    --
    Trouble making decisions? Just flip for it.
  44. False assumption by Moraelin · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You're making the assumption that "if noone patented it, noone thought about it", which is, sad to say, bogus. Some people just don't run to the patent office for each and single triviality.

    In this case, for example, there I can remember at least two cases of phones built just like that. One even made it all the way to being marketted. (Dunno if it actually sold or not, though.) So, yes, other people "skilled in the art" _did_ think of it before. Go figure.

    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
    1. Re:False assumption by orgelspieler · · Score: 1

      What I meant to say was "if no one *built* it, no one thought of it." Thanks for pointing out my error. While I think that argument is dumb, it is one that the courts use for proof of non-obviousness. If what you say is true and people have marketed similar phones before, then I think it is a no-brainer invalid patent. Since I was never really on top of the mobile phone market, it's probable that I just never heard of the devices you're talking about. Somebody mentioned the Ericsson Hedvig, but that has the keyboard on the bottom, too, if Google Images is to be trusted.

  45. Maybe by kdizza · · Score: 1

    I think it may be because if you mash the phone into your ear it would trigger the keypad.

  46. Must be an Aussie design ... by schwit1 · · Score: 1

    Isn't this the default layout down under?

  47. I bags the keyboard on the left by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd like to patent the keyboard on the right, but garmin seem to have done that one too:

    http://www.radar-detector-shop.co.uk/products/garm in-quest.htm

    Do they have a unit with keys on the back?

    Don't go stealing my Intellectual Property, it takes away jobs and kills little puppies.

    1. Re:I bags the keyboard on the left by Heian-794 · · Score: 1

      I'd like to patent the keyboard on the right, but garmin seem to have done that one too:

      http://www.radar-detector-shop.co.uk/products/ga rm in-quest.htm

      The marginal increase in usability for right-handers would be more than offset by its near-total unusability by left-handers.

      Some of the "Zaurus" PDAs are like this also. What on earth can makers of products like these be thinking?

    2. Re:I bags the keyboard on the left by nasch · · Score: 1

      What on earth can makers of products like these be thinking?
      I would guess they were thinking "I have an idea for a product that could be more attractive to 95% of potential users.
    3. Re:I bags the keyboard on the left by Stewie241 · · Score: 1

      I have a cell phone with both the keys and the display on the back. It makes it hard to use, but if you turn it backwards then it works like almost any other cell phone.

  48. Uh, Because of human anatomy? by popo · · Score: 1


    Current configuration:

    Let's see:
    Long fingers, short thumbs.
    Fingers cradle phone.
    Thumbs type.

    New configuration:
    Fingers crunch uselessly over the top of the phone.
    Thumbs must curve outwards to prevent screen from being concealed.

    Once again: just because you patent it, doesn't mean its good.

    Sort of like my upside down toilet patent. Just *try* to copy it, I dare you.

    --
    ------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
    1. Re:Uh, Because of human anatomy? by Hittite+Creosote · · Score: 1
      Human anatomy? Let's do a little test, shall we.

      Put your fingers together and twiddle your thumbs. Are your thumbs twiddling by your forefingers, or by your little fingers?

      Place the phone supported by all the fingers. Twiddle your thumbs - they're in front of the screen.

    2. Re:Uh, Because of human anatomy? by elcid73 · · Score: 1

      This doesn't make any sense at all. Do you *really* need to curve your thumbs outward to prevent the screen from being conceled?

      Let's see... according to human anatomy, when my palms are facing in, my thumbs are higher up than the rest of my fingers... ie, they're at the "top" of the hand, It would be nice to hold a device where the top of it was easily in reach of my thumbs while comfortably holding the device.

    3. Re:Uh, Because of human anatomy? by popo · · Score: 1


      Huh? Wait.

      When I hold my hands 'palms facing', my fingers extend further than my thumbs, making them a perfect cradle
      for the top (screen) part of the phone. My thumbs are shorter -- near the bottom (keypad) part of the phone.

      If the top of the phone was to "end" right above my thumbs, my fingers would be dangling uselessly in space,
      and the new bottom of the phone would extend unsupported between my wrists.

      Still seems like a lame idea to me....

      --
      ------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
    4. Re:Uh, Because of human anatomy? by elcid73 · · Score: 1

      This still doesn't make any sense to me anymore than I suppose what I'm saying doesn't make any sense to you.

      If you look at the picture in the post, that is exactly how I feel it most comfortable to hold the phone and my thumb is closer to the top of the phone then the bottom.

      My palm doesn't cover the screen, I don't have to bend or contort my my hands, I don't violate the design of the human body.. it's just more comfortable. I suppose we'll agree to disagree.

  49. Wait till I file my patent for the ZXCVBN keyboard by uwbbjai · · Score: 1

    designed to let the guy sitting opposite of me do all my typing...

  50. What a load of crap by hedleyroos · · Score: 1

    I found a quicker route to my office. Now I'm going to patent that route and anyone who wants to use my route must pay me royalties!

    Seriously, ridiculous "patents" like this want me to torch the patent office (or the applicant, whichever works).

  51. Not new: Garmin has done it before by vrt3 · · Score: 1

    My Garmin Geko 201 (http://www.garmin.com/products/geko201/) has the same layout, for the same reasons.

    But I don't like that layout a single bit. It may be great in theory, but in practice my hands always obscure the screen if I use the buttons. Even more so if I mount it on my bike's handlebar.

    --
    This sig under construction. Please check back later.
  52. Refreshing approach to customer support by multisync · · Score: 1

    This product has been discontinued. We are happy to help you, and we will continue to support this product.
    --
    I don't care why you're posting AC
  53. Done and failed years ago by rbrome · · Score: 1

    This has already been done:

    http://www.phonescoop.com/phones/phone.php?p=513

    The Wildseed Identity phone was innovative in many ways; putting the keypad on top was just one. Unfortunately, Wildseed never really got off the ground on their own. I think AOL snapped them up.

  54. I've been doing this for years by dan+the+person · · Score: 1

    You don't need a special phone for this, once you've practiced a little you'll be used to reading the screen upside down and will find it weird using a phone the conventional way.

    Do i get to claim prior art?

  55. In your opinion by The+Creator · · Score: 1

    If improving something in a non obvious way is not enougt, what should it take to get a patent?

    --

    FRA: STFU GTFO
  56. Proof that patents suck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    'More importantly, nobody "skilled in the art" thought of it either. If they had, they would have patented it.'

    Ah but Ericcson did do it before (see above), and they didn't patent it and countless devices did it before them (Garmin are listed as examples above) and they didn't patent it either.

    So it illustrates the problem with ignoring the 'non obvious' and 'innovate' clauses in the patent law as the patent office is clearly doing.

    "A lack of an existing successful product is considered "objective evidence of nonobviousness,"

    Yet a quick look in any shop shows keypads on the left of the screen, right of the screen, and handsets with buttons above (e.g. the off button is often above the screen). So what is so unique about this?

    It appears the 'unique' aspect of this is that the person thinks it makes it easier to use one handed, however he's ignoring the thumb. In the drawing he's placed it at the middle, and the viewpoint at the left, so it doesn't show the thumb obstructing the screen. So what is unique about it? Nothing.

    Someone skilled in the art draw unworkable prototypes like this all the time. Just because a drawing isn't worth making into a product, doesn't mean its new.

  57. Prior Art ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bang & Olufsen had a phone like this, Serene Mobile, a long time ago :
    http://www.bang-olufsen.com/page.asp?id=54/

  58. And it has Linux on it, too by RichiP · · Score: 1
  59. erhm... there are rules for patents by mixenmaxen · · Score: 1

    When you apply for a patent you have to live up to three criteria:
    1 - Your idea must not have been in the public domain before you file your patent aplication
    2 - Your idea must not be obvious to a skilled expert in the field of the invention
    3 - Your idea must be usable

    Well, to me it seems that this is pretty obvoius to any engineer in the mobile phone market, and both this phonehttp://gizmodo.com/gadgets/cellphones/serene- bang--olufsens-upside-down-cellphone-210756.php and this phone http://www.garmin.com/products/gps12/ already have upside down displays.

    So I hardly see how this can justify a patent... Of course it could all be about business practices, there is nobody stopping me from applying for a patent on the wheel, I just won't get it. But my competitors won't know that for a year or two..

  60. Unusable? by NorQue · · Score: 1

    Has anyone here ever written a SMS before? T9 usually messes up every second word if you don't watch what you're typing, you'll *have* to constantly watch the screen. And that's impossible with the keypad above the display, as it'll be partially covered by your thumb. So this is one of the most useless ideas I've ever seen! Unless someone invents a T9-like SMS input method that actually works, that is...

    1. Re:Unusable? by timmyf2371 · · Score: 1

      I tried using T9 on the recommendation of a friend, who claimed it allowed him to text so much faster than the "old" texting method.

      Sadly, I spent the next hour trying to find a way to change a suggested word without having to go through a single menu, and then I challenged him to a texting contest, and I won.

      I still get texts from people where there's a random "on" instead of a "no", and other such grammatical mistakes. They're easy enough to read if you know what to look for, but I'd never use something so non intuitive.

      --

      Backup not found: (A)bort (R)etry (P)anic
  61. Prior Art ? by rozz · · Score: 1

    Serene
    upside-down cellphone from Bang&Olufsen

    --
    "There is nothing more frightful than ignorance in action." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
  62. Clearly invalid patent! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Everything in Australia surely qualifies as prior art.

  63. I had this idea! by MaWeiTao · · Score: 1

    For the love of god... I actually had this idea a few years ago. I was playing around with my phone and found it easier to access the keys with the phone upside down. My idea would have the screen offset by a few millimeters so that it wouldn't be obscured by the palm.

    I didn't actually think it was a patent worthy idea. I didn't think much of the idea at all. I guess somebody else has. What a joke.

  64. Doomed, doomed I tell thee by CmdrGravy · · Score: 1

    My patent for a phone into which you had to talk backwards to it doesn't seem to generated much capital for me, yet. The idea is that the person you're calling will immediately hear the end of the conversation and know straight away if it was a worthwile conversation or not and thus be able to terminate the call immediately if the conversation didn't end positively for them.

  65. Agreed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lets say that there WERE NO PATENTS.

    Would this idea not be used? No. Could its' use be kept a secret or protected from easy reverse engineering? No.

    So what do we, the public, get out of breaking the free market principles of capitalism and granting a patent on this idea? Whether it's a novel idea or not, without patent protection, this idea would still be around and there would be no friction in using it (e.g. to get Ericson to include this "useful feature" will cost Ericson the retooling but no licensing costs). Therefore the market will be efficient in getting the best product use of this idea out to the public for the least cost.

  66. *shakes a pair of rollerblades* by jimstapleton · · Score: 1

    *has a pathetic look on face*

    I shoulda got a patent.

    --
    34486853790
    Connection too slow for X forwarding? Try "ssh -CX user@host"
  67. patently dumb by FishCalledOscar · · Score: 1

    He filed a patent -> APPLICATION -. It is far from being a patent. Don't we wish we could scribble some trash, drop it in the mail, and have a patent. Sadly, it has to be examined by a patent office and all that other procedural stuff.

    --
    What? Me? Sig?
  68. I did think of that by amazon10x · · Score: 1

    I've been saying there should be a phone like this for a while (not on /.; IRL). I often dial phone numbers with the phone upside down just because it's so painful to do it the other way.

    However, I think I've seen a phone that has done this before (maybe it was just a prototype).

  69. This is why. by markfleser · · Score: 1

    It's so you don't get all your skin grease all over the screen.

  70. Prior art: the B&O ``Serene''? by Lproven · · Score: 1

    So it's a bit like the Bang & Olufsen "Serene" mobile, then?

    Icky flash-driven official site or a review.

    --
    Liam P. ~ "Intelligence is a lethal mutation." (me)
  71. Really? Not for me. by jimmyfergus · · Score: 1

    If I take my phone and turn it upside-down in a natural position, the screen is fully visible. It would be a major improvement. I'd have to adopt an uncomfortable position to obscure the screen.

    My phone is a very small Nokia soap-bar (6100 - I've never understood the infatuation with flip-phones... Star Trek?). Perhaps it's different with whatever you're using.

  72. Obviousness by robbarrett · · Score: 1

    As one holding a number of patents (sorry, part of the problem, I suppose....), my experience is that many patent applications are initially rejected by the patent office for reasons of obviousness.

    So how does one prove that a solution to a problem is non-obvious? One technique that has proved successful in my personal experience is to demonstrate that a certain problem is well known within the art and yet no one has ever proposed or implemented this approach to solving the problem. Such an argument then requires two steps: (1) demonstrating that experts in the field have struggled with the problem for some time and (2) claiming that no prior art has been found with the inventor's solution.

    I'm curious if anyone thinks this is inadequate or if other proofs of "non-obviousness" are possible.

    (No comment on the obviousness of the upside down phone patent)

  73. Re:Really? Not for me. by sconeu · · Score: 3, Informative

    I've never understood the infatuation with flip-phones

    No keyboard locking necessary. I can't count the number of times my wife has forgotten to lock the keyboard on her Nokia, and buttons get pushed on it in her purse.

    --
    General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
  74. Much better way to speed up texting by skymt · · Score: 1

    Why not make a candybar phone with a chorded keyboard on the sides? It would fit the human hand better than the upside-down or rightside-up designs, and gives you proven speed (stenotype machines used in court reporting use a chorded keyboard). It would require some training, but the speed gains would be worth it for heavy texters.

  75. Lame... by PortHaven · · Score: 1

    I am really sick of patents. I do not think this is an idea worthy of a patent. Maybe because I've had the same idea. Who knows...

    I think that the usability on a phone is okay, but I really thought the concept could be better applied to the iPod. Giving the user a full screen in front and and the virtual jog wheel on the back. Anyways, at least now that it's here in the annals of slashdot that will hopefully provide some prior art concept and prevent more stupid patents.

    I swear, soon the patent office is going to grant a patent on "the wheel". Yes, the thousands and thousands of year old invention now patented by "Good Year".

  76. Re:Really? Not for me. by Stewie241 · · Score: 1

    Or suddenly your pocket or briefcase starts talking to you... Hello? Hello? Or on the other end, you receive a call and you either hear rustled background noise, or a mundane conversation... Ian

  77. Re:Really? Not for me. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    I've never understood the infatuation with flip-phones

    The point of a flip is that it takes up the least space in your pocket or whatever, and then it turns into a phone that isn't so tiny that the microphone is just useless. I mean with most phones they might as well put the mic on the back for all the good having it pressed against my cheek does. I now have a RAZR V3i (was waiting for MP camera and memory card slot on the RAZR and they gave me what I wanted, so I bought one) and when you open it, it actually turns into a good-sized phone with the mic near my mouth, and I'm 6'7" and have a proportionally-sized head.

    This is especially true of the RAZR and that samsung knockoff which is made much more cheaply but has that neat flip-over camera. I don't even know of any phones thinner than a folded razr, and I don't know of any that start out with so little overall volume (and I don't mean the sound) and end up so long. And yes, I realize there's a joke there, thankyoverymuch.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  78. Re:Really? Not for me. by jimmyfergus · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Ok, part of my viewpoint comes from the fact I'm a cheapskate, and won't pay hundreds of dollars a year for service*, don't care about cameras, internet access etc.. For cheapskates, the soap-bar is king.

    Now that flip-phones like the RAZR are around, the size in the pocket is no longer a disadvantage, only leaving the high cost to get a small phone and the fragility of a hinge etc.. In contrast for instance the Nokia 6030 is even given away free for prepaid (T-mobile: $30 including $35 of airtime), the equivalent Samsung flip is a fat lump, and a RAZR costs $200. If you get them "free" with a contract, we all know they're not really free.

    The mic on these soap bars is on the bottom of the unit, so won't touch your cheek. With my fairly large head, it's 2 inches from my mouth, and works just fine. No one ever has problems hearing me, and I have to keep telling my wife she can talk more quietly on hers.

    I do concede that with the flips don't need to lock the keys, and if you're happy paying for a slim RAZR or whatever, then it's not really inferior. My initial comment was partly out of date, and certainly colored by my usage pattern.

    * Prepaid: I use the phone on average of 10 minutes a week. With T-mobile prepaid I can buy 2 year's worth of minutes for $100, and then just have to buy a minimum of $10 after 12 months to keep that balance active for another 12. Total cost for first 2 years service with phone: $140, $50/year after that, assuming all things stay the same. Sure, I could pay $40 or more a month and get more minutes, but they'd be minutes I don't use. I use Skype or Gizmo when I want to have an actual chat, which is rarely when mobile.

  79. Wildseed Phone by daemonmonke · · Score: 1

    In addition to the other phones cited here, this was also a feature of the Wildseed (also briefly known as "GitWit") phone, that had a number of other interesting features beside the fact that the keypad was on top.

    http://www.linuxdevices.com/articles/AT5512478189. html

    I doubt that Anthony Harrison's patent can hold up, since there is plenty of "prior art" available.

  80. Re:Really? Not for me. by DAtkins · · Score: 1

    Once I was driving into work in the morning, doing my normal thing when I get a call from my wife. Apparently, I had called her by accident and she wanted to thank me for singing to her - and her coworkers - on my drive in.

    That day, I wished I had had a flip phone. My singing along to Junior Kelly surely doesn't sound all that great.

  81. or maybe it's for this kid by splict · · Score: 1
    --
    Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a yo-yo.-Enoch Root
  82. cool by White+Yeti · · Score: 5, Funny

    Of course, this was all on a bicycle, so that makes a difference as well. We need more posts that end with this line.
  83. Except for one problem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You sent 4 different SMS messages to your wife, at 10p each, and she sent you 5 at 10p each for a grand total of 90p vs 20p for that 30 second call.

  84. Ehhh.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    prior art 'nuff said

  85. It's an *application* people by hacksoncode · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Complaining about the ridiculousness of a pending patent *application* is about as useful as complaining about people spending time thinking of what they'd wish for if they found a bottle with a genie in it.

    So someone thought they had a cool new idea because they hadn't ever seen anything like it and they were wrong... so what? If the patent *issues* then there's something to complain about (though pointing the patent office at the prior art would be a useful public service, unlike whining on Slashdot).

    1. Re:It's an *application* people by bit01 · · Score: 1

      Complaining about the ridiculousness of a pending patent *application* is about as useful as complaining about people spending time thinking of what they'd wish for if they found a bottle with a genie in it.

      Given the ease with which the PTO issues silly patents and the sometimes ridiculuous cost of breaking patents to claim that questioning a patent application is not useful is disingenuous at best.

      So someone thought they had a cool new idea because they hadn't ever seen anything like it and they were wrong... so what?

      So these idiots could cost many other people doing nothing more than minding their own business a lot of money if this is not questioned before it's issued.

      If the patent *issues* then there's something to complain about (though pointing the patent office at the prior art would be a useful public service, unlike whining on Slashdot).

      The fact that the people making this patent application thought it might succeed says more about the technical ability of the PTO than anything else.

      The entire idea that a small government department is capable of assessing all of technology created by 6,500,000,000+ people for prior art is silly. Only scientists working in very narrow fields for a lifetime can do that and even then they make mistakes. The assumption that in a population of billions of people most technological inventions are not going to be independently reinvented many times is also silly.

      ---

      Scientific, evidence based IP law. Now there's a thought.

  86. Re:Really? Not for me. by green1 · · Score: 2, Informative

    >> No keyboard locking necessary.

    unless you have a poorly designed flip phone that happened to have 3 buttons on the outside, and one of them was both the keyboard unlock, and the redial last number button... I CONSTANTLY had that phone calling people from my pocket even though it had both the flip closed AND the keyboard locked! (what idiot designs a phone where the keyguard is turned off by one of only 3 buttons that were NOT covered by the flip cover??? (hint: Samsung SCH-3500 ))

  87. I've said this about DAPs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've been thinking this about Digital Audio Players for a couple of years now.

  88. Upside-down texting? Meh by Trogre · · Score: 1

    I still prefer good old sideways texting.

    Feels much more natural and less typing due to the qwerty keyboard. I don't get why this style seems to have vanished in current generations.

    --
    "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
  89. I think the idea sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My phone is much more comfortable and natural by holding it the correct way. I am able to hit every button with my thumb with ease. By holding it upside down, it's "Ok" to hold, but it's awkward to look down to see the screen. Bad idea IMHO, I will stick with the current format.

  90. Re:haHA...me too!!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ij rezenf dhat commeint.

  91. large hands by fuliginous · · Score: 1

    I have two friends with large hands (they are both 6' 4" tall, but in particular have long hands) and have both always texted and dialed with their phones upside down because of the greater comfort it gives them.

  92. Re:Really? Not for me. by Nasarius · · Score: 1

    For cheapskates, the soap-bar is king.
    Uh, my clamshell Kyocera phone cost $20.
    --
    LOAD "SIG",8,1
  93. Re:You know what they say about guys with big hand by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

    Yeah but now I want to know how you type on this phone with boxing gloves on.

    --
    Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
  94. Duty of Disclosure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's a lot of good prior art listed in this thread. If you place any of the applicants, attorney of record, or anyone else substantively involved in the prosecution of this application on notice of this thread, they will have to report the prior art disclosed in this thread to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to satisfy their Duty of Disclosure. A patent is unenforcable if anyone substantively involved in the prosecution of the patent application does not satisfy their Duty of Disclosure.

  95. Don't put your mouth where your glass is. by twitter · · Score: 1

    Also, it's not such a great idea to put a screen next to your mouth. Unless you can flip it over the screen will be a mess.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

  96. Re:Really? Not for me. by dcam · · Score: 1

    I've never understood the infatuation with flip-phones

    flip phone = larger screen & buttons.

    That said, Nokia's interface is sooo much better than anything else anyone has to offer and Nokia haven't made a small, well featured flip phone, so I'm sticking with candy bar phones for the moment.

    --
    meh
  97. That was done in 2004 by Classic+Guy · · Score: 1

    http://linuxdevices.com/news/NS2319525658.html

    I also think candybar-style phones (my preferred style) would benefit from having the mic and earpiece on the *back* of the phone, so the screen and keypad don't get all greasy.

    --
    Why can't they just collide a whole bunch of little hadrons?
    1. Re:That was done in 2004 by usrusr · · Score: 1

      i was thinking of this prior art too. or is that patent by the same guys? a quick glance over the patent pdf linked behind the article shows no date before 2005.

      i don't agree with the backside thing though (never had that problem), but then i'm one of those people who are spending much more time with their mobile in a pda role than with their mobile in the traditional phone role. ever thought about using a headset?

      --
      [i have an opinion and i am not afraid to use it]
    2. Re:That was done in 2004 by Classic+Guy · · Score: 1

      In fact I do use a bluetooth headset, but generally only while driving. I'm just tired of wiping skin oil off my screen, and it occurred to me that I never have to wipe the *back* of the phone!

      --
      Why can't they just collide a whole bunch of little hadrons?
  98. Correction by rbarreira · · Score: 1

    Correction - I meant "I use a prepaid card as do most of the people in the countries I've lived at".

    --

    The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
  99. Re:Really? Not for me. by drsquare · · Score: 1

    OK, hold your phone upside down, and press the button in the top-left with your right thumb. Half the screen is obscured.

  100. One of several ideas I've thought of by alternapop · · Score: 1

    I mentioned this exact feature request to several Apple reps at Macworld, 2 Macworld's ago. The ability to have the iPod display the screen upside down and thus reverse the controls of the ipod.... it makes the iPod easier to hold and your thumb does not get in the way. Maybe I should just keep these silly ideas to myself and patent them? If only I had thousands of dollars to patent things that seem obvious to me.

  101. why don't you just call them instead? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hello? Sorry I can hardly hear you. I said I can hardly hear you! Yes, I'm on my way! Sorry? Can't you go somewhere quieter? err..don't worry about it! huh? I'll see you in 10 minutes, you're in the same place right? sorry? err, sorry I can't hear you, I'll call you in a bit.

    Hi, I'm on the train and the signal is a bit dodgy. I'm on my way and I'll see you at ...if you could call me back on 0122334456789 I'd much appreciate it.

    Yeah we're going to the party tonight, are you coming? Yeah it's at Guanabara between Covent Garden and Holborn. No...Guanabara. G U A N A B A R A. Yes kinda off longacre to the north, on Parker Street. Have you got a pen and paper? ohh bugger, nevermind. yes, P A R K E R street... and it's G U A N A B A N A. No, G U A N A B A N A. Look we're going in now, so hopefully I'll be able to hear you call if you get lost, it get a bit loud in there...Yes on Parker Street. ok hopefully see you in a bit.

  102. Duh! by AoT · · Score: 1

    You just punch the numbers in.

    You asked for it.

  103. Re:Really? Not for me. by EdelFactor19 · · Score: 1

    dunno what you are smoking, no one in the world pays 200 for a razr... maybe a krazr.... its 100 and with the $50 that every single company gives you right now no matter what (all i did was renew my 2 year contract) brings it down to 50 bucks.. stop complaining about it being expensive. 10 minutes a week? why do you even need a cell phone? and that assumes that they still offer service to your ancient phone after 3 years... also assumes that you dont have to replace the battery.

    --
    "Jazz isn't dead, it just smells funny" ~Frank Zappa
    EdelFactor
  104. Prior art: Curitel Identity phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Curitel Identity phone (1st Linux phone released) has the screen on the bottom and the keys at the top. It had a lot more cool shit than just that though... it was a shame they never caught on.

  105. Re:Really? Not for me. by jimmyfergus · · Score: 1

    all i did was renew my 2 year contract

    That's the key - perhaps you should read my post. You think it's really costing you $50? Good consumer! Good boy!

  106. Re:"Why didn't I think of^W^Wpatent that?" by CortoMaltese · · Score: 1
    Not that it matters anymore, but I did think of that years ago, looking at my dad trying to bend his huge thumb to the keys at the bottom.

    For me, the question will be "Why didn't I patent that?"

  107. The ridiculousness of it is.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That the person thought that simply switching the layout of a phone was a patentable invention... and that they were probably right, in the absence of the Ericcson and BO phones they would probably have been allowed the patent. To the Slashdot crowd, it's just a layout change, no different than arranging the number keys so they're 987,654,321 instead of 789,456,123. A change that should fail the 'obviousness' test.

    So it points out a couple of big problems with patents:

    Patents are to encourage new products and new inventions by giving an exclusive market to the inventor to cover the financial risk of inventing. How much risk is there in simply saying swap the screen and keyboard? None. Bad application of the 'technical invention' clause, since it's a styling design not a technical invention.

    There is no way to see into the design studios of cell phone companies, but do you honestly think that they don't move the keys around the phone in their many designs? This is a problem with the 'prior art' and 'obviousness' tests since you can't know how many times it's been designed.

  108. Re:Really? Not for me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >> I've never understood the infatuation with flip-phones

    > No keyboard locking necessary. I can't count the number of times my
    > wife has forgotten to lock the keyboard on her Nokia, and buttons get
    > pushed on it in her purse.

    Last time I had a one piece phone, there was a timer that automatically set the keyboard lock and I nevery had a problem.

    Now that I'm stuck with a flip phone with "extra" features that I'll never use such as a camera, I'm constantly taking pictures of the insides of my pants (and not in the fun way). Nothing like being on a date, shifting in your seat, and having to explain the tacky little camera shutter sound effect.

  109. Re:"Why didn't I think of^W^Wpatent that?" by The+Empiricist · · Score: 1

    Don't feel bad about it now. Patent prosecution is expensive (unless you do it yourself, which for most people is a bad idea because they don't claim very many rights, and thus end up with weak patents). Feel bad a couple of years from now if this technology becomes extremely popular.

  110. Works on existing phones at no extra cost by d33p1x · · Score: 1

    Support RMS, oppose patents! Just hold your cellphone upside down and practise typing with the new button-layout and inverted text!