Slashdot Mirror
Apple's 3D Desktop Patent Filing Examined
phantomfive writes "The patent office has released some patent filings by Apple which indicate that the company is working on a 3D desktop of some sort. They call it a multi-dimensional desktop, according to the patent filing." There's also some commentary at ZDNet; both stories link to a detailed run-down at AppleInsider.
Not surprising if you look at the 3D effects that Apple put into Time Machine and the document stack. I love these.
What will make this really interesting is the navigation itself: since Apple is about to get rid of all buttons on the trackpad (and mouse?), I'm wondering if they have thought of some fancy 3 or 4-finger gestures to move around in 3D. I can think of some games that could use that.
The first time I saw the idea of 3D navigation for the desktop was when Hypercard came out (was that 10, 15 years ago?). Someone came up with this concept of a house where you'd store various things. In the basement would be the backups. On the desk in the office would be the open documents, etc. You'd just walk around your house in what (at the time) felt like 3D.
--
http://fairsoftware.net/ -- where software developers share revenue from the apps they create
Why is I always think about stuff and see them years later patented by some company... like dimming backlight with a photoresistor... oh well, if only they would do the other things I thought of, like real SMP laptops so you could power down cpus to save battery...
First post ?
No need to play lottery today I guess :D
For some reason I have this vision of a frenetic and baked Steve Jobs coming up with this "awesome" concept for a U/I, rattling off orders to developers by the dozens. Somehow Apple makes it work, and to perfection. Developers lives are shattered, Jobs is triumph, and the result is probably going to be pretty excellent.
Apple is back.
This is my sig.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Bob :D
3D "effects" on a 2D interface is patentable. Pull the other one.
Another instance of the patent system gone mad.
If I had an Ass, I'd call it Fanny Bottom, then I could slap my Ass; Fanny Bottom, on the Arse.
This clearly shows that the patent system is broken. Sun have been working on a 3D Desktop since the early 2000s.
More info: http://www.sun.com/software/looking_glass/
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
This may not yield to a product. It is just a Patent. So if apple does come up with a 3D desktop no one else can sue them stating it is theirs. 3D computing has been in peoples imaginations for years. Remember Star Wars Ep. 4 back in the 1970's.
We may get a real 3d interface in January but probably 5-10 years down the line as Human Interface interaction has gotten more advanced and intuitive vs. the old mouse method. Gestures, and better ways of tracking your hand have made 3d Manipulation more feasible.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
So, we're going back 15 years to 1993?
Great, now I'll have to revise my emergency velociraptor attack plans...
Why don't you guys just get a room together and be done with it ? Hell, half the Reg stories come from US writers already. The /. comments system is way better, though. Mod points FTW !
...prior art = Bump Top 3D desktop?
And what are the Linux Defenders doing in the meantime?
Spinning around in their little Compiz desktop cubes.
Your average end user has enough trouble efficiently using 2D virtual desktop space, so why do we have extend this unfortunately popular metaphor by adding in the z-axis?
So the new Apples will have holographic displays? If not, it isn't 3D, it's perspective .
Free Martian Whores!
linux got it first, wooosh!!!
"Steve Jobs invented the world" -- Bill W. GATES
That sure sounds a lot like Sun's Project Looking Glass.
They did not get rid of the buttons on trackpad, they added more. You now have 2 buttons on the trackpad for left and right click. They are just not "proper" buttons, more like an area on the trackpad that can get depressed when pressure is applied and the make a clicking sound.
As the island of our knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance.
I get the feeling they haven't fully considered the use of multiple displays under this interface, this being the only paragraph even mentioning them.
E.g. if each display is a walled-off tube, how do you move something between displays or cause it to span across them? What if the displays don't share pixel dimensions, don't align their edges, or are even placed diagonally to each other? What if there are more than two?
Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
Am I crazy, or is this an unskeptical report of Apple attempting to get a software patent?
Knowing Steve Jobs this is unlikely to be a defensive patent, either. He may actually expect to be able to sue people to stop writing software that seems like his software.
How sleazy. How ridiculous.
You cannot patent software. Period.
People who pretend we can are con men and shakedown artists.
I don't care if it's GIF compression or one click buying or a goddamned 4D desktop. It can not be patented.
You only have one choice: have a software industry, or have software patents.
The only reason we have anything like an industry now is that they are totally ignored and almost everyone is not attempting to enforce them. But this status quo means a goldmine for con men who do enforce them, and a hit on the economy, from all the victims, as well as those who are intimidated away from innovating or competing.
Tired of Political Trolls? Opt Out!
I think I'll stick with using Compiz Fusion, thank you very much. Free and Versatile ftw! =)
Jobs is a marketer. What happens is a programmer gets a cool idea, writes a prototype, and sends it up to the execs for review along with a dozen other ideas. Then jobs gets baked, reads through proposals, sees the cool one and goes "OMG I can so sell that to millions of n00bs! A brilliant marketing plan for this just popped into my head! I will 0wnz j00r w0rldz with my reality distortion field muahahahahahahaha!!" Developers get paid, Jobs is triumphant, and the result is not perfect but pretty good, incredibly stylish, and everyone except the most die hard slashdotters and luddites will want one.
"All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"
Setting aside for a minute the fact that data storage is already a multidimensional representation on any modern computer..
The most efficient way to manipulate that data is in a 2D matrix. That's because we can see all of it at once -- at least, as much as can fit on the display and/or our arc of vision. If we lived in 4 spatial dimensions, it would make sense to represent data in 3 dimensions, because we could see all 3 of them at once (assuming we had 4D sensory input.. whatever that might be). Creating a 3D representation of data might look cool, but it's just not efficient to work with for any amount of data beyond 2-3 items. See: Win-Tab in Vista, Stacks in OSX. It's not that we need better ideas for how to represent data in 3D, rather it's a physical limit that we need to accept and stop trying to do it "because we can."
If you still don't buy that, imagine living in 2 dimensions (which is probably easier than imagining 4). We exist only on a plane, and objects can be represented only on the axises around us; nothing above or below, and we could only see the 180 degree arc from left to right. It would make no sense to represent data as more than a 1D line. Sure, we could send a line to the front or back, but working with a set of data would be most efficiently accomplished along that line.
It's always more efficient to work with a set of data in 1 less dimension than you exist in. (Unless you live in 1D.. then I guess you're screwed.) There's a reason we don't use a 3D writing system. There's a reason we don't stack monitors one behind the next. Store it in 3 dimensions, fine, as a book, or as a stack of 2D windows, but use it in 2 dimensions. A 3D desktop is form over function in the worst sense.
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
Seriously!
Just about time that Mac Laptops come with two buttons, and I decide that it's time to go ahead and get one, I read (perfectly believable!) crap like this. No more buttons at ALL!?!?!
Maybe it's "stylish" but it makes usability a NIGHTMARE. buttons make it very easy to say "I WANT THAT ONE" without having to have gestures interpreted. It gets to the point where I accidentally slide my thumb across the board, and some gesture gets interpreted and suddenly, I just launched 3 more pieces of software that I didn't want, or closed the window.
Ack!
Let my mouse be a mouse, and let it have buttons. Or GTFO.
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
People are way too worked up over this in regards to functionality, IMHO. It's just some 3D eyecandy over the top of a basic virtual desktop setup. Don't a number of OSS window managers offer 3D cube styled virtual desktop environments already? Most of them map to the outside of a cube this one just maps to the inside.
I am hopeful this fixes the dock. Apple made the dock a lot less useful with 10.5, stacks being the most useless "innovation." By adding some depth to the stack it might become useful.
On the other hand I am against software patents, of any kind, and would hope this would be unenforceable under some of the newer precedents that have been set (Bilski?).
--
Carry on.
Back around 99, I remember installing a little OpenGL accellerated 3D desktop for Win98. At the time, I had an STB Permedia2 based card (full OpenGL ICD) and it was one of the very few cards that could run this "desktop" of sorts. Icons could be placed ANYWHERE in a 3D field and I could navigate 3D space around them. I could move through all three axis, rotate, do all kinds of things, even lose icons if I placed them in an area of 3D space too far away from the rest of the desktop stuff. It was neat for about 6 days, then I stopped using it.
I'm sure I still have a copy of this in my CD graveyard. I'll look for it later and post up something when/if I find it.
Fifty watts per channel, baby cakes.
I think there isn't a real need to migrate from a 2D to a 3D paradigm because the paradigm is actually already as 3D as it will get before we need a different type of display altogether. I think that the real value of a 3D desktop is incrementally improved window management and eye candy (which is not to say they aren't important). Still, I see 3D vs 2D more of an underlying tech thing instead of a user thing. I see it more like the switch from programmers using indexed paletted bitmaps to full RGBA bitmaps, or use of the GPU as a computing unit versus just the CPU. Nothing fundamental changes for the user, but the improvements are indeed palpable. What makes a UI 3D in the first place? Is CoverFlow 3D? Why is it better than my thumbnail list views? It's certainly pretty to look at.
3D Spinning Cube (Mac):
http://www.codingmonkeys.de/subethaedit/goodies/ada.dmg
You're welcome.
~hylas
It is apparent that you have never actually bothered to use one of the touchpad's in question. The whole pad is one physical button. It can be configured to act as a single button like the one present on all Mac portables, or to behave like the mighty mouse where the Left and Right sides are treated like separate buttons.
It's also obvious that if you've ever used an apple portable, you've never bothered to look at the preference pane for configuring the pointer (trackpad or mouse). Their is a checkbox present that says "Ignore accidental trackpad input" that works flawlessly. There is also a checkbox that says "Ignore trackpad when mouse is present"
Please, if you've never actually used a piece of equipment, don't give your ignorant opinion on it. It'd be like me giving you my opinion of Halo 3. Never played the game so have no worth while input on the topic.
Bureaucracy expands to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy.-Oscar Wilde
When we finnaly will be able to do this on our macs!
Creating a 3D representation of data might look cool, but it's just not efficient to work with for any amount of data beyond 2-3 items. See: Win-Tab in Vista, Stacks in OSX. It's not that we need better ideas for how to represent data in 3D, rather it's a physical limit that we need to accept and stop trying to do it "because we can.
I won't argue that it has not been done very well yet, but I am not sure it is because it can't be done. You could make a similar argument that adding color to the desktop is pointless, but it can be used to add information.
Perspective transformations, transparency, and other effects might well improve the interface even though they exist in 2 spacial dimension.
Did you think Zaxxon was not a step forward?
I don't know if Compiz Fusion retained the feature, but back when Beryl was separate, you could invert the cube and be inside it instead of outside it.
There weren't any doors though..
Oh yeah, and CF/Beryl work with KDE too, not really Gnome tied. Probably work with other desktop environments as well.
Didn't Sun do this over a decade ago with Project Looking Glass? (http://www.sun.com/software/looking_glass/)
And, it's most efficient to work with a set of data in 1 more dimension than you display it in.
Why?
Because.
90% of all programming today is a bunch of business people that see programming as well, satisfying the construction of a design according to their prototypes. That Apple actually encourages the creative aspects of programming, as you suggest, is actually even -BETTER- than what I wrote. That Jobs actually takes the time to get baked and find something he can sell, well, is doing more than 90% of all other software company CEOs do... and that's why he's a billionare, and others are not.
This is my sig.
To me it sounds weird funny old stuff. Like people in 70s couldn't think of GPS and stuff we've got; instead, they fancied a traffic warden robot in the middle of a crossroads waving its stick.
From what I can see, trend-makers (say, Google or Apple) prefer lighter UI than does MS. In 2007 at Mossberg's annual event (whatever it's called) Mr. Gates made that prophecy about a 3d UI of the future. (BTW Jobs was like, I dunno, sth will obviously change, but you know, people don't want cars with 6 wheels, they are happy with 4).
Although if they had some nice ideas about it, why not patent them.
I always wanted one when I was a kid, but its ok. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U-Force http://images.google.com/images?q=nintendo%20u%20force&rls=com.microsoft:en-us&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&startIndex=&startPage=1&um=1&sa=N&tab=wi
My apologies for my ignorance, but how can it be that an entity is even able to apply for a patent on a concept that clearly was not created by them without being ridiculed? The way I see it (which could be wrong) there are several projects in existence applying this concept (glassfish, compiz-fusion, etc), and some others that go beyond it (g-speak), whilst apple has nothing to show for it. I am starting to wonder if I should apply for a patent on scratching my ears, walking around naked, or maybe eating and breathing... Feel free to call me an idiot and insult me in every way you may find fit, as long as you provide some sort of clarification to my query that goes along with it. Maybe I will find that I should quit my job and dedicate my time to patent trolling so that I can make some money by doing nothing... Is it not enough that apple created the core of OSX based on code from the FreeBSD project in order to save itself from bankruptcy and gave nothing back?(not to mention the iTunes music-store craporama). If I understood this patent filing correctly how is apple any better than Microsoft ? As far as I can see it their methods are pretty similar...
From this article I wrote in 2004...
http://scarydevil.com/~peter/io/3dworld.html
I remember a tape of a presentation at 1990's or '91's SIGGRAPH showing what looked like a very data-rich 3D file-browsing construct. It particularly noted how well we can track a preselected and highlighted object as the display rotated.
It might be that doing a barely-acceptable 3D desktop might be a much taller order than a barely-unacceptable, as opposed to 2D where we've seen more of a continuum between 'fail' and 'o.k.'.
They said 'multi-dimensional'. I believe that Apple are attempting to make Time Itself tightly coupled to their hardware and software.
Watch for the ad:
-I'm a Mac.
---And I'm a PC.
-I'm getting damn tired of you, so I'm going to kill your grandfather before you were born. [thumbs iPhone, vanishes]
---That's imposs [fades to nothing]
-[Reappears, faces camera] Now who's cheaper?
Of course then they might get sued by Candlejack bu
does joel swanson's work count as prior /art/?
http://www.joelswanson.net/diorama/index.html
They'll need to solve the motion sickness problem
You're getting motion sick because your body isn't doing what your eyes say they are doing.
The good money is on single-user 3D interfaces that track the eyes to generate 3D on a 2D screen, so it's exactly the opposite.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)