[Super Mario]

Apple, Jeff Han and Microsoft aren't as innovative as they are trying to make people believe. This technology, including pinching pictures to resize them, has been around for years in so many different forms.

http://www.billbuxton.com/multitouchOverview.html

1983


1992


1995


1996


2002


2003

[Peter]

everyone's a critic.

[Wiskedjak]

Look at all those concepts ripping off Apple ... even before Apple came up with the idea

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by Super Mario 

Apple, Jeff Han and Microsoft aren't as innovative as they are trying to make people believe. This technology, including pinching pictures to resize them, has been around for years in so many different forms.

...so? Apple didn't invent the GUI either, the mouse or the portable MP3 player either. What Apple does is make these ideas work.

A good idea is worthless if you can't make it real and of very limited value if you can't make it useful. That's where Apple innovates.

I didn't even consider for a moment that the multi-touch idea was made in-house at Apple.

V

[Super Mario]

Originally Posted by voodoo 

.
I didn't even consider for a moment that the multi-touch idea was made in-house at Apple.

V

Point being that Jobs said Apple patented the hell out of the iPhone however there's lots of prior art there.

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by Super Mario 

Point being that Jobs said Apple patented the hell out of the iPhone however there's lots of prior art there.

Sure, that's US patent laws for you. None of these multi-touch ideas were for portable phones, so they can be patented by anyone for that purpose.

You can probably patent multi-touch for hairdryers right now!

V

[Super Mario]

Originally Posted by voodoo 

Sure, that's US patent laws for you. None of these multi-touch ideas were for portable phones

You mean if person A has a patent for general purpose multitouch GUI then person B can make a multitouch phone interface without paying royalties?

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Super Mario 

Point being that Jobs said Apple patented the hell out of the iPhone however there's lots of prior art there.

It's not the idea of a touchscreen that they patented, it's the implementation.

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by Super Mario 

You mean if person A has a patent for general purpose multitouch GUI then person B can make a multitouch phone interface without paying royalties?

I mean that patent A used in device B can be made into patent C. The maker of device B and thus the owner of patent C may have to pay royalties to the patentowner of patent A, but only if the patentholder of patent A seeks royalties.

There is a patent for the vibrating device found in most GSMs, but there is a second patent for using this device in game controllers for video game consoles. For instance. This second patent is independant of the first.

V

[Super Mario]

Originally Posted by voodoo 

There is a patent for the vibrating device found in most GSMs, but there is a second patent for using this device in game controllers for video game consoles. For instance. This second patent is independant of the first.

V

What is the unique application of Apple's Multi Touch that they patented that, say, isn't in other Multi Touch devices or Surface?

[Eriamjh]

How many multi-touch products are out right now? I can think of none that were commercially significant. So who is innovating? Companies that bring them to market!

Many times, the patent is not what you are doing, but how you do it.