Slashdot Mirror
Apple Files for OLED Keyboard Patent
pegdhcp writes to mention that Apple has applied for a patent on a 'dynamically controlled keyboard' with OLED keys. This may seem remarkably familiar, since an OLED keyboard has been bandied about by Art Lebedev studios for quite a while now. "while the Optimus Maximus is a bit expensive, Apple could certainly mass-produce something similar for less money, perhaps bringing the price into reality for most users. Lebedev has, however, apparently applied for several patents for the Optimus, so it's unclear just what Apple is up to, or what would happen if the company were ever to release such a product."
about the only thing in the patent that may be innovative [that is that hasn't already been done] is claim 25 about their new manufacturing process [or not, it could be obvious in of its self, who knows] other than that, why hasn't this been thrown out yet due to prior art?
Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
Art Lebedev managed to scrape together some cash and "released it" before anyone else. Big deal.
I would never purchase an Optimus keyboard because there is no muscle behind it. They can't mass produce the thing and have been paper launching the keyboard for 2 years now. Imagine getting one and needing quick support like an immediate replacement, or getting really used to the thing and discovering they don't have the money to continue producing it. Apple, Logitech, or Microsoft have the resources to do it.
Now there is lots of prior art in this area, going as far back as 1978 in monochrome alterable keys. Perhaps Apple patented this as a countermeasure against someone who would try to claim this as an original idea. A differently-worded patent on a new product is better than no patent at all. At least that's my opinion.
Notice how they only promise windows and mac support for the keyboard because linux doesn't have enough marketshare:
Why isnt there any Linux software?
Because first we want to let 95% of people to work with the keyboard.
Is there a chance it will support Linux?
Maybe sometime.
I hope they feel violated.
Immediately, it strikes me that Apple will create context specfic layouts. The machine will know when you are playing quake, or using garage band (or whatever) and give you the correct keyboard layout automatically. I am not sure if Optimus was set up to do this already, but it seems like an obvious choice for Apple who controls both the hardware and software.
The book Imperial Earth http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_Earth by Arthur C. Clarke from 1976 featured something similar:
The 'Sec was the standard size of all such units, determined by what could fit comfortably in the normal human hand. At a quick glance, it did not differ greatly from one of the small electronic calculators that had started coming into general use in the late twentieth century. It was, however, infinitely more versatile, and Duncan could not imagine how life would be possible without it.
Because of the finite size of clumsy human fingers, it had no more controls than its ancestors of three centuries earlier. There were fifty neat little studs; each, however, had a virtually unlimited number of functions, according to the mode of operation--for the character visible on each stud changed according to the mode. Thus on ALPHANUMERIC, twenty-six of the studs bore the letters of the alphabet, while ten showed the digits zero to nine. On MATH, the letters disappeared from the alphabetical studs and were replaced by X +, / --, = and all the standard mathematical functions.
Shame on Apple for trying to claim they invented the idea.
"To stay awake all night adds a day to your life" - Stilgar | eMT.
IBM made a bit of hardware for the US Navy called the A/N-BQQ5 SONAR system. The main consoles had an array of buttons ( keys if you will ) that called functions and of course changed that actual text that was displayed on each button based upon the current function(s) selected. If memory serves, mind you this was 30 years ago, they had an acronym ( the Military has acronyms for everything ) and it was DROS . This is a link to a site that has a decent photo of the control consoles, Click on the image ( yes unfortunately it will open in a pop-up, sorry its the ONLY photo I can find ) for a larger version. As you can see the three consoles are identical; however, each console could be assigned any function that the system performed. Thus each set of keys displayed text appropriate for the consoles currently assigned function, and sub-functions.
I rode USS-OMAHA SSN-692 in winter of '78 and USS Los Angeles was commissioned in '76, so given how long it takes to get a bit of hardware like that from IBM in those days, I would imagine those buttons / keys were more then likely developed in the late 60's.
So there you have your prior art.
Hey KID! Yeah you, get the fuck off my lawn!
I'll bet that number's gone up significantly since then.
The CB App. What's your 20?
I would imagine the real question is: how large a firm are lebedev and can they afford to see Apple in court to protect their IP?
..after all, I find thats the real issue at stake in these weaselesque (is that a word?) situations..
Patents are not, and have never been, about "rewarding innovation". That's the Big Lie used to sell them. They're a vestige of mercantilist protectionism now used for corporatist protectionism. You aren't patent things that you know to be invalid simply because you think you might be able to sneak them past the examiner. That's the theory. The practice is a long history of precisely that sneaking happening. And note, even if apple is completely in the wrong, they can still crush people with frivolous lawsuits. I have a net worth of EUR30000 or so after 8 years as a programmer (that might actually sound small, but I've been burned by high-risk investments twice, just my nature). In the US, I couldn't even pay for competent legal defence.
The normal state of the patent system is for it to be abused. The damage from that abuse far outweighs any (largely hypothetical and unproven actually - it's shocking how little actual research is done, the "emotive reward innovators" crap is just trotted out again and again) purported benefits of it, I'd say.
If anyone actually went to the patent (I know, I know, I must be new here...) they would find that the patent itself has several claims that are clearly patenting an implementation of a keyboard like the Optimus - something which is, as far as I know, explicitly what a patent is allowed to do. For example, the patent has claims related to displaying large images across several keys, relating to the way in which data is transferred from computer to keyboard and manufacturing the keys.
Now, it may still be that the Optimus is prior art, or that the patent is obvious when you look at the Optimus, but it's not nearly as clear cut as "Optimus is a similar keyboard, prior art, case closed."
im in ur