Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Apple Businesses

Apple Tries to Patent Fast User Switching 445

Posted by timothy from the presto-change-o dept.
Ashcrow writes "An article from The Register points out Apple's attempt to patent fast user switching. It seems that Steve Jobs admits that Microsoft beat them to the punch but believes Panther's implementation is superior."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple Tries to Patent Fast User Switching More

Apple Tries to Patent Fast User Switching

Comments Filter:

  • Actually unix beat them both (Score:4, Interesting)

    by bic2k ( 140221 ) * on Sunday July 13, 2003 @05:20PM (#6429766) Homepage
    Alt-F1, Alt-F2... I can switch between root and myself in about 1/8 of a secord or less. Its amazing really. I bit longer to switch between console and X.
    • But X only allows one user at a time, or, wait, is there a way to run multiple X sessions using different consoles? My experience with user-switching in Win XP was interesting, Winamp doesn't stop playing when you switch users.
      • It's definitely possible to run multiple X sessions on different virtual consoles. Sucks a bit of ram, but you can definitely do it.

        • Re:Actually unix beat them both (Score:2, Informative)

          by Anonymous Coward
          That's pretty much what XP does anyway. Keep all the apps and the windowing system up on a virtual screen. Sucks up some ram and is a copy of UNIX's innovation. Par for the course.
        • And I do. I run one for a desktop and one for 3D games on linux. I use it to switch back to the desktop from a full screen 3D game that won't nicely share the mouse or keyboard or display with other apps.

        • Re:Actually unix beat them both (Score:4, Informative)

          by mcgroarty ( 633843 ) <brian@mcgroarty.gmail@com> on Sunday July 13, 2003 @06:14PM (#6430070) Homepage
          It's definitely possible to run multiple X sessions on different virtual consoles. Sucks a bit of ram, but you can definitely do it.

          It's not only possible, but some of us have been doing this for over ten years. If Apple pursues this patent, I'm definitely calling prior art on this.

          • I don't think so (Score:5, Informative)

            by 2nd Post! ( 213333 ) <gundbear.pacbell@net> on Sunday July 13, 2003 @07:27PM (#6430409) Homepage
            Unless you're familiar with Location Manager and can disagree with that implementation, I don't believe there *is* prior art.

            Or rather, that Mac OS (Classic, not X) *is* the prior art, and that *Apple* owns the original patent, of which this is merely a continuation if you read the article.

            Location Manager allows a single user to change multiple settings on a computer with a single selection:

            Wireless Plugged
            Wireless Unplugged
            Netless Plugged
            Netless Unplugged
            Wired Plugged
            Wired Unplugged
            At Home
            At Work
            Roaming Unplugged

            So that with a single selection the user can change:
            Bandwidth settings on Qucktime and the network
            Power/Battery/Energy saver settings
            Screen Saver settings
            Printer settings
            Network settings (DHCP and Proxies)
            Browser settings ... AppleScripts to manage everything else

            If you look at 'Multiple locations - User' :: 'Multiple users - Machine' then it does appear valid that Fast User Switching is a continuation of the original patent Apple holds regarding the technology that is Location Manager.

            su is *not* fast user switching, it is just changing the user locally in a terminal; and it doesn't change the settings of the machine, applications, or even the environment *outside* the terminal, unlike FUS or Location Manager.

          • Re:Actually unix beat them both (Score:5, Insightful)

            by Suppafly ( 179830 ) <slashdot@s[ ]afly.net ['upp' in gap]> on Sunday July 13, 2003 @07:36PM (#6430468)
            It's not only possible, but some of us have been doing this for over ten years. If Apple pursues this patent, I'm definitely calling prior art on this.

            Fast user switching isn't even close to running separare x sessions, not is it similar to switching between virtual desktops. Fast user switching unloads part of the OS and logs in another user, this is much more efficient than loading multiple xsessions and switching between them. If apple pursues this patent, the only one that could call prior art on this is microsoft and as stated in the article, apple's implementation is different than microsofts and that is what they are pursuing the patent on.
        • When my daughter logs into Linux on this PC, her .bashrc starts up her own personal X server - I can flip between her desktop and mine (if I'm in X) with Ctrl-Alt-F7/8, and all of our programs continue to run just fine. Been doing this even before WinXP made it popular with the point-n-grunt crowd

      • Re:Actually unix beat them both (Score:5, Informative)

        by gantrep ( 627089 ) on Sunday July 13, 2003 @05:28PM (#6429816)
        Sure, multipse X sessions are easy! Here's a very nice tutorial [justlinux.com] on how to do that.

      • Applications don't stop? (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Merk ( 25521 )

        Then how do they deal with the security issues of the MP3 being in a directory owned by another user? What if permissions for the data and/or applications don't allow the new user to access them? Does it do something similar with editors? If the first user was in the middle of editing something, will it still be opened for editing by the second user?

        Has Microsoft actually solved these issues, or are they just using a very lax security model, as usual?

    • ...that UNIX beats itself. OS X is UNIX, and user switching is really just as fast as on any other *NIX based system, the only delay is Apple's insistance on having a perty Quartz graphics transition between it.

    • Re:Actually unix beat them both (Score:5, Insightful)

      by BrookHarty ( 9119 ) on Sunday July 13, 2003 @05:46PM (#6429923) Journal
      Alt-F1, Alt-F2... I can switch between root and myself in about 1/8 of a secord or less. Its amazing really. I bit longer to switch between console and X.

      The point is the simple and ease of use of the GUI to switch users. Not text only console, not remote access like vnc or xwindows.

      My kids use fast user switching on XP, and its very stable and works quite well. They can switch users, and not disturb the desktop of the last person using the computer. Some households cant afford multiple computers, fast user switching is a good idea. I love apples eye-candy approach, its faster than microsoft's, 1 second switch. They even let you use a pulldown on the menu with each users picture (if you change your login photo).

      Anyone know if KDE/Gnome or even Xfree is planning something like this? I heard talk about multiple X servers, but its not out of the box simple use, of even possible.
      • Uh, you can put multiple Xterms on different TTYs and use ctrl-alt to switch. Or you can use Xnest to do it.

        OS X and Windows are latecommers to the game. OSS even had the cube thing first - check out 3ddesk.
        • Uh, you can put multiple Xterms on different TTYs and use ctrl-alt to switch. Or you can use Xnest to do it.

          Yes, startx -- :1 puts a new xserver on ctrl-alt-f8. Problem, you just have an open VT that someone can switch too. And you have to log into a console to switch.

          While Apple and Microsoft might be late the game, its a better implementation and more secure at user switch. And a hell of a lot faster.

      • Re:Actually unix beat them both (Score:5, Informative)

        by zenyu ( 248067 ) on Sunday July 13, 2003 @07:00PM (#6430289)
        Anyone know if KDE/Gnome or even Xfree is planning something like this? I heard talk about multiple X servers, but its not out of the box simple use, of even possible.

        If you use gdm to login, add the line "1=Standard" after "0=Standard" in your gdm.conf. If you use kdm I think you just add the line ":1 local@tty1 /usr/X11R6/bin/X vt8" after the line ":0 local@tty1 /usr/X11R6/bin/X vt7", but I don'y use kdm, so your milage may vary. (xdm is more complicated, so google if ya use that). As suggested by the kdm config to start a new X server on another virtual terminal just specify the vt you want to use. I think this has been around since shortly after XFree86 was first ported to Linux, maybe earlier on the BSD's. Recently it's been possible to program virtual terminal switching to keys other than the basic F1-F12, so easy switching isn't limited to just 12 users anymore. I never understood why multiple X servers haven't been used in the Linux distro's, at least on a "allocate one X terminal per 256 MB of RAM the computer has" basis. My desktop has had a gigabyte or more of RAM for years, I'm not really concerned about a few extra buffers eating up a tiny bit of memory. Even my laptops with 256MB-512MB in the last 5 years can handle an additional X server without batting an eye.

        You can also give the different servers different configurations, which is the traditional use for this. But by default the X server started by kdm/gdm requires a login and uses the same config, so it is exactly what you want. BTW if you want to be able to login with the same user twice you will have to enable that, by default it is not permitted to prevent remote users from starting lots of X servers and consuming all your resources... (though this is also limited by the number of virtual terminals you allow.)
        • If you use gdm to login, add the line "1=Standard" after "0=Standard" in your gdm.conf. If you use kdm I think you just add the line ":1 local@tty1 /usr/X11R6/bin/X vt8" after the line ":0 local@tty1 /usr/X11R6/bin/X vt7", but I don'y use kdm, so your milage may vary. (xdm is more complicated, so google if ya use that). As suggested by the kdm config to start a new X server on another virtual terminal just specify the vt you want to use.

          If we think that Windows users are going to be wanting to do all that

      • Surprised I haven't seen any posts specifically describing this yet, but in KDE 3.1 (at least the version in Debian, but I think it's distro-independent) there's a "Start new session" option in the k-menu which opens up kdm in a new x session. You can also access this when the screen is locked - there's a button in the password prompt to start a new session.
      • The point is the simple and ease of use

        What could be simpler and easier than alt-f2, (username), enter, (password), enter, startx-space-dash-dash-space-colon-one? ;^)

    • startx -- :1 (Score:5, Informative)

      by Erisian Pope ( 636878 ) on Sunday July 13, 2003 @06:05PM (#6430028) Homepage

      On linux (and probably any other system with XFree86 ) To get to the first virtual console Use: CTL+ALT+F1. Then login and type:

      someone@server someone]$ startx -- :1

      X windows starts using the next available console. To switch between X sessions use CTL+ALT+F7 and CTL+ALT+F8. To start more sessions use :2, :3 etc. This has been available (but not well documented) for many years. Have Fun!

    • Re:Actually unix beat them both (Score:4, Interesting)

      by leob ( 154345 ) on Sunday July 13, 2003 @08:49PM (#6430883)
      Alt-Fx to switch consoles first appeared in Microsoft Xenix, AFAIK. So, in all fairness, Microsoft should win.

  • SU (Score:5, Interesting)

    by KingJoshi ( 615691 ) <slashdot@joshi.tk> on Sunday July 13, 2003 @05:20PM (#6429767) Homepage
    um, isn't "su" fast user switching? Doesn't that have prior art?

    • Re:SU (Score:3, Informative)

      by zapp ( 201236 )
      Su does not "maintain state" like the XP/OSX fast user switching features does. If I log in as user1, then user2 wants to finish some old work, I do not do "su user2" and have it resume where he last left off.

    • Re:SU (Score:3, Informative)

      by CatOne ( 655161 )
      su is not the same as fast user switching. I don't know whether you've used "fast user switching" on windows or OS X, but they are not at all the same. su allows you to become another user (really, in the shell). fast user switching lets you switch to a desktop which is for a specific user -- like a normal windows or OS X login. But you can have many of these running concurrently -- say one user has a window with their browser running, and one with a mail client runnning, etc. Fast user switch to anoth
  • I mean, what is the use of switching users as fast as it can be done?

  • What the hell? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by TWX ( 665546 )
    Okay, I'm really confused here. If there's a prior implementation, how can it be patented, especially when it's not like Apple can claim that they don't know about any competitors?

    I really have liked where Apple has been going lately as far as the technical side of things goes, but if their management is going to become stupid, then they need a wakeup call.

    • Re:What the hell? (Score:5, Funny)

      by n0nsensical ( 633430 ) on Sunday July 13, 2003 @05:25PM (#6429802)
      If there's a prior implementation, how can it be patented, especially when it's not like Apple can claim that they don't know about any competitors?

      This is the USPTO we're talking about. You could patent the wheel and nobody would notice until the Register posted the story.
    • IANAL, but its because different implementations are, well, different.

      For instance, there is more than one way to compress music. Company A figures out a way to do it, Company B sees this and goes "ah, we can do better than that". Both can patent their own technologies so long as they are sufficiently different.

      There is some grey zone here, but obviously Apple believes that their implementation is sufficiently different from MS's or any other's that it merits a patent.

      Having not used Panther, I am not

    • Re:What the hell? (Score:2, Informative)

      by spooje ( 582773 )
      Acutally Apple is trying to patent Fast Switching for handheld devices, not desktops. Also they already had the patent for it from teh Newton Days, this is just an extension and adding in multiple devices and personas to slightly enhance the patent. It was in the article. Not a very big deal.

    • Read the article (Score:3, Informative)

      by 2nd Post! ( 213333 )
      Apple happens to have prior art, since 1995, that applies to the current patent, and is evidently a continuation of that patent.

    • Re:What the hell? (Score:3, Informative)

      by Grishnakh ( 216268 )
      If there's a prior implementation, how can it be patented,

      Prior art doesn't matter for patent applications, unless there's prior art that has already been patented.

      When patent examiners get a new patent, they look for prior art in the USPTO patent database. The assumption is that if there's any prior art, someone would have patented it. If there aren't any patents, then it passes that test. They don't actually bother to check if there's non-patented prior art, even if it's something anyone in the fiel

  • The meat of the issue (Score:5, Insightful)

    by mrpuffypants ( 444598 ) * <mrpuffypants@gmailTIGER.com minus cat> on Sunday July 13, 2003 @05:21PM (#6429775)
    Incidentally, it does, however, cover uses such as the Mac OS' Location Manager, which switches network-related settings according to the user's location. The patent extends that idea to cover other, more personal settings and data, that might depend on the user's location/identity, ie. the computer's owner as public individual and as company employee.

    I think that this is really the point here. Apple's got a great implementation of multi-environment profiles and they want to protect that. Jobs himself said that WinXP got there first...It'd just be odd to retract and deny that.

    Anybody remember when Apple patented "lighted" computer devices? Everybody was guesstimating that it meant your new iMac would, at the press of a key, turn into the center of a disco party for you and your friends. Mostly we are inaccurate, since we never know what's behind the doors at 1 Infinite Loop.

    Finally, when contacted, Jeff Bezos said, "Been there, done that!"
    • Incidentally, it does, however, cover uses such as the Mac OS' Location Manager, which switches network-related settings according to the user's location.

      Location Manager is one of the coolest features the old Mac OS had. I always wondered why Microsoft didn't shamelessly copy it, considering what a pain in the ass it was to change network settings in Windows (especially in the days when you had to reboot for them to take effect)-- it never occurred to me that Microsoft actually might respect someone else's (especially Apple's) patent instead of ignoring it [vaxxine.com] and figuring their army of lawyers will protect them from any repercussions.

      ~Philly
      • MacOS location manager is itself old hat. Multiple roles according to what the user/system is currently doing goes back to military systems in the 1960's. The military stuff is actually vastly more powerful because you can in general tie anything to a role - security rights, commands you can run, settings, files you can read.

        Linux pcmcia has had similar stuff since about 1994/5.

        Apple's is just a *lot* prettier and more used oriented than anyone elses 8)

  • um... (Score:2)

    by pb ( 1020 )
    Couldn't X-Terminals do this like a zillion years ago?

    or, for that matter: su - change user ID or become super-user

    • Re:um... (Score:2, Informative)

      by 2nd Post! ( 213333 )
      Nope.

      Read the article.

      Grok fast user switching
      Grok Location Manager

      Unless the X-Terminals you're talking about actually changed system settings, preferences, and configuration states (like IP address, network connection settings, battery/power settings, screen savers, executed scripts, startup and shutdown services, and ran programs in the background), FUS and LM is a different beast.

      It's *obvious* in hindsight, but OS 9 had it, and Windows 95, 98, ME, NT, 2k, and XP don't, so perhaps it isn't *obvious*
      • All of the settings a user can change are already stored in that user's home directory. Therefore, "fast user switching" on Unix simply consists of "logging in as a different user". And, as the article mentions, XP *has* fast user switching.

        Actually, it's so obvious that it's been a stock feature of Unix for decades, and that doesn't make it worth patenting, or even patentable.

  • Direct link to feature description on Apple (Score:5, Informative)

    by $$$$$exyGal ( 638164 ) on Sunday July 13, 2003 @05:22PM (#6429783) Homepage Journal
    Here's the Direct Link [apple.com].
    • You can do that exact thing on UNIX by running multiple X-servers on different virtual consoles. ALT-F# to switch, and voila, you've got a different user with all their apps still running. Optionally you can lock the console before switching (using xscreensaver-command -lock, among other options) so you need the user's password to switch back.

  • Yes but. (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Do they rotate on a cube like the mac does?

  • Fast User switching, some thoughts. (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 13, 2003 @05:23PM (#6429788)
    Since I have no karma here goes:

    Apple + FreeBSD = FeeBSD

    OS X Aqua is a single user gui on top of a multi-user system, this is otherwise known as a kludge.

    On second thought I'll post this anonymously.

  • Prior art (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Mensa Babe ( 675349 )
    One word: prior art. And one link: su(1).
  • I've never had any problem with how fast the 'su' command executes on my machine.

  • Can someone please read the article (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 13, 2003 @05:26PM (#6429806)
    because it appears that nobody here is able to. They are not patenting fast user switching per-se but changing application settings and preferences on the fly, such as what location manager is doing.
    • The patent application talks a lot about pen based systems. In fact, it says:

      Therefore, it would be desirable to provide some method for quickly and easily changing an entire collection of parameters of relevance to the pen-based computer system when its owner adopts different personas.

      I don't know of many pen based systems that Apple still markets...

  • In other news: (Score:5, Funny)

    by be-fan ( 61476 ) on Sunday July 13, 2003 @05:29PM (#6429820)
    Microsoft tries to patent "fast user baiting-and-switching."

  • sueing microsoft (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Pompatus ( 642396 ) on Sunday July 13, 2003 @05:34PM (#6429847) Journal
    As much as we'd all love to see Apple successfully sue Microsoft, It won't happen. This reminds me of the 1998 lawsuit about Microsoft ripping off the "look and feel" of Mac OS.

    The article even points out weaknesses in the strategy (I know, I know, I broke the slashdot rule by reading the article).

    "At WWDC, Jobs admitted that Microsoft had beaten Apple to market by offering such a feature in Windows XP, but he claimed Apple's implementation was the better of the two." and "The downside - if Apple's intent is to outflank Microsoft; we're only guessing here - is that the patent refers to multiple personas of a single user, not multiple users".

    Microsoft is an EXTREAMLY WEALTHY corporation. When it comes down to how the legal system works, the more money you can spend on lawyers the more you can get away with. Hell, even the GOVERNMENT didn't beat them. I know they were convicted of being a monopoly, but really, what has happened since then? They still hold a monopoly on the desktop market, they still own windows and office, and they still infest every windows computer with a copy of internet explorer. I'd say that they really won.

    I'd love to see apple (or anyone else) be able to truely step up to them. Sadly, as long as they continue to have as much money as they do, there is no chance

    • Re:sueing microsoft (Score:5, Funny)

      by geekee ( 591277 ) on Sunday July 13, 2003 @05:52PM (#6429959)
      " As much as we'd all love to see Apple successfully sue Microsoft, It won't happen."

      So frivolous patents are bad unless someone uses them against MS?

    • Re: sueing microsoft (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Zhe Mappel ( 607548 ) on Monday July 14, 2003 @01:29AM (#6432111)
      Hell, even the GOVERNMENT didn't beat them. I know they were convicted of being a monopoly, but really, what has happened since then? They still hold a monopoly on the desktop market, they still own windows and office, and they still infest every windows computer with a copy of internet explorer. I'd say that they really won.

      So would I.

      The pity is that the very law designed to protect American consumers and competitors is such a rat's stew of politics, ideology, and byzantine caselaw. The sordid history of antitrust law - with its endless larding of exceptions and layers and layers of right wing theory - is one part of the tale of how corporations have come to dominate our culture.

      Still, the stink rising from the MS settlement has added itself to the general odor hanging over our justice system (joining such rich fumes as the failure to prosecute major corporate criminals of the past three years, the hysterical drug war, and the 2000 election fiasco). Again, more's the pity. This type of phoniness is one of the reasons people lose their faith in the system, and a system in which fewer and fewer believe is a system in trouble.

  • Wanna see fast? (Score:3, Funny)

    by mikeophile ( 647318 ) on Sunday July 13, 2003 @05:36PM (#6429858)
    Fast user switching happens when someone who has spent their computer life on Microsoft operating systems gets their first taste of Linux or OSX.

    Switching back is the hard part.

  • Legit (Score:5, Informative)

    by alset_tech ( 683716 ) on Sunday July 13, 2003 @05:36PM (#6429861) Homepage
    If you read the article, you will see that Apple has filed a CONTINUATION of a patent involving user-switching, originally granted in 1995. This is a completely legitimate move on their part. It is arguable that they have owned this technology for years. As for using SU for user switching, this would be true as an earlier form, however the patent applies to the GUI. Dan

    • Re:Legit (Score:3, Informative)

      by WindBourne ( 631190 )
      Yes, but the original patent will most likely be ruled invalid. X has had this capability as it was designed in since the 80's (ever wonder about the format of DISPLAY variable? hostname:display#:screen#). This patent might be interesting (it allows for physical changes to the hardware as you move across sessions ; personally, I think it foolish), but the original will almost certainly be ruled invalid due to prior art.

  • Important Quote (Score:5, Informative)

    by jmt9581 ( 554192 ) on Sunday July 13, 2003 @05:37PM (#6429866) Homepage
    Straight from The Register story (the The Register story?):

    At WWDC, Jobs admitted that Microsoft had beaten Apple to market by offering such a feature in Windows XP, but he claimed Apple's implementation was the better of the two.

    That would imply, surely, that Microsoft has a solid prior art claim?

    No. The current application, filed last November and updated this past June, turns out to be a continuation of a patent, number 6,512,525 filed in August 1995, long before Windows XP arrived, and finally granted in January 2003 with the same title. That patent is also assigned to Apple.

    :)

  • Apple patents everything (Score:5, Interesting)

    by mcc ( 14761 ) <amcclure@purdue.edu> on Sunday July 13, 2003 @05:38PM (#6429873) Homepage
    Apple patents everything they can imaginably think of, right down to the skins on their OSes, and they never use a single one of these patents. (OK, they bitchslap people who make themes similar to aqua, but based on trademark law, not patents.)

    If they give any indication they'd ever use this patent, ever, I'll bitch and moan about it with the rest of you. But they never will, and anyway, this idea is SO obvious I can't concievably imagine them ever winning a lawsuit based on this patent even if they tried.

    In the meantime, i want to see how long it takes someone to make a serviceable Virtual Desktop implementation based on faking out the fast user switching implementation. Also, I find the Register's last paragraph a bit odd:

    Will Apple use its new-found intellectual property rights? Maybe not, but like its use of QuickTime patents to win a $150 million investment from Microsoft demonstrated some years back, it may now have the opportunity to do so if it ever hears the words 'cancelled' and 'Microsoft Office' in the same sentence.

    Patents? Hmm, I seem to remember that particular lawsuit being over several tens of thousands of lines of actual source code that slipped directly out of the Quicktime codebase and into the Microsoft Media Player codebase, through the intermediary of a third party contractor that both Apple and Microsoft hired at different points. I could have missed something, though.

  • Why Patent User Switiching? (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    They woulda covered more stuff if they
    just patented "fast"

  • Fast user Switching (Score:2, Informative)

    by gh0ul ( 71352 ) *
    as a developer I recieved a free copy of the developer preview of OSX 10.3, and the fast user switching is by far superior in speed and eye candy.

  • screen(1) for X11 (Score:2, Insightful)

    by TCM ( 130219 )
    Now that would be cool.

    1. start X
    2. start dozens of terminals/browsers
    2. detach the whole thing while leaving everything running
    3. attach it again at a later time, maybe on another box

    Just like screen(1) does now for text terminals. And come on, who can live without screen(1)?

  • patents and implementation (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Slur ( 61510 ) on Sunday July 13, 2003 @05:49PM (#6429941) Homepage Journal
    The thing about software patents is that they are Implementation-Specific. For example, the patent held by Adobe on tabbed palettes that can be dragged in and out. Adobe was able to sue Macromedia because Macromedia copied the implementation verbatim. Had Macromedia used a different technique to tear off palettes they would have been safe.

    Likewise, by extending their Location Manager patent to include user-oriented settings Apple is implying that the switching technique and internal binding methods are unique to their implementation. Microsoft may have a semblance of fast user switching under XP, but there is no doubt that their implementation relies on different hooks and methods than the Apple implementation, which is a very thin layer that leverages the Darwin underpinnings of the OS. Most geeks here can easily guess the techniques Apple had to use in order to make this possible on top of Darwin. These techniques are certainly more graceful and less of an OS kludge than whatever Microsoft had to bolt onto Windows, and could easily be applied to other Unix-like OS's.

    There will be a time in the not-too-distant future when portable devices will contain GPS by default, and automatically switch locations and users on the fly. Apple is doing the right thing here, formalizing their design via the patent system.

    • These techniques are certainly more graceful and less of an OS kludge than whatever Microsoft had to bolt onto Windows, and could easily be applied to other Unix-like OS's.

      Microsoft uses a thin local Terminal Server that's running in the background to achieve this. Quite elegant actually. The only problem with this is that it adds another layer between user & hardware, so there's a performance hit.
      I was really impressed with how WinXP handled itself in a little test I devised: Start installing MS Offi

      • Microsoft uses a thin local Terminal Server that's running in the background to achieve this. Quite elegant actually. The only problem with this is that it adds another layer between user & hardware, so there's a performance hit.

        I was really impressed with how WinXP handled itself in a little test I devised: Start installing MS Office in 1 account, switch to user2 and start surfing the web, fetching e-mail, etc. Switch back and hey presto! office was installed. I say: sweet. that's a good implementati

  • Prior Art? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by fuzzybunny ( 112938 ) on Sunday July 13, 2003 @05:53PM (#6429969) Homepage Journal

    I used to work for a corporation called Bull [bull.com], a French computer manufacturer and consulting outfit.

    One of that company's core products at the time was smartcard-based . The project they were really proud of consisted of a massive rollout for a chain of hospitals in France, where doctors and other staff, just by inserting a chip card into a reader on a kiosk PC, could almost instantaneously call up their user profile, including rights to patients' dossiers and user-specific access to applications. The GINA mask would even display the doctor's photo while he/she typed in the PIN code.

    This was based on Windows (forget which version), but the actual functionality was developed in-house. And I'm pretty sure we weren't the first to do anything of the sort.

    Good luck, Mr. Jobs.
  • Anyone else think that their switch cube thing looks rather like 3ddesk, except that 3ddesk was designed to switch virtual desktops?

    And yes, you can rig up 3ddesk to switch between Xnest sessions (logged in as different users) on Linux. I was doing this before Apple announced copying this into OS X on one of my boxes, just for the hell of it. Perhaps I can sue them for millions now?
    • Hey, like, no, because you like not only don't own the 3Ddesk IP, but Apple is continuing a patent application they filed in, like, 1995.

      Facts, anyone?

  • My God, RTFA already!!!! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 13, 2003 @06:34PM (#6430191)
    1. This is a continuation of a patent filed in 1995, and finally reviewed and granted in January 2003. Even if this was patenting Fast-User Switching, it was filed way before MS had it.
    2. This is NOT a patent on Fast-User switching (by itself). MacOS has, since, well probably no earlier than '95 but I'm thinking it was introduced around '98 or so had the "Location Manager". It works like this: LM compatable Control Panels saved their prefs in config files within the Preferences directory in the System Folder, and registered themselves with the Location Manager on initialization. Then, using a Location menu, you could simply snap all the settings to different configurations with one menu. Quite handy, I have one set on this machine for "normal" and one for "MIDI setup".
    3. We've all seen the Balmer video, but even he wouldn't be so stupid as to announce "our compeditors beat us to it" and then file a patent. Steve may be sadistic, but stupid he is not.
    If I see one more post about "I have a virtual desktop and I can put a different xterm on each one" or "One word: su" , all I gotta say is this:
    All I better see now is "cp -R /var/root/configs/home_settings /etc" ;-)

  • Read the Patent Application: It's interesting. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by banal avenger ( 585337 ) on Sunday July 13, 2003 @06:52PM (#6430269)
    This may indeed be an attempt to patent "fast user switching" on Panther, but the patent talks about switching personalities on a pen based system. I, for one, would like to be able to tell my PDA to switch between my work persona and my persona persona, and to keep the calendars separate. The mention of that in the application is a new idea that I haven't seen done before, and it's much more intriguing than Apple supposedly trying to hoodwink Microsoft. Here's the relevant line in the application:

    [0082] In the example presented in FIGS. 4a and 4b, the hand-held machine is shown to have two personas. In the case of FIG. 4a, the persona is Stephen Capps, professional engineer, while the persona illustrated in FIG. 4b is provided in for Stephen Capps, private citizen. As shown in FIG. 4a, some information associated with Stephen Capps, professional engineer, includes his company affiliation, title in the company, company address, and company phone number. In contrast, his private citizen persona is shown to include his home phone number, and may include such other information as a home address, etc.

    I definitely haven't seen either Mac OS X switching or Windows switching do something _that_ useful.

  • Has anyone here actually read the pattent? (Score:5, Informative)

    by RalphBNumbers ( 655475 ) on Sunday July 13, 2003 @07:37PM (#6430469)
    Has anyone here actually read the patent that the Register article links to?
    It covers "Multiple personas for mobile devices".

    It's a hell of a stretch to go from that patent to fast user switching. The Register even admits it's a inaccurate description of user switching, although they underplay it.

    That patent sounds like it would more accurately describe a handheld device that could serve multiple roles (like a mp3 player, a movie player, a camera, a phone, etc) and could rapidly reconfigure it's GUI to accommodate whichever 'persona' the user wanted.

    I'd say this is just the Register blaring sensationalist bullshit to get attention (and succeeding wildly since they have a front page /. story now), with only their wild guess as to what Apple is actually patenting.

    • Re:Has anyone here actually read the patent? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Aapje ( 237149 ) on Monday July 14, 2003 @07:39AM (#6433089) Journal
      Has anyone here actually read the patent that the Register article links to?
      It covers "Multiple personas for mobile devices". That patent sounds like it would more accurately describe a handheld device that could serve multiple roles (like a mp3 player, a movie player, a camera, a phone, etc)

      A laptop is a mobile device too. In fact, the patent explicitly makes a distinction between a hand-held computer and a portable computing device (see claims 34/35, 43/44 and 50/51 from the patent). In the desciption it states that: "Computers are becoming increasingly [...] portable. [...] Laptop, notebook, and sub-notebook computers are virtually as powerful as their desktop counterparts." In other words, the class of portable computing devices referenced in the patent includes laptops.

      It covers "Multiple personas for mobile devices". It's a hell of a stretch to go from that patent to fast user switching. The Register even admits it's a inaccurate description of user switching, although they underplay it.

      The term 'user' as used in Unix is really just a persona. It's certainly not equal to a person since the root and guest accounts are not directly related to a person. They are more like roles, aka personas. Multiple personas seems to be an valid description of (fast) user switching.

      I'd say this is just the Register blaring sensationalist bullshit to get attention (and succeeding wildly since they have a front page /. story now), with only their wild guess as to what Apple is actually patenting.

      Unfortunately, I haven't got the time to examine the entire patent (it's very long), but your criticisms don't seem to hold water. So for the time, I'll have to give The Register the benefit of the doubt.

      PS. Quotes were edited for readability.

  • Fast User Switching "Switcher" Ad (Score:5, Funny)

    by Ilan Volow ( 539597 ) on Sunday July 13, 2003 @09:34PM (#6431111) Homepage
    (Cue cheesy balalaika music)

    When I used to be Dan on my powerbook five seconds ago, I couldn't do anything. I couldn't get my e-mail from work, I could only browse the net at 56k, and all my Brittney Spears mp3's would play back in Swedish.

    Then I got Apple's fast user switching.

    Now I'm named Barbara. I can browse the internet using bluetooth, I've got access to corporate VPN's Dan never did, I've got a Hello Kitty background on my desktop, and everyone in the chat room thinks I don't have a penis. This just rocks!

    My name is Dan..er..Barbara Wickowski, and I'm an insurance salema..er..saleswoman.

  • Bad pun..... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Darth_brooks ( 180756 ) <.clipper377. .at. .gmail.com.> on Sunday July 13, 2003 @09:36PM (#6431124) Homepage
    If Jobs doesn't get his patent, he should take microsoft to court and..... ....wait for it.......

    ....$su

  • How can they even think of this? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by teval ( 683486 ) on Sunday July 13, 2003 @10:24PM (#6431312)
    How could they get a patent for technology that has existed much before either company was ever created? Unix has been using this technology for ages. Mainframe operating systems have this feature too, and its an extension of the dumb-terminal idea. So... How would this work?
  • Circa 1985: I remember something called "the switcher" that would allow you to rapidly switch between desktops on the 512K macintosh. (The original 128K thin mac) didn't have it. It was a neat effect, with the desktop sliding right off the screen and the new one sliding into its place. There were no multiple user logons, but this was the first example I remember of multiple desktop switching.

  • Like a game of chess, maybe? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by inkswamp ( 233692 ) on Monday July 14, 2003 @03:31AM (#6432441)
    I have to wonder if Apple isn't trying to maneuver MS into a position of having to maintain their Office suite for Mac OS X. We just witnessed a five-year span where a standoff (or "agreement") between the two companies ensured continued Office for OS X development, thereby staving off a lawsuit by Apple against MS. I wonder if Apple reinstating their patent on fast-user switching isn't a way to position MS into another similar agreement. Who knows? Curious move on Apple's part.

  • Sun Java Station with fast user switching for GUI' (Score:3, Interesting)

    by mcdade ( 89483 ) on Monday July 14, 2003 @10:20AM (#6433683)
    Sun had this years ago, we have java stations which are like 4 yrs old now, which did fast switching, login to a session with your smart card in the station, pop it out and you session is saved while the terminal returns to a login screen.. pop that baby back in any other terminal on the network and your session returns pretty much instantanously!

    lightyears ahead of this point and click...

  • Old News (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Quixadhal ( 45024 ) on Monday July 14, 2003 @10:44AM (#6433856) Homepage Journal
    First there was login, kindof quick if you're a good typer.

    Then there was su, slightly quicker if you're a good typer.

    Then came screen, ^a1, ^a2... seems pretty quick to me!

    Then came sudo, awfully fast, especially when combined with keybindings in screen.

    Oh, you meant silly GUI switching? Fine. But why switch users when I can just 'sudo -u luser mongo-app --display :0'?

    Maybe I really want to see a different desktop theme? Ok, how about binding those to virtual desktops....

    All those patent lawyers must be bored, they've twisted the USPTO to the point where it's just a funny rubber stamp and mask outfit, so they need a new challenge!

    • Re:Old News (Score:3, Insightful)

      by pressman ( 182919 )
      Oh, you meant silly GUI switching? Fine. But why switch users when I can just 'sudo -u luser mongo-app --display :0'?

      Silly GUI switching? It doesn't seem all that silly to my Mom who owns an iMac. I really don't want my mom dealing with sudo commands and all that other terminal stuff. The terminal may work just fine for you, but don't call my mom silly for using a GUI!

  • Linux method = fractured metaphor (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Paradox ( 13555 ) on Monday July 14, 2003 @12:27PM (#6434677) Homepage Journal
    Sheesh, everyone in Linux clamoring that their OS can do User Switching too. It's like they're jealous or something.

    C'mon now. It's plain to see that fast user switching is a better solution than just virtual consoles, or even multiple X servers. For one, security. I can safely transfer control to someone else without worry of them messing me up. This safety isn't necessarily from deliberate attempts to cause harm. I have a user account for people who don't know my computer, thus they have a nice little box they can check their email in. An accidental keypress can dump you back in the other environment.

    Second, it fractures the metaphor. When you "log in" a GUI then you are identifying that machine as "you" for the duration of that session. Everything that computer does, it should do as "you." Fast User Switching is a clean extension of the metaphor to allow for multiple users at a time. The console and multiple X terminals is not.

    For the people who just advocate using su or sudo to switch shells, that's fine. For advanced users, that's very possible and doable. Remember OSX has a pretty schwag terminal app built right in should power-users want it. But the average user doesn't understand it, doesn't want it, doesn't need it. However, they do need a way to switch users.

Slashdot Top Deals

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Close