If the technology apes the Timex Datalink, then why were they granted a patent? Or am I missing something?
Apple has been granted a couple of patents (here and there) on linking two devices using a moving graphic on the display of a watch. A camera on the device which is being paired reads an “invisible” image. The technology apes the 1994 Timex Datalink which employed flashing bars on the CRT of a computer running Windows 95 to …
"but hold patents on using piezoelectric panels to do so."
You mean an enlarged version of those buzzers used in everything from hand held games to watches to phones etc that have been around for about 4 decades? And someone gave them a patent??
Perhaps I should invent a Really Large wheel and try and patent that!
Because all old technology was really invented by Apple. As were common shapes such as rounded edges. Yet one more example of Apply taking an existing technology and using it and then claiming credit for it.
It's all old hat now.
And before anyone cries foul, anyone remember the Apple people making fun of Samsung for the size of the Notes?
making fun of Samsung for the size of the Notes?
Yup. I remember. That was me. But large phones just aren't my cup of tea. As far as I'm concerned, if the device has to resort to an ugly hack to make it usable (temporarily shrinking the size of the screen, moving the screen down and so forth) then it's a bad design.
For my money, a phone has to be usable one handed. If I'm standing on a bus (for example) I'm going to need my other hand to be free so that I can hang onto the strap. Similarly, I might be coming home from a shopping trip, trying to find my car. I don't want to have to put my shopping down, or fall over, in order to use my phone.
For the record, I did buy an iPhone 6. The normal sized version. It is, without a shadow of a doubt, the worst phone I have ever used. Whenever I pick up my old iPhone 4, the old iPhone feels well designed, the perfect size, and comfortable to use (if rather slow).
I hope that Apple comes to its senses and releases a phone with a sensible screen size (4 inches or smaller) in the next refresh - but I suspect, given the roaring trade that they're doing with their silly flappy paddle hand phablets, that they won't.
For my money, a phone has to be usable one handed.
I do not like a phone that is so small that you need to borrow the services of a small child to operate the buttons (a practise that is frowned upon where I live), but there is some wonderful technology called "voice recognition" that allows me to dial a number or even send a text without needing to handle the phone at all should I have a hand (or even both) occupied when I need to use the phone. I admit that I have so far never had a sudden urge to use a phone while looking for my car after shopping, so I cannot comment on that aspect, but I would imagine the voice system would work if carrying the shopping to the car has not made you too breathless.
> As were common shapes such as rounded edges.... It's all old hat now.
Okay Baldrick, one more time:
The rounded corners were an example of a "Design Patent", which is not the same thing as a (proper) "Utility Patent". Indeed, in the UK we use the term "Trade Dress" instead - an example would be the unique shape of the Coca-Cola bottle. It is unfortunate that the USPTO uses the term "Design Patent" because it evidently confuses people. That said, it does make it easy to spot the people who comment without educating themselves first.
The USPTO does need some serious revising, though.
This post has been deleted by its author
Ah! I see. It would appear that if it's too loose, you need to tighten it. Blimey.
I wish someone had told me that sooner. I've been wondering for years why my trousers keep falling down, and I keep getting arrested. If only there had been this level of information available when I bought my belt.
No Darryl, we're not prefixing stuff with an i now, so whilst iBelt makes some sense, it'd now be Belt Sport, Belt and Belt Edition.
The sport belt rather than the er, belt being vaguely sensible price wise, but still ridiculous. Yes, even though normally the 'sport' version isn't normally the entry level version.
You were naming it wrong, we've got a guide on how to correctly name our products too.
"The method is to take two colours which look pretty much the same to a human eye and flash between them so fast the eye cannot see them changing. The receiving device looks at the pattern and the movement of the changing dots and decodes that as data"
Will compliance be rewarded?
Has the human race really degenerated to the extent that they need to be told that wearing a watch strap (or other close fitting, non porous item) can cause a rash due to the build up of sweat between the strap and the skin?
I suppose Apple will face a class action now, instead of the litigants being told to fuck off and grow up.
It's nearly as bad as having to mark a packet of Dry Roasted Peanuts with a warning sign:
"MAY CONTAIN NUTS!"
Peanuts are a legume, not a nut, but are likely processed in the same factories that process actual nuts, so therefore putting a label on them saying "May contains nuts" is just the same as putting a label on cornflakes made in the same factory as crunchy nut cornflakes, for instance.
They may contain nuts from other processing lines that might have blown over or whatever, but they aren't nuts themselves.
Correct. Peanuts are, quite literally, a type of pea.
However, you can still be allergic to peanuts. And because they are called nuts, the warning is intended to include them too (buy anything with peanuts and it won't say "may contain peas", it'll say "may contain nuts".
Be suspicious, however, of anyone who claims to be allergic to "all nuts". Because most of the things they'll say they are allergic too aren't actually the same thing at all and it's incredibly unlikely that they are allergic to ALL "nuts".
"may contain..." is a voluntary label with no required wording or separation of ingredient types.
However, it's use on a packet of peanuts is almost certainly to indicate that the packet may well contain traces of other "nuts", as the label is *not* required.
A label saying "Contains: Peanuts" and "Ingredients: Peanuts, salt" is required however....
"Be suspicious, however, of anyone who claims to be allergic to "all nuts". Because most of the things they'll say they are allergic too aren't actually the same thing at all and it's incredibly unlikely that they are allergic to ALL "nuts"."
This is true, ask anyone what the most common "nut allergy" in the UK is and most will state peanuts. However from memory the most common allergy in the UK is actually to hazel nuts. The other half however seems perfectly fine with pretty much any nuts apart from almonds.
And god help you if your other half is allergic to brazil nuts and you fancy a bit of nookie after polishing off the chocolate coated brazils you got for Xmas.
That warning is probably there because they can't guarantee that the ingredients didn't come into contact with nuts at some point along the supply chain. Yes it seems silly but some people really are that sensitive to nuts and being absolutely sure there isn't one nut hiding somewhere in your 100 ton delivery of potatoes is hard.
"Peanuts are a legume, not a nut,"
This is true, or not true, depending on whether you are talking to a botanist or a chef.
In botany, peanuts are, indeed, legumes and not nuts. A whole bunch of things we call nuts are not nuts from the botanical point of view, just as strawberries aren't berries, but grapes, tomatoes and oranges are.
In cooking, however, most of those things we call nuts are nuts, and some berries, e.g. tomatoes, aren't even fruit.
Quite. This is not specific to any specific watch brand, Apple included. The material used and the fit of the strap are factors.
Conventional watch straps are available in materials including titanium, gold, stainless steel, ceramics, leather, Kevlar, cotton, Nylon, rubber, silicone etc.
YMMV. Nothing new here.
I bought a honey-glazed rack of ribs from the supermarket not long ago, in big letters on the back (yes, you guessed it) - "Warning, may contain bones." You don't fucking say, it'd be a piss poor rack of ribs if it didn't.
As a wise man once said, "I'm not suggesting we kill all stupid people, just take the warning labels off stuff and let Darwin get to work."
I have a bunch of those little milk carton thingies in my office.
Actually, it only "contains" in the mathematical sense - because it is entire, 100%, whole milk. It doesn't "contain" milk. It *IS* milk. There's nothing else in there BUT milk.
But still, on a lid the size of a 20p coin, it has both Whole Milk and Contains Milk written on it.
"to achieve a snug, yet comfortable, fit that prevents movement of Apple Watch relative to skin"
That's going to become uncomfortable if the watch, sorry, Apple Watch, is going to sit all day, without moving, on the same section of arm.
I have to reposition my watch, sorry, watch (sic), several times during the hour or two I wear it. I'd go insane if I couldn't reposition it.
Flaming rash ---->
Already covered to death in a different thread. No blood oximeter works well through some tattoos.
> allergy enriched watchstraps
Not an allergy as such. Not specific to Apple. A sweat issue for some users with a specific strap, who probably haven't worn a watch in years. Easily solved by using a different strap, from Apple or a 3rd party.
Breaking news: Apple Watch doesn't measure the heart rate of some double-amputees.
>As is my utter utter disdain for all things crApple.
Does your disdain stem from their business practices, their products, or some small selection of their customers?
-Apple can play hard-ball in their business practices, true. So do others in the business when they can.
-Their products are actually pretty good for many use-cases. Rival products may suit others better.
-Their customers are normal people, including idiots and posers but many good folk too.
Personally, I find Apple interesting because of the unique position they hold in the market - they can move quicker for a few reasons. I am also a product designer - which paradoxically means that my industry doesn't use Macs because our software hasn't been available for OSX (even though it was on UNIX in the 90s, it is pretty much Windows-based these days).
The reasons some engineers don't use Macs dates back to the 80s.
This post has been deleted by its author
Re: Its oh so easy to pour scourn
crApple? Really? Is the school holidays already?
No it's not the school holidays.
Or not here at least. I'm guessing it is where you are though as most kindergartens lock their computers down to stop the small children from accessing the grown up internet. Which is what you are doing. But from home. In your bedroom. With your One Direction posters and action men.
No, but it is crap. Overpriced and underperforming. Brainwash idiots by using "simplicity" spin to cover up product deficiencies, whilst working on copying android features as fast as they can.
Apple watch is basically a poor man's androidwear, its got half the features, a quarter of the battery life (I get 3 days between charges) and a price tag to make it look like an exclusive product. Crapple indeed
Far too easy to make those sort of jokes now about sweaty wrists as a result of 'too much wrist action', let alone the 'Master Beta Testing'.
Let us hope that Apple is not working on a vacuum cleaner - the 'suck and blow' jokes combined with the 'wrist action' jokes would be far too much.
Aesthetics. I'm serious - if you read the background to the patent application, it because QR codes don't look very nice. That is the reason.
Now, I agree with you - for many operations I like to have confirmation that it has worked. That is, until the technology matures and become so reliable that any conformation is largely redundant.
"It seemed to me," said Wonko the Sane, "that any civilization that had so far lost it's head as to need to include a set of detailed instructions for use in a package of toothpicks, was no longer a civilization in which I could live and stay sane." — Douglas Adams, "So Long and thanks for all the Fish"
Were Douglas Adams still alive, I wonder what he would make of detailed instructions on wearing a watch, especially from a company that he admired so much (although there was a lot more to admire about the Apple that DNA knew than today's company)
"The method is to take two colours which look pretty much the same to a human eye and flash between them so fast the eye cannot see them changing. The receiving device looks at the pattern and the movement of the changing dots and decodes that as data."
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020