Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Patents Module-Based Smartphone

Posted by samzenpus on from the swiss-army-phone dept.

edumacator writes "It seems Microsoft is working on an interesting concept for smartphones, or maybe they are just adding to their patent war chest. From the article: 'A recent Microsoft patent describes a smartphone with a slide-out section that can house one of several modules, including a QWERTY keyboard, a gaming pad, a second display or a battery pack. Even better: The modules work wirelessly when they aren't docked in the smartphone's slider. Another useful way the modular smartphone concept could be used: The keyboard can be used as a controller while the smartphone acts as a TV-connected media hub.'"

101 comments

  1. Handspring Visor by HomerJ · · Score: 4, Informative

    Didn't Handspring--now defunct--already do this like 12 years ago? There were all sorts of devices for their PDAS, including a GSM module.

    1. Re:Handspring Visor by Hamsterdan · · Score: 3, Informative

      The name for that interface was Springboard
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Springboard_Expansion_Slot

      in an ironic way, also the name of the homescreen in iOS
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpringBoard

      Quick, someone tell Handspring to sue Apple :)

      --
      I've got better things to do tonight than die.
    2. Re:Handspring Visor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes they did although it was a card module that plugged in to the back of the device. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Springboard_Expansion_Slot

      Link to the Patent:
      http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PG01&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=%2220110230178%22.PGNR.&OS=DN/20110230178&RS=DN/20110230178

      Link to various handspring springboard devices: http://www.88-keys.com/springboard_modules.htm

      I will point out that it seems to be a patent application not an approved patent. So once again we have a bad title for TFA.
       

    3. Re:Handspring Visor by Anthony+Mouse · · Score: 2

      Didn't Handspring--now defunct--already do this like 12 years ago? There were all sorts of devices for their PDAS, including a GSM module.

      When has that stopped anybody before? The lawyers will just try to find one little thing which is different and claim that it's new and patentable.

      A decade ago we got a million patents that said something like "that thing everybody knows about, but on the internet." Now we're going to get a million patents that say something like "that thing everybody knows about, but on a mobile device." Because hey, adding that extra element lets you try to claim that nobody has ever done it before. And the patent office is profoundly lax in issuing rejections for obviousness.

      This is a case in point: Making a computing device modular? Who could have ever thought of that? (People in the 1950's, that's who.) But you throw in "it's a phone too" and you've got yourself a patent application, apparently.

    4. Re:Handspring Visor by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 1

      Hey, well. Utter cluelessness about the patent process is basically standard for /. articles. Of course this is an application. No one patented anything yet. Springboard might be usable to challenge inventive step, I guess, but I doubt it'll even be enough for novelty.

      --
      Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
    5. Re:Handspring Visor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I actually had a cdma module for my handspring visor prism from SprintPCS. Worked rather nicely, and had tons of "apps" for it :p

    6. Re:Handspring Visor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not sure why springboard modules would quality any more than pcmcia devices, or the multitude of other add-on module interfaces for portable devices.

    7. Re:Handspring Visor by foobsr · · Score: 1

      Making a computing device modular? Who could have ever thought of that? (People in the 1950's, that's who.)

      Computers were quite modular these days, just not exactly portable (or even moveable).

      CC.

      --
      TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
    8. Re:Handspring Visor by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Yes, but my first thought was the BUGbase:

      http://store.buglabs.net/

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    9. Re:Handspring Visor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "modules work wirelessly when they aren't docked in the smartphone's slider". Springboard did that?

    10. Re:Handspring Visor by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Personally I'm all for it, let them do "in a cell phone!" like they did "on the Internet!" and let them go nuts with it. why? Because the quicker the entire system is completely saturated with BS patents the quicker the whole thing will fall down like a house of cards and hopefully we can get some damned reforms, that's why!

      The ONLY way we are gonna get any kind of reforms after citizen united is if supermegacorp gets so buried in patent bullshit that they can't even release a single product here for having it tied up in court for a decade. Meanwhile we are already seeing that the Indians and Chinese don't have these problems and can build upon the ideas of others, such as those cool handhelds that are game emulators, PMPs, you name it they play it. I have no doubt they'll just add some modular plug in controls like thumbpads to one of their iPhone ripoffs and tell MSFT to suck it.

      The way the tech industry has grown and come up with so many new ideas has always been to "stand on the shoulders of giants" but the supermegacorps are so damned afraid of anyone competing or not having an insane barrier to entry they are just crippling the entire process. Just as the insane copyrights are locking more and more of our history behind paywalls so too is insane patents locking up more and more of our ideas behind intellectual tollbooths. But in a global market all it takes is one that doesn't play your reindeer games for all that IP shit to fall apart, and currently we have at least two markets that are growing that don't play the game and I'm sure there will be more to follow.

      Let the country drown in bullshit IP wars I say, the quicker we can toss this madness and work on something a little more sensible.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    11. Re:Handspring Visor by Anthony+Mouse · · Score: 1

      The ONLY way we are gonna get any kind of reforms after citizen united is if supermegacorp gets so buried in patent bullshit that they can't even release a single product here for having it tied up in court for a decade.

      There is a major flaw in this strategy, which is that parasites are sticky.

      Let's say we keep issuing ever more bullshit patents. Some coven of asshats the likes of Intellectual Ventures will acquire a few thousand of them and then extract several hundred million dollars each in settlements and lawsuits from shaking down the companies that actually make stuff. So then they've got a fat wallet and a proven business model -- what makes you think they aren't going to spend a billion dollars a year lobbying Congress to make sure it stays that way?

      On top of that, you think the foreign manufacturers are going to put pressure on fixing the system, but it's completely the opposite. If the foreign companies are ignoring the patent trolls in their home countries, they can't sell the same products to the US market because they'll get sued the same as anybody else. So what happens? Market division. The US companies can't compete in foreign markets anymore because they have to abide the ridiculous US patent system, and the foreign companies stay out of the US because they don't want to have to either. Now ask yourself what incentive that drives for US companies -- if they fix the US patent system then foreign competition that had been avoiding the US in order to avoid litigation-induced bankruptcy will enter the market and compete with them. By contrast, if they can export the damage of software patents through treaties or foreign lobbying then they can use the warchests they originally built to balance one another to destroy their foreign competition.

      Parasites are sticky and thrive on inefficiency. If you have fast-paced competition to be first to market, the parasites can't survive. If you let the market converge into a collection of oligopolies who stamp out innovative new competitors through litigation and resign themselves to paying the occasional tithe to a patent troll out of their monopoly rents, there could be nobody left without a vested interest in the status quo.

    12. Re:Handspring Visor by atisss · · Score: 1

      Did you read the "battery pack"? It will continue to work wirelessly when separated :p

    13. Re:Handspring Visor by Bj�rn · · Score: 1

      Excellent points.

      --
      Never express yourself more clearly than you are able to think. --Niels Bohr
    14. Re:Handspring Visor by HermMunster · · Score: 1

      That's too freaking generic. You can't patent the modularization of hardware or software. Cars are modularized, computers are already modularized. This is stupidity. So, Microsoft is what "filing first" for every freaking idea while understanding that they can modify later when/if they are rejected?

      Utterly moronic.

      --
      You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
    15. Re:Handspring Visor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most laptops are quite portable, especially those little netbook thingzies...

    16. Re:Handspring Visor by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Did you miss the "supermegacorp buried in bullshit" part of my theory? If Apple can't bring in a single iPhone, if MSFT's customers can't bring in a single windows based anything, all because the trolls have taken over the courts, who do you think has more money, IBM,MSFT,Apple, etc or the trolls?

      The ONLY way you are gonna get real reforms now that citizens united means they can just write a check (and we have a member of SCOTUS taking bribes) is by having supermegacorps like Apple, MSFT, Sony, Google, etc, ALL get bit right in the ass. All the damned products are made in China now so all it takes is ONE injunction to throw a big fat monkey wrench into their quarterly earnings and you KNOW how much the day traders that rules Wall Street now hate those that miss the earnings!

      You watch, once Apple,MSFT and Google all start getting giant fucking monkey wrenches thrown into their plans thanks to trolls flinging them like monkeys flinging shit THEN AND ONLY THEN will you "suddenly" have both the talking heads and the congress critters talking about how we "need real reform to get America innovating again". hell that will probably be the marketing slogan, "Reform for an innovative America".

      Because if you think the people have a shot of getting anything changed I have a nice bridge you might be interested in. After all if they listened to the people we wouldn't be blowing money on THREE wars, or handing billion dollar checks to "our allies", or paying for a military that is so frankly overblown, or cutting aid for the poor and elderly, or having every politician acting like taxing a rich man is like kicking Jesus in the nads. Nope the supermegacorps call the shots, and when the trolls hit them one too many times in the pocketbooks THEN we'll see change. After all with their money they can crush the competition in a myriad of other ways besides patents and copyrights. Collusion and bribery for example.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    17. Re:Handspring Visor by Anthony+Mouse · · Score: 1

      Did you miss the "supermegacorp buried in bullshit" part of my theory?

      I did not. The trouble is that that isn't what will happen. Nobody is really going to get a permanent injunction against the iPhone and then try to enforce it permanently. Especially not bidirectionally -- if you have an injunction against them and they get an injunction against you then you're both better off to sit down at the negotiating table. It's all just leverage in negotiating royalties or cross-licensing agreements. And it's largely a zero-sum game -- for every loser there is a winner who will be there lobbying Congress to keep their advantage, whether it's a megacorp crushing its smaller competitors or a patent troll putting a private tax on digital products and putting the money towards its lobbying efforts.

      After all with their money they can crush the competition in a myriad of other ways besides patents and copyrights. Collusion and bribery for example.

      Collusion doesn't work in a free market with low barriers to entry, which is what software would be without software patents. Bribery doesn't work without collusion because your competitors just pay bribes the other way and you don't get results. And both collusion and bribery are illegal.

    18. Re:Handspring Visor by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Uh huh, explain that to Intel who got away with bribery for 7 years and then only had to pay a pittance compared to the massive profits from owning the market for that length of time. or tell that to the DRAM and LCD manufacturers, who also got to own the market for quite some time and then pay a pittance compared to the massive profits they made.

      I hate to break the news to ya friend but bribery and collusion on a massive scale goes on every day, it is just the DoJ doesn't have any teeth anymore and all the regs have been gutted. And sure they can get an injunction, we are talking trolls, remember? trolls don't have a product to file an injunction against, they just buy paper and then use it to extort. It is just SOP in the land o' the freee. personally i think we need to stop the bullshit and just change the anthem to "mighty mighty dollar bill" and call it a day. But they'll get bit, live by the sword and all that. the only question is will they allow REAL reform, or will they pay their puppets to tweak the laws so basically the incumbents have different rules than everyone else? Who knows.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  2. War Chest by Microlith · · Score: 1

    It's unlikely to be for anything else. Not that this is particularly innovative, but they want to have a government enforced monopoly on the concept to secure it exclusively for their own mobile OS.

    1. Re:War Chest by mcrbids · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Haven't you noticed? Microsoft is now officially a patent troll, making far more profits trolling Android than their own Windows mobile O/S.

      --
      I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
    2. Re:War Chest by V!NCENT · · Score: 1

      I don't know what's worse:
      -Microsoft being a patent troll, or;
      -Stupid companies buying it.

      --
      Here be signatures
  3. Wait, wait, wait. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Did you just suggest that Microsoft is creating wireless batteries for smartphones?

    1. Re:Wait, wait, wait. by V!NCENT · · Score: 1

      Already prior 'arted': http://thefutureofthings.com/news/5763/intel-s-wireless-power-technology-demonstrated.html

      --
      Here be signatures
  4. Prior art? by Lisias · · Score: 5, Informative

    http://www.designboom.com/weblog/cat/16/view/5578/modu-modular-mobile-phone.html

    (and this is just the first link of a google search...)

    --
    Lisias@Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Local.Virgo.Universe.org
    1. Re:Prior art? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Didn't Google buy them?

    2. Re:Prior art? by SmlFreshwaterBuffalo · · Score: 5, Funny

      (and this is just the first link of a google search...)

      That's the problem. They did a search on Bing and didn't find anything.

    3. Re:Prior art? by Lisias · · Score: 1

      Yes, they did!

      This is going to be interesting...

      --
      Lisias@Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Local.Virgo.Universe.org
    4. Re:Prior art? by lucidlyTwisted · · Score: 1, Informative

      Hasn't the "First to File" rule changed all this in the USA? Whether or not prior art exists is now moot, it is the first to file a patent that is the important thing. So if those designers did not patent their idea, they are out of luck.

      Please someone, correct me if I am wrong in this.

    5. Re:Prior art? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      first to file only matter to determine WHO gets the patent, not if the patent is valid or not which is what prior art is used for.

    6. Re:Prior art? by icebraining · · Score: 3, Informative

      Prior art still exists, it just has to be published. From the act:

      A person shall be entitled to a patent unlessâ"

      â(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention; or

      â(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date[3] of the claimed invention.

      The thing is that before when two inventors claimed the same patent, you'd go to court and try to find private documents, witnesses, etc. to prove you had invent it first. Now, if you didn't publish the work publicly, it's the file date that counts.
      This has you can see saves a bunch of time; whether it's more or less fair is arguable.

      --
      Dilbert RSS feed
    7. Re:Prior art? by lucidlyTwisted · · Score: 1

      That's clearer now, thanks!

    8. Re:Prior art? by andydread · · Score: 1

      Didn't the recent changes in patent law make it easier to submit prior art on a filed patent? Anyone know the procedure to submit this product as prior art?

    9. Re:Prior art? by sgt+scrub · · Score: 1

      Which is probably why Microsoft is racing off to get a patent. They have figured out how to reword the exact same concept but ambiguous enough to get through. "Our stuff gets added TO the phone". "Their phone gets added TO stuff". The patent office is too stupid to see that they are the same thing. Makers of bluetooth keyboards, and the like, should be worried too.

      --
      Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
    10. Re:Prior art? by Nadaka · · Score: 1

      And since we just got shafted with "patent reform" and are now a first to file country, prior art and the actual invention and production of products is now irrelevant, making this a valid patent.

    11. Re:Prior art? by Xtifr · · Score: 1

      Not how "first to file" works. The rules about prior art is unchanged. The only thing that changed was what happens if two people file for the same patent, and both of them claimed to have been working on it secretly for a long time! Rules about prior art, obviousness, etc., are completely unaffected. Anything published counts as prior art, just like it always did.

  5. wireless power, I knew it!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    battery pack ... "Even better: The modules work wirelessly when..." *sigh*

    1. Re:wireless power, I knew it!!! by ppanon · · Score: 1

      I guess it uses Tesla-style stratospheric wireless power transmission :-)

      --
      Laissez lire, et laissez danser; ces deux amusements ne feront jamais de mal au monde. - Voltaire
    2. Re:wireless power, I knew it!!! by Adriax · · Score: 1

      My next cell phone could come with a 100' tesla tower?
      Awesome! Allied forced aren't getting anywhere near my ore refinery now.

      --
      I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it!
    3. Re:wireless power, I knew it!!! by ppanon · · Score: 1

      Well they said cellular, they didn't say mobile :-)

      --
      Laissez lire, et laissez danser; ces deux amusements ne feront jamais de mal au monde. - Voltaire
    4. Re:wireless power, I knew it!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Presumably you would plug in the battery module and use the other ones wirelessly so that you don't have to choose between having an extra battery and having a keyboard.

    5. Re:wireless power, I knew it!!! by atisss · · Score: 1

      I guess it will have SMB password hashing weakness which will allow me to hack and drain bypasser's wireless batteries.

  6. Awesome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I want the wireless battery pack to power my next phone too!

    1. Re:Awesome by V!NCENT · · Score: 1

      Sadly, the current state of wireless power is that it isn't 100% efficient (which is kinda obvious). So you probably don't want to shave 25% battery life off of your mobile...

      --
      Here be signatures
    2. Re:Awesome by gnud · · Score: 1

      Have you got a 100% efficient battery? 0o

    3. Re:Awesome by V!NCENT · · Score: 1

      No and I definately don't want to reduce the efficiency further...

      --
      Here be signatures
  7. First to register vs first to invent by Mistakill · · Score: 1

    This is what will happen alot... prior art? pft just apply for the patent, let the lawyers sort it out later

    1. Re:First to register vs first to invent by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      First to file changes absolutely nothing with respect to prior art requirements. Prior art is still prior art, whether patented or not.

      The only case where first to file vs first to invent matters is when there are two patents for the same thing, and priority needs to be determined.

    2. Re:First to register vs first to invent by jeffrey.endres · · Score: 1

      Bah! If you have two patents for the same thing created independently, then the idea is obvious. Both denied!

  8. What innovation! by roc97007 · · Score: 1

    Genius! Microsoft finally gets around to patenting the springboard.

    They must think we all have alzheimer's. "Don't worry, that was more than a decade ago. Nobody is going to remember."

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    1. Re:What innovation! by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      All that matters is that someone will have to pay either their lawyers or Microsoft big piles of money if they intend on doing something like this.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    2. Re:What innovation! by roc97007 · · Score: 1

      ???

      Profit!

      Alternately, they'll spend a lot of money pursuing this in court and prior art will trip them up. At least, if there's any justice left in the world.

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  9. A Question by abednegoyulo · · Score: 1

    With the current rules in obtaining a patent, can anybody grab hold of a patent for everything that you see in Sci-Fi films even though that it still does not exists?

    1. Re:A Question by sir_eccles · · Score: 1

      Not really, for two reasons.

      1) To have a valid patent, you need to make an enabling disclosure. i.e. describe it in enough detail that someone can make it. If it's inner workings are just fiction then you can't really describe how it works.

      2) Even if there is enough information in your sci fi film to actually make one, the film itself is prior art.

    2. Re:A Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you can patent _how_ that thing works, as long as it's not obvious.

      microsoft could patent the protocol/methods how these devices communicate, for example, but this modular general idea.. hell no.

    3. Re:A Question by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      I'll patent the launch loop. It will make me a millionaire.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
  10. OGO CT-25 "Clips" by Vecanti · · Score: 1

    The OGO had something similar with it "Clips" that slid in and out. There was all kinds of things you could slide out. There was even a bottle opener, a tiny tiny blue tooth hand set so you didn't have to hold the whole phone to your head, a slide out blue tooth camera, one that was just to add some flashing lights for fun, etc.

    http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2159119,00.asp

  11. google recently acquired some patents by Modu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modu

  12. Wireless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I for one really look forward to the new wireless battery pack!

  13. Re:google recently acquired some patents by Modu by Alex+Belits · · Score: 1

    This is going to SUCK.

    --
    Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
  14. Swiss Army Phone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    More like lawyer army phone

  15. Microsoft invented the drawer... by Foske · · Score: 1

    Oh wait, it's not general purpose, so this must be patentable !

  16. wireless battery? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wireless second battery pack? Brilliant!

  17. Next up, patenting Legos by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    nuff sed

    --
    Table-ized A.I.
    1. Re:Next up, patenting Legos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you also say "meccanos"?

  18. Ma! by Dark+Lord+of+Ohio · · Score: 1

    Ma! Where the heck is my remote, pad, camera and goddamnit battery! For Christ sakes! I just cant go to skooll looking like some retarded iPhone user!

  19. Idea stolen from my engadget comment? by backslashdot · · Score: 1

    http://www.engadget.com/2008/12/26/how-would-you-change-sony-ericssons-xperia-x1/2#comments

    Do a find in page for the word "bottom" or "slide" or "pop out"

    Btw I am sure I made the same comment other places and also with and without the LCD aspect .. however engadget doesnt have an easy way to wade through or search through comments to find the earliest one..

    1. Re:Idea stolen from my engadget comment? by StripedCow · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, I don't think a comment on a forum counts as prior art. In fact, anything on the internet is suspicious, since anything could have had its time stamp tampered with.

      --
      If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
    2. Re:Idea stolen from my engadget comment? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ideas are a dime a dozen. Did you design it? Did you put any sort of work into it? Did you (and most importantly) patent it? Did you have the resources to actually build the device? Have you done any sort of user testing? I bet MS has done all of the above.

      This sounds more like a physical patent to me. There are probably thousands of similar things in there. For example the NES from days of yor. Change out a cart to get a whole different set of functionality. You can bet cash they had patents on that. But it was probably very narrow to their physical form factor.

      Take the telephone of Mr. Bell. He beat someone else out by patenting it by a few days. They both came up with the same idea. Also many had the idea before them... But those two actually MADE it.

    3. Re:Idea stolen from my engadget comment? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://xkcd.com/827/

  20. Legit Patent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't understand the outrage and cannot agree with the examples of prior art given by previous posts. This Module-System is new and innovative enough to allow for a valid patent. Neither the aforementioned Springboard, nor the OGO count as prior art, because neither is a slideable system. It is a rare occasion that MS is innovative. Let's focus on bashing them where they haven't been and still received legal backup (the double click, the "Windows" brand name, the OOXML ISO and ECMA certification, the patent on .NET apps receiving data in binary format from SQL Server, the FAT patent, the patent on Videoencoding on the GPU, etc.)

    1. Re:Legit Patent by backslashdot · · Score: 1

      Did you read my comment? The one above yours.

    2. Re:Legit Patent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unfortunately i didn't. I should have reloaded prior to posting. I did not include your post in my comment, i was mostly referring to the Handspring product, which pretty clearly isn't prior art.

      I think you might even have inspired MS to their patent application, since many of their employees are avid readers of sites like Engadget; Especially the ones in R&D. I think it's unfortunately, especially under current anti-competitive jurisdiction in the US you will have a chance winning a trial. Unless you might have a technical paper in which you propose your design and maybe even have pitched it to a company.

      IANAL, but i think the only option you have in that matter is to be able to brag about how Microsoft successfully stole you idea.

  21. I think I have one of those. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mine is called a "computer".

  22. Not patented yet by Dachannien · · Score: 1

    The article is pretty terrible in terms of hiding the link to the document they're referring to, but I can only assume they mean their first link. It's to a patent application, which is not a patent . Maybe someday it will become a patent, but not today.

    1. Re:Not patented yet by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      Pretty much a pointless patent app, why because mobile smart phone gains it usability from basically being an all in one appliance, the docking station is still considered more of a hindrance than a benefit. Just what is needed more bits to loose and buy again and again and again.

      This smells more like a patent that is targeted at all devices, not just phones, a back-door to future prevention of competition high cost bluff lawsuits. Did they nominate size limits, or would it extend to tablets and even larger (desktops that are actually "the tops of desks")

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    2. Re:Not patented yet by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      My Motorola docking station is pretty damn handy.

      http://www.amazon.com/Motorola-Vehicle-Charger-Retail-Packaging/dp/B0042I7AUE

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
  23. Re:At least look at the patent, Freetards. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe it's because it's more patent-happy BS, not because it's Microsoft. /. has been focusing on patent issues lately far more than Microsoft, so I believe your perception of how the article is biased, in and of itself, is biased.

    Might want to ask yourself some questions.

  24. Star Trek: tNG by RingDev · · Score: 1

    This sounds pretty much identical to the tricorders, especially the ones used by the medics that had a small wireless module that they could use for scanning specific points.

    It's often said that Life immitates Art, but I'm pretty sure that wasn't meant to mean Corporations patent sci-fi entertainment creations.

    Or does someone have a patent on flying cars and warp engines?

    -Rick

    --
    "Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
    1. Re:Star Trek: tNG by foobsr · · Score: 1

      Or does someone have a patent on flying cars

      e.g.

      CC.

      --
      TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
    2. Re:Star Trek: tNG by RingDev · · Score: 1

      Two things:
      First - That thing is BAD ASS!!! I want one

      Second - That patent appears pretty specific and applies to one precise implementation of dual-rotor elevation control. The MS patent appears much more vague, effectively allowing them to patent ALL such devices.

      If the flying car patent did not have the rotors drawn in, and instead had black boxes labeled "lift providing system here", I would be just as irate with it.

      -Rick

      --
      "Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
    3. Re:Star Trek: tNG by Nadaka · · Score: 1

      awesome how it has hot rod style mufflers sticking out the side.

    4. Re:Star Trek: tNG by foobsr · · Score: 1

      ad 1st: and it is not exactly a new idea, I wanted one myself when I was still a child, see here

      ad 2nd: but it is a stolen idea

      CC.

      --
      TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
  25. Fijitsu by Drathos · · Score: 1

    Immediately thought of the Fujitsu F-04B. I guess since that wasn't released on this side of the Pacific, they think it doesn't count.

    --
    End of line..
    1. Re:Fijitsu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I teach in Japan and last year, one of my students showed her fujitsu F-04B phone to me during our break. As a gadget geek, I thought It was pretty cool! Now I read slashdot and see that Microsoft has tried to patent a "new" idea. nudge, nudge, wink, wink. My goodness, the folka in Redmond are soooooo creative . . . . NOT!

  26. MS Office Labs Vision 2019 by InsertCleverUsername · · Score: 1

    Here are a couple of videos from MS Office Labs with their vision of what MS products might look like in 2019. Check out the second vid at about 2:05 to see a modular phone system in action.

    --
    Ask me about my sig!
    1. Re:MS Office Labs Vision 2019 by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      That video was pretty, but disappointing. Basically, except for full colour e-ink and edge to edge displays, Microsoft thinks that in eight years things are going to be the same as they are today except that we'll all have bought a lot more Microsoft devices.

    2. Re:MS Office Labs Vision 2019 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft thinks that in eight years things are going to be the same as they are today except that we'll all have bought a lot more Microsoft devices.

      Yeah... Why would I want a Microsoft real-time, translating, multi-touch, whiteboard/video wall when there are so many others to choose from?

  27. Offtopic by AdamJS · · Score: 0

    Sorry for being offtopic, but didn't there used to be a far more uglier Borg-Gates icon? Why the change?

  28. Relax by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Most people here are just haters. They haven't done anything in their life that would make their opinion relevant. They desperately want people to hate microsoft and ballmer/gates because they themselves hate them. But the reality is most non-zealots regard them as successful businessmen and admire and respect them.

  29. Modu by demiurg · · Score: 1

    This is precisely what (now defunct) Israeli startup Modu tried to develop. They failed, but their patent portfolio was acquired by Google.

  30. Bad reporting (again, sigh) by deblau · · Score: 1

    This is an application, not a patent, and the original journalist is either ignorant or being sensationalist (you decide). Here's a link from the article to the published app:

    http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PG01&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=%2220110230178%22.PGNR.&OS=DN/20110230178&RS=DN/20110230178

    A quick check of the USPTO website's "public PAIR" using the application serial number 12/726252 (right off the publication data) shows that the application has not even been looked at yet for patentability. But let's not let facts get in the way of journalism.

    --
    This post expresses my opinion, not that of my employer. And yes, IAAL.
  31. Drawer by shayd2 · · Score: 1

    So, Microsoft is pattenting a drawer?

  32. Just an expansion slot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My laptop has a nice spot for add-on modules called a PCMCIA slot. I can also pull out my dvd drive and replace it with a hard drive or a floppy (on the older laptop).

    Doing this with a smart phone doesn't sound remotely innovative to me. Still, it doesn't sound like a bad idea, just not a new one.

  33. so we are now adding: .. on a smartphone? by Nyder · · Score: 1

    So, I guess the old formula:

    (old patent) + "on a computer"

    is now:

    (old patent) + "on a smartphone"

    Guess i got to keep up with the times.

    --
    Be seeing you...
  34. Re:so we are now adding: .. on a smartphone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm surprised you missed all of those bullshit patents that Apple has been throwing around recently.

  35. Title is wrong by Hentes · · Score: 1

    Microsoft didn't patent modular phones, but a specific design that uses a slider to store the modules. At least theoretically, you can't patent an idea, only an implementation of it.

  36. Limited by Hentes · · Score: 1

    Although it's a good idea to offer modularity instead of trying to fit everything into a phone this method looks very limited, working only with one electronic module.