“The US Patents and Trademark Office has today made public a Microsoft patent application (serial no. 240,729) related to the graphical user interface found on the hotly anticipated Windows Phone 7 Series mobile OS. Filed in September 2008, this application describes a ‘contiguous background’ that extends beyond the dimensions of the screen (either vertically or horizontally, but not both) with anchored ‘mixed-media’ elements being littered atop it – all of which is to be served on a ‘media-playing device’. That should sound pretty familiar, given that it’s the central navigational concept of both Windows Phone 7 and the Zune HD, and as such it makes a lot of sense for Microsoft to seek to legally protect its uniqueness.”
It’s a well sheltered computer science mind that came up with that patent. Jesus, do they NEVER look at their competition?
The prior art for this has to be.. what? Dinosaur old?
Embarrassing Microsoft. Embarrassing.
I thought patents where made for ideas, not for graphical layouts. Isn’t that what copyright is for (kinda)?
I am so glad we don’t have software patents in Sweden. This is just soooo ridiculous.
“a ‘contiguous background’ that extends beyond the dimensions of the screen (either vertically or horizontally, but not both) with anchored ‘mixed-media’ elements being littered atop it”
Is it just me, or does this really sound like the Android 1.5 home screen?
I was thinking the exact same thing.
Me too, I have an Android (Samsung Moment), and it has a desktop that is wider than the screen (you scroll horizontally by flicking you finger). In addition, some things can stay “pinned”. Obviously, XWindow has done this forever. This patent stuff blows.
To tell you the truth it sound like they are patenting my desktop layout when I was using Amiga computers. There were a number of programs to turn your screen into a window into a larger virtual desktop. And with Amiga`s pull down screens it did not usually make sense to make a virtual screen taller than your real screen, making it wider however made it a lot easier to use a number of related programs together, or even a single program with a lot of windows.
Remember the early Amigas were limited in resolution compared to modern day computers, the standard screens filled up fast.
Remember the recent patent tutorial on software patents for OSS developers:
http://news.swpat.org/2010/03/transcript-tridgell-patents/ . It specifically says neither the title, nor the abstract is sufficient to judge the generality of a patent.
We had multiple/scrolling backgrounds in everything (all the modern Unix windows managers, especially recent compiz). However, the Zune UI is unique. And MS will try to focus on what it does differently.
So, in my opinion, we should look at the application under this light.
Even under this light: software patents suck.
There’s a really big problem here….patents cost a bit of money to file (40k or so) and is not something a small business can generally afford. Once filed, a patent like this then gives a large company the ability to threaten and/or bankrupt any small company entirely based on threats regardless of whether or not the patent is valid.
I really see no inovation regarding hardware or manufacturing, just yet another process patent.
Your information is way off. The USPTO charges $330 for a utility patent filing, $165 if you qualify as a ‘small entity’ and $82 if you file electronically.
This case is exactly the article I linked is about.
I’m quoting the first claim of the patent text:
For MS to successfully sue a company, they have to make sure all the “and … and” clauses are done at the same time by the possibly infringing use. For example if you’re not doing only a single item in the list (e.g: not having mixed-media content, but only single type) then you’re not infringing.
Your defense would be easy: “we’re not doing that”. It will not even go to court.
This is just a rehash of the zoomable UI concept championed by Jeff Raskin and already implemented in a variety of different manners by a variety of different interfaces already. Just because it’s on a “media device” and only lets you scroll horizontally or vertically at any given time does not make this new.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zooming_user_interface
For me Apple and Microsoft have become two companies where I would not want to work, because I know any small UI innovations I come up with would probably be put straight into a patent. I’d rather have innovative ideas spread….
Edited 2010-04-02 19:58 UTC
My first brush with display scaling/zooming ( that *IS* what this patent really is ) was with BeOS.
I didn’t have a support video card and I tried to change the screen resolution. Done.
Of course, I could scroll in any direction, so maybe Microsoft can make a claim about being the only ones to limit the technique?
Merde, I wish we would just distinguish between artistic techniques ( such as most UI design ) and true scientific processes when issuing patents. And require a greater degree of uniqueness…
–The loon
I remember first experience of desktops bigger than screens on Amiga in the far 1990 with AmigaOS 2.0.
Also AmigaOS 1.3 could do it when equipped with A2024 monitor or perhaps with Lowell A2410 graphic Card too…
This is a 2.1 screenshot showing MUI Magic User Interface. Its dimensions are unusual 720×800 (720x double 400) and infact it must be shown on a normal TV set, by scrolling down entire screen of Workbench to reveal the rest ot the desktop.
http://fms.komkon.org/graphics/Workbench.gif
And this is a 1008 x 800 1.3 Workbench Screen that is made out of 4 separate panels and it could be seen entirely only with Commodore Monitor 2024 that was capable to join all 4 panels in an unique graphic screen.
http://www.gregdonner.org/workbench/images/wb_b_3.gif
http://www.gregdonner.org/workbench/wb_2024.html
http://www.amigahistory.co.uk/modelnum.html
Edited 2010-04-03 16:43 UTC