Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Meet The Man Who Designed a Tablet Computer 15 Years Before the iPad

Posted by timothy on from the flat-and-functional dept.

Doofus writes "The Washington Post has a profile of Roger Fidler, who 'invented' the tablet computer in the 1990s, while working as a visionary for newspaper firm Knight-Ridder. He is now embroiled in the Apple/Samsung legal war, as an expert witness. Fidler admits that other prior art influenced him, such as the tablets being used as computing devices in 2001: A Space Odyssey. Prior prior art."

7 of 374 comments (clear)

  1. iPad by wisnoskij · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What does the iPad have to do with it? There were commercial, mass-produced, tablets way before the first iPad.
    I would think, either this guy owns tablet tech and has been making money of it for decades or has missed his chance.

    --
    Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
    1. Re:iPad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They are suing Samsung because they think or thought they could win. Generally in cases like this the company sues someone they think they can win and then use that case to set a legal precedent. They then take that precedent and threaten other companies with it. It has nothing to do with believing in the next guy and only protecting their patents. Its all about protecting their monopoly and profits.

    2. Re:iPad by Kreigaffe · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Probably because I'm fucking right here, and you're an Apple apologist.

      Just sayin.

      Samsung doesn't have their plugs and button/s in the same place as the iPad, and thus, it's not a copy.

      What's that? It looks similar?

      EVERY FUCKING LCD MONITOR IS A BLACK RECTANGLE WITH ROUNDED CORNERS AND A DISPLAY ON THE FRONT. If you remove variations in their stands, they all look identical.

      You can point out differences in where they locate their power button, or any sort of port -- but that's just reinforcing my point, as Samsung has done just that. Samsung's tablet is just as different from an iPad as an Apple LCD monitor is different from an LG monitor.

      Of course, under the design patent granted to Apple, they ARE within their legal rights to file suit.
      the problem was that the design patent should never have been granted, as it was overly broad. they basically created a cylindrical bottle with a cap on the top and are now saying that anyone who wants to sell bottled drinks has to use a non-cylindrical shape. that's fucking obnoxious, and Apple should rightfully be raked over the coals for it.

      If this was Microsoft, and not Apple, I somehow doubt anyone would be defending their position.

      --
      ... still waiting for this free-as-in-beer free beer I keep hearing about. :|
    3. Re:iPad by WebCowboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This article is absurdly stupid. What about the Newton, arguably the predecessor, dare I say it, tablet to the iPad seems to have come before this guys idea. It's even mentioned in TFA.

      Watch the Knight-Ridder video onYouTube. The fact that Apple was not the first to create an oversized PDA is not in dispute. This is a case involving industrial design--Apple accuses Samsung of copying basically the "look and feel" of the iPad specifically. K-R's "newspaper tablet" design bears a strong resemblance to the iPad--much more so than the Newton devices.

      Besides that, everyone knows Alan Kay invented the tablet computer design in the 1960's. I personally don't believe the iPad design is patentable and it was a mistake to grant those design patents in the first place.

    4. Re:iPad by Kreigaffe · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I can't tell the difference between any two brands of jeans.

      I can't tell the difference between any two brands of mechanical pencils.

      Hell, most people can't tell the different between a Harley and a Honda.

      Certainly if a brand were to distinguish itself from the rest -- unique stitching or something in jeans -- that would stand out, and copying that would be emulation.

      But.. making a pair of pants out of blue denim with a zipper and button on the front, with 2 back pockets and 2 front/side pockets likely with a smaller pocket for a watch on the right side?

      You can't fucking patent that design, because it's the basic design of all things we call "jeans".

      That is precisely what Apple's doing with their iPad design. You're simply an Apple apologist. If this was Microsoft, not Apple, you'd be calling for heads to roll.

      Have you LOOKED at Apple's design patent? It IS for a "rectangular tablet, rounded corners, bevel, screen on front".

      The design patent was overly broad, should never have been granted, and Apple is behaving like a boorish asshole by trying to enforce it. These = facts.

      --
      ... still waiting for this free-as-in-beer free beer I keep hearing about. :|
    5. Re:iPad by _xeno_ · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What I'd like to know is how Samsung's lawyers could be unable to tell the difference between an Apple and a Samsung product from ten feet away, yet you assume that the casual viewer will totally know the difference.

      I'm pretty sure that's bullshit, because:

      At one point during the hearing, she held one black glass tablet in each hand above her head, and asked Sullivan if she could identify which company produced which.

      They were most likely off, meaning you couldn't see the user interface. And depending on how they were being held, you could probably block off the home button and other identifying characteristics so the only thing to go on would be the aspect ratio, which while entirely different, is something you'd need to know ahead of time.

      So, here's a challenge for you: Go into a big box store, and find the TV section. From far enough away that you can't see the logos, I want you to identify by brand each TV. Can you do it? Because some people certainly can, but most people would just see a bunch of black rectangles on the wall, all showing the same video.

      Yet, TV manufacturers don't sue each other over the "trade dress" despite the fact that all the large black slabs look basically identical. You know why? Because form follows function. It's a TV: it's basically all display with a little bit of structure around it and a few controls beneath the screen. They all look the same.

      The exact same thing applies to tablets. Visually, they're just a touchscreen, with a few buttons around the display. They all look identical to the casual observer. But if you hand one to someone and ask them who made it, unless they can't read, no one will mistake a Samsung for an ASUS. Let alone an iPad.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
    6. Re:iPad by Kneo24 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Their argument does have substance if you ignore the rhetoric. They even impolitely told you to do as such. Real life is not a true/false statement where if one part of the sentence is false, the rest must be, and thus invalidates their entire point. In case you wish to not look past their rhetoric their point is:

      Apple is suing Samsung to set a precedent where if they win, it gives the ability to go after other manufacturers who have similar designs and demand licensing fees with a threat of a lawsuit if those companies don't pay for the licensing fee.

      Apple never has been, nor will they ever be the only company to do this. IMO, any company who does this is run by jerks. I realize companies exist to maintain profit for their shareholders, but that doesn't mean you have to be a jerk at every opportunity.