Apple Files Patent for Translucent Windows

jpkunst writes "John Kheit at Mac Observer reports on US Patent Application No. 20040090467, published on May 13, 2004, in which Apple filed a patent application for 'Graduated visual and manipulative translucency for windows.'" Begin the hunt for prior art! It's a challenge to find a non-Apple translucent window that isn't just a snippet of desktop wallpaper pasted in the background.

Prior art found!!

[aardvarko]

Yeah, I've got some windows with graduated transparency that can be manipulated. They're in my FREAKIN' CAR.

Transparent windows

[Anonymous Coward]

I have one on my desktop right now, i even took a screenshot and was going to post it untill i realized you cant see it, ITS TRANSPARENT!!!

Re:Prior art? Easy...

[Anonymous Coward]

"Translucency has been around for a while, but Apple is filing for time dependent translucency."

Translucent windows?

(looks outdoors)

How are they new again?

Re:Software patents are evil

[Anonymous Coward]

"Or are we all going to change our stance because its Apple?"

I don't really like Apple... so... 'No'.

That's not fair!

[Anonymous Coward]

"I can understand why though, without their GUI to set them apart what do they really have to offer?"

Well, they've got this thing where the power button is on the keyboard.

And you get to Think Different

Oh, and the iPod. Don't forget the iPod. Which is eardelicious!

Apple is wonderful. Sigh.

Re:Did CowboyNeal RTFA????

[Jeff DeMaagd]

Heh, this is Slashdot.

I'm not sure Slashdot editors ever RTFA, if they do, those that do never apply critical thinking about the subject at hand. Slashdot editors don't really even edit much either, it seems. The best most of them do is pick of which stories to post a dupe.

sigh...

[geoffspear]

If slashdot was around when Edison was alive, someone here would claim that his lightbulb patents were invalid because the sun was prior art.

Re:Existence alone is bad enough

[cosmo7]

Patent 4058738294:
Prevention of sleep apnea by means of a large sign affixed above the patient's bed bearing the message "REMEMBER TO BREATHE"

Re:Existence alone is bad enough

[theshowmecanuck]

We can test this hypothesis. Look at the world around you. Where does most useful software come from? Companies. Yes, a good deal of software, some of it quite useful, comes from hobbyists, for lack of a better term. But most of it comes from commercial development. So no, the development of software isn't inherently restricted to those with money, but it is practically restricted to those with money.

I picture a college dropout Bill Gates in a hotel room working on the foundations of a business empire... before there was a Microsoft. Before there was a company. Hmmmmmmm... if you have a company you have more money to spend, but if you don't have anyone putting legal roadblocks in front of you, you have time to spend. In the overall picture of business, investing a few thousand dollars in a computer, and spending your evenings and weekends working on project is nothing. Of course if you are blocked from even starting by stupid patents paid for by companies with money... So maybe it is better said that the reason companies with money produce much of the software now-a-days is that they are starting to use a big patent stick to beat down the little guys.

I would like to patent the concept of lining up at a cash register in order to pay for goods in a store. Or maybe the concept of my customers using a shopping cart to carry their goods in, instead of buying items one at a time. What a load of crap.

Re:Software patents are evil

[Anonymous Coward]

....ago sued anyone trying to implement WIMP.

Then most of the slashdot crowd would have been served papers.

Hey.

[blair1q]

Do you suppose Microsoft patented Transparent Government and that's why we can't have one?