Comments on: Virtual keyboard tops Apple patent requests

Mac maker files patents for a "smart" virtual keyboard, a two-way screen and tech that lets iPods talk to TVs.

[hrmpf]

copying microsoft?

Interestingly, the patent has curved keyboard similar to microsofts
origami projects... wonder who came up with it first :)
Pictures of the patent are here:
http://hrmpf.com/wordpress/74/apple-virtual-keyboard-copying-
ms-origami-or-vice-versa/

[Peter Bonte]

Not a copy from MS

In the comments someone states : "microsoft?s looks just like
Dial Keys which already comes loaded on Fujitsu?s P1510".

Its a complete qwerty keyboard, MS did not invent it and there is
a extra patent for a different visual layout vs touch layout. It
looks good to me, bring it on Apple :-)

[hadaso]

Finally: Apple patrents FTP!

The patent on "method" to transfer images or other kinds of media files shows absolutely nothing new or unobvious. It claims monopoly on designating files to be transfered between computers if one of the computers happens to be named a "media device" (because of the way it's packaged).

Designating files to be transferred between computers is not new. Automatically adjusting the format of the data to fit the characteristics of the recipient is also not new. E.g. webservers sometimes do it based on various characteristics of the client that sent an http request. So the only "new" thing here is that one of the computers involved in the file transfer is called "a portable media device", and has computing capabilities and packaging that agree with what the public perceives as such a device (i.e., much more than the computing capabilities of a mainframe from 3 decades ago, but smaller packaging).

So the patent claims begin with a fallacy, claiming that PDAs, Media players, cellphones etc. are all different kinds of devices (so making one of them do something some of the others did in the past is an innovation. But in fact they are all exactly the same kind of device: a universal computer. The only differences are in unused capabilities of the universal computer embedded within the package. The decision to use certain abilities and not others is just a business decision of adjusting costs vs. expected income. Apple's decision to use a different subset of the existing capabilities is not an invention, and not even a business method. It's just a change in design, and shouldn't have been granted a patent.

[gg4rest]

Not Patents only Applications

They weren't given patents. These are simply applications and the claims will undoubtedly change.