Apple patent application offers more evidence of projector plans
By Donald Melanson 
posted March 18th 2010 2:24PM
posted March 18th 2010 2:24PM
They're easily missed about the mass of Apple patent applications revealed each year, but the company has filed a few regarding projectors (pico projectors, specifically), and the latest one to be published has now offered a few more details on how they might all fit together. That application boasts the rather broad title of "projector system and methods," and basically describes a setup that would let various devices (including a laptop or phone) remotely interact with a projector, which could itself be built into a device like a phone. To do that, each device in question would be equipped with a sensor of some sort that would be able to receive data from the projector, and even allow you to do fairly advanced things like calibrate the projector remotely. The application further goes on to detail how the system could accommodate multiple clients -- letting folks overlay multiple images on a single presentation, for example -- and it would apparently be able to receive and broadcast audio between multiple clients as well. Does this mean you'll soon be able to control your pico projector-equipped iPhone from your sensor-equipped MacBook? Probably not, but it may not be quite as far fetched as some of Apple's other patent applications.
*sigh*
@commenter7
http://www.engadget.com/exclude/apple
You're welcome. Or cry moar, whichever.
@commenter7
i think it was a sigh related to patents, not apples.
but that's ok, you can be a dick if you want to.
@BrianH
This is an article about Apple applying for patents. How is it not about Apple?
"and basically describes a setup that would let various devices (including a laptop or phone) remotely interact with a projector"
So a patent application for the remote control... of a projector with a computer?
That's not an invention. That's a weekend DIY project!
@LAY
That's your argument against this patent application? That somebody could build it in their garage?
Do you just not understand why patents exist or something?
@HighestRanked2
"and basically describes a setup that would let various devices (including a laptop or phone) remotely interact with a projector"
Except for the fact that Windows has done this since vista, and windows mobile for a few years as well
@HighestRanked2
I hate Microsoft as much as I hate Apple. It has nothing to do with Microsoft doing this before Apple, and everything to do with NEITHER of them inventing this.
@HighestRanked2
"and basically describes a setup that would let various devices (including a laptop or phone) remotely interact with a projector"
Is that NOT the actual quote from the article from Engadget? Or are they stupid too?
I dont care if Microsoft came up with it first last or ever. It is not an invention. It's like a patent application for remote access or teleconferencing!
Here:
http://www.engadget.com/exclude/anyone_that_doesnt_kiss_apple's_ass.
Just so you can have a dissent free Engadget.
@Jack
"That's your argument against this patent application? That somebody could build it in their garage?"
That it's not an invention, but using existing devices to...do something
It's remotely controlling a projector with a device. That is essistially like the remote that comes with the damn thing.
Or how about allowing different computers to use the same output screen? Never seen that before.
"Do you just not understand why patents exist or something?"
In this case to patent no actual thing? I guess as long as it's the RIGHT company, patenting BS is A-OK.
@PBB Then they should have patented it. Unless it's something totally different.
@LAY You troll every apple post don't you. If you hate apple so bad then don't waste our time. Get a life
@LAY Apple will patent anything and sue. That's how to make millions of dollars.
@robott actually the way to make millions of dollar is to:
- take an already existing process or system that requires above average geekery and tech wizardry
- simplify the hell out of it so that "normal" people can use it
- piss off geeks and nerds by leaving out stuff normal people don't need or use
- package the whole thing in appealing industrial design
- put an Apple logo on the back
@Stevenamani normal people don't use Blu-ray?
@HighestRanked2
I've read it. It's exactly as Engadget states. Device gives data to projector over the network, projector has included camera (don't know why, presumably you would have the data on your screen as you push buttons), camera sends data back to device.
Why Apple.. Why :(
Not why, but how. Apple will invent the projector. Just you watch it!
Does this mean they now have a patent on projecting light? Fuck - there go all the movie theaters in existence. Just when we thought the 3-D age was coming.
@whySoSerious
Why so stupid? Where in this patent application does it say anything about patenting the projection of light? Oh right, Apple haters don't read so good. No, see, this patent is about a specific methodology for controlling a projector remotely.
Not a patent for all forms of remote control.
Not a patent for projecting light.
Not a patent for inventing projectors, or remote control.
It's just a patent for a SPECIFIC type of control that Apple may or may not want to implement in the future.
Why are people so dense about Apple and patents?
@Jack
Why so touchy?
It could also just be a joke, I won't get into the fanboy/hater thing but why do you jump to defend a computer company?
@Jack
Clearly, you don't "read so good", either. Obviously, I was just poking fun at the situation (the article doesn't mention 3-D either, does it?).
Everyone who up-ranked me go it... you may have too if your Apple Defense System didn't kick into overdrive the moment someone cracked a joke. Uptight about their patents, much?
@Jack WOAH, calm down now. Just a joke.
@whySoSerious This is why I use "/s" most of the time, so fanbois don't pitchfork me to death!
@whySoSerious I can control my networked projector remotely already, and alot of companies offer remote projectors already. So does this mean they may all have an impending lawsuit if this gets accepted?
I find it hard to believe that controlling a projector via network or remote network can be patented let alone accepted.
Oh wait...
Wow wtf, people been doing these "overlay" projector for years and now Apple claim that it's their methods? Patents law be damned. There isn't any more common sense anymore.
@cdf74dc9
No... no. Just no.
they are just filing this so they can sue LG for their projector phones
@haas599
Watch out LG, Apple has had this idea since the dawn of time...but never implemented it. /s
Wouldn't be surpised if it doesn't mean anything... just that Apple will sue the pants off of whoever uses said feature.
Case in point: Apple suing HTC over the use of multitasking...WTF?
@Luxury Guy
wasnt it multitouch?
@commenter7
He wouldnt know, since he obviously hasn't read the claims, and since he is not a registered patent attorney, he likely could not interpret the claims even if he had read them.
One must take a massive dose of salt when reading any comments here that relate to patents, as those leaving messages have little to no knowledge of claim interpretation, prosecution strategy, or infringement analysis.
@DigDug
It would be nice is people sat at their chairs for a bit thinking.
"Hmm, I'm reading this, but I don't really understand it. Maybe I shouldn't comment, or maybe I should just type something like 'BURN THE WITCH!!!" cos I'm on the internetz and I have a keyboard and I'm FUCKING AWESOME!!!!!!!!"
@DigDug Word? Patents #5,519,867 and #6,275,983: Object Oriented Multitasking System and Object-Oriented Operating System
Do your research.
@Luxury Guy And yes, both those patents were claimed as part of HTC's infringement against Apple's IP.... I may not be a lawyer but my girlfriend is.
@DigDug
no one in here does even remotely mention he/she is writing advice, or to be an expert in the field.
this is a comment section, as defined by it's word it is a placeholder for "comments" therefore one providing one's own opinion.
but you are correct, maybe a disclaimer, as you did was necessary.
@Luxury Guy
If your girlfriend is a lawyer, why didn't she tell you that Apple doesn't own "multitasking" and isn't suing HTC over "multitasking"?
Apple owns patents on SPECIFIC IMPLEMENTATIONS of multitasking, and that's what HTC is violating. Not "multitasking" in general. Did your girlfriend not understand that part? Or was it just you?
@Luxury Guy
The title of a patent is utterly meaningless. It is the CLAIMS that matter, and how they are interpreted.
Saying Apple is suing for "multitasking" is a bit like saying "the tax code states that taxes must be paid."
@D1Only1
It's not that people are writing advice, the problem is that people get their panties all in a bunch about patents (and generally, only about Apple patents or lawsuits) when they have absolutely no idea what a patent is or how the patenting system operates. Complete ignorance.
I wouldn't "rip" Lockheed for the lousy thrust mechanics of its rockets because I know absolutely nothing about rockets or thrust mechanics. But for some reason, everyone and their mother is a patent expert when it comes to (Apple) patents - yet by their writings you can tell they don't even know patents 101.
@Jack Jack, my mistake. But completely besides the point. Read my original post.
I said Apple will likely not use the feature, but use it to sue. So in short.
- So is Apple suing HTC over multitasking (implementation)? Yes
- Does the iPhone multitask? No
@Luxury Guy
Wrong. Apple is suing for the violation of their patent, which is the specific implementation of multitasking. Not "multitasking" in general.
And yes, the iPhone DOES multitask. iPhone OS is a fully preemptive multitasking OS, and Apple's apps do run in the background. But even that is irrelevant. If Apple holds the patent it doesn't matter if the iPhone is actually using the technology that is patented, does it? All that matters is that Apple holds the patent.
Keep making more patents APPLE, keep on.
@shoxite
On March 18th, 2010, Apple published 18 patent applications.
Microsoft published 51.
Citations:
http://www.latestpatents.com/apple-patent-applications-published-on-18-march-2010/
http://www.latestpatents.com/microsoft-patent-applications-published-on-18-march-2010/
The information isn't hard to find, people.
@eyerot
Yeah, but who is Microsoft suing? :/
@Arayta
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=microsoft+files+patent+lawsuit
I suppose they also own the patents for," Method for shadow puppetry", "Method for universe expansion using dark matter",and "Method for being a douche [on a corporate level]"?
@ChristopherW
If you don't like the patent system, blame the patent system. Don't blame Apple for using it.
@ChristopherW
If you don't like the patent system, blame the patent system. Don't blame Apple for ABUSING it.
I wish behaviour like this was just limited to Apple, but there are serious problems with the US patent system. This is just another obvious tactic that will allow Apple to sue its competitors more than it already does and further limit competition. It would be nice if tactics like these were ruled as anti-competitive and disallowed. We (the consumers) are the ones being hurt here, not Apple, HTC, Microsoft, etc. Where is the damned SEC when you need them?
Can Engadget please stop posting stories about patents? It's kinda obvious 95% of the people reading (ie. skimming) this don't completely understand what a patent it. It's depressing to see the ignorance all over the comments.
Maybe some stories on Hello Kitty laptops or something would be more on their level.
@pukerocket
I think you meant to say "99.9999% of the people reading this have absolutely no understanding whatsoever of what a patent, patent application, or patent claim is."
As to Hello Kitty, you basically nailed that on the head.