Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
iMac Businesses Apple Hardware

Apple Patents 'Chameleon' Computer Case 323

Posted by CmdrTaco from the strange-ideas dept.
Dave B writes "The Register has been fishing at the patent office again and found that Apple has a new patent for "a computing device [which] includes a housing having an illuminable portion. The computing device also includes a light device disposed inside the housing. The light device is configured to illuminate the illuminable portion". While this gives us the exciting prospect of an iMac that is all five fruit flavors at once surely the original iMac with its glowing power button, or indeed a-thousand-and-one other electronic gizmos represent prior art?" Update a couple of users noticed this Slashdot Story from 2002 which looks familiar.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple Patents 'Chameleon' Computer Case More

Apple Patents 'Chameleon' Computer Case

Comments Filter:

  • Prior Art? (Score:5, Informative)

    by Morgahastu ( 522162 ) <<bshel> <at> ... fave bands name>> on Monday August 16, 2004 @08:01AM (#9979364) Journal
    What the poster failed to mention was that the patent also included that it was customizable via a software program. You could open the "case prefs" and sets your case to have stripes, polka dots, etc. I am sure it could probably be animated too.

    I don't I've ever seen that.

  • Not Prior Art (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Oculus Habent ( 562837 ) * <oculus.habent@gm ... m minus caffeine> on Monday August 16, 2004 @08:02AM (#9979376) Journal
    A "glowing power button" does not a "housing having an illuminable portion" make. That is a status indicator. A button, a light serving a unique and specific purpose is not prior art.

    • Re:Not Prior Art (Score:4, Funny)

      by ari_j ( 90255 ) on Monday August 16, 2004 @08:14AM (#9979490)
      Not to mention that Apple would really have to smoke some bad crack to claim prior art against their own patent.

    • Re:Not Prior Art (Score:3, Insightful)

      by HaloZero ( 610207 )
      Even if it doesn't fit on the iMac, PowerBooks and iBooks for generations (theirs, not ours) have had illuminated apples on the covers. Their lumen-strength is directly proportional to the brightness of the display when the case is open. Obviously off when the computer is closed/suspended.

    • Re:Not Prior Art (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Fulkkari ( 603331 )

      Isn't it funny how everytime a new patent application is filled in, Slashdoters are desperately trying to find prior art for it. Sometimes it's quite reasonable, but not always. This time the application looks quite unique. If you don't really know any prior art, don't pretend like you would.

  • Lasers? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by DarkMavis ( 767874 ) on Monday August 16, 2004 @08:04AM (#9979396)
    So do you suppose that these internal lights will actually be lasers like the ones found in laser pointers? how else would you be able to make the lights turn into dots or stripes?

    • Re:Lasers? (Score:3, Interesting)

      by krog ( 25663 )
      probably by having multiple tri-color LEDs dimmed by pulse-width modulation.

      I gotta say, it will be pretty neat having the entire case give me information about CPU/memory usage.

    • shoot your eye out (Score:5, Funny)

      by millahtime ( 710421 ) on Monday August 16, 2004 @08:22AM (#9979547) Homepage Journal
      I don't know about "Lasers". You might open the case and shoot your eye out.

    • Re:Lasers? (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      So do you suppose that these internal lights will actually be lasers like the ones found in laser pointers?

      I think they'll actually have little frick'n sharks with the frick'n lasers attached to their heads

  • Interactive Illumination (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Lord Grey ( 463613 ) * on Monday August 16, 2004 @08:06AM (#9979414)
    From the detailed description portion of the patent:
    [0090] In some cases, the light system 14 is arranged to cooperate with the electrical components 18. For example, events associated with the electrical components 14 may be monitored, and the light system 14 may be controlled based on the monitored events. As such, an illumination effect corresponding to a specific event may be produced. For example, the housing 12 may be configured to exude a blinking red coloration when an event has been implemented.
    It looks like Apple is extending the "illuminated case" theme by making it more interactive. The patent is purposely vague about what the illumination is, taking (what seems to be) pains to avoid calling the illumination static. I think they're looking at displaying color bars, logos, icons, etc. on the case from the inside. It would be cool to see an entire case shaded (for example) from blue to red to indicate processor activity. Imagine a rack full of server systems with that capability, in a dark server room....

    Now, I'm not sure how a so-called "interactive illumination" is much different than LEDs you see on the mondo-cool multiprocessor boxes, but the patent does describe something a bit different than the run-of-the-mill case mod.

    • Yeah, and if someone gets Goatse'd, a little fluorescent man holding his anus pops up on the case.

    • Re:Interactive Illumination (Score:4, Funny)

      by N Monkey ( 313423 ) on Monday August 16, 2004 @08:29AM (#9979610)
      It looks like Apple is extending the "illuminated case" theme by making it more interactive. The patent is purposely vague about what the illumination is, taking (what seems to be) pains to avoid calling the illumination static. I think they're looking at displaying color bars, logos, icons, etc. on the case from the inside. It would be cool to see an entire case shaded (for example) from blue to red to indicate processor activity. Imagine a rack full of server systems with that capability, in a dark server room....

      I wonder what will happen if it ever works out that it can behave like a chameleon and then it suddenly disappears....?
      • I wonder what will happen if it ever works out that it can behave like a chameleon and then it suddenly disappears....?
        Yeah, don't bother- chances are your boss won't fall for that one either.

  • Are patents stifling or restricting? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by erick99 ( 743982 ) <homerun@gmail.com> on Monday August 16, 2004 @08:06AM (#9979419)
    If people and companies viewed patents and copyrights 100 or more years ago the way we do now, we would have possibly had exactly one artist who did pointillit paintings, one who did impressionistic, one who did abstract, etc. I wonder if we really have a need to patent or copyright things that are somewhat "basic"? Well, in my mind they are basic. But, that is just one person's point of view.

    Cheers,

    Erick

    • Re:Are patents stifling or restricting? (Score:5, Funny)

      by krog ( 25663 ) on Monday August 16, 2004 @08:12AM (#9979477) Homepage
      Good thing no one has a patent on hyperbole -- you'd be in some serious trouble with the above post.
    • I guess Apple is sick of them coming up with cool new ideas/designs, just to be ripped off by a bunch of cheap-ass PC manufacturers...
      On the other hand, I'm sure several case-modders has done something similar to this before, unless I've gotten it all wrong.
    • This is what patents are supposed to be used for. There's an invention, and the inventor discloses the invention to the public, in exchange getting the exclusive right to the invention for a limited time.

      This invention could not be protected by other intellectual property laws, such as copyright or trademark law. A patent is the only way, and an appropriate measure. The only basis I see for questioning this patent's validity is the presence of prior art. Aren't they basically patenting a LED display here?

    • Ah, the usual fallacies, eh (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Moraelin ( 679338 ) on Monday August 16, 2004 @08:41AM (#9979701) Journal
      Guess one can never get enough of "waah! but what if someone had patented sex!" kind of fallacies on /. Was starting to get withdrawal syndromes after through a whole weekend without reading one ;)

      But OK, let's play that game. Let's talk about paintings:

      1. They'd more likely have to patent a device or method to make those paintings. So someone might have got a patent on something new like flinging colours at the canvas, but then someone else might just as well get the same result (or close enough) by using the old methods (using a brush). For which plenty of prior art existed.

      (Just as this patent doesn't prevent you from having a lit case by other means than what Apple patented. You can still have your old cathodes or LED fans.)

      2. For that matter, it might have stimulated someone to try more new stuff. So we might have 3-4 times more styles in the same period. Which is the whole purpose of patents: to stimulate researching _and_ publishing your research.

      (And you could say the same about the situation at hand. We've had _years_ of noone even trying something more original than yet another LED fan or cathode behind acrylic window. By now every kiddie has one of those. So if it takes patents to get out of that loop and have a more original case, seems to me like a benefit of patents.)

      3. Patents are not for ever. Copyrights amd trademarks do get extended. Patents expire no matter what.

      I.e., if you talk about a 100 years interval, you may notice how the 20 years covered by a patent is only a fifth of it. I.e., combined with the previous point, we'd probably have a helluva lot more art choices after 100 years.

      4. Patents encourage publishing your results, as opposed to keeping everything super-secret. Art is a bad example there. But there are a ton of technological processes that one could have kept secret. Or which _are_ being kept secret. Patents encourage companies to share this information with the rest of the world instead.

      5. Patents get licensed all the time. I'm sure that if someone absolutely needed to do something impressionistic before the patent expired, they could have negotiated a license.

      (And in this case, if IBM or MS absolutely needed to do their own lit cases, I'm sure they can persuade Apple.)

  • This IS news! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by UncleBiggims ( 526644 ) on Monday August 16, 2004 @08:07AM (#9979427)
    The funny thing is that this actually IS news. But only because it is Apple. I for one am dying to see what the new iMac will look like. Even people who never plan to buy an Apple product are, at the very least, interested. However, if DELL had filed this patented then no one would really care. That says something about the importance of good design in the computer industry.
  • (next time I will RTFA)

    I did not know mother Nature is this sloppy when it comes to patents. I thought the Chameleon would have been patented already.

  • Hum... (Score:3, Funny)

    by SirLestat ( 452396 ) on Monday August 16, 2004 @08:08AM (#9979442)
    I guess it now make sense to call them iLamps ! Damn it was my favorite joke.

  • gah (Score:5, Insightful)

    by vena ( 318873 ) on Monday August 16, 2004 @08:09AM (#9979453)
    patents protect a specific implementation. you can't patent the idea of putting a light in a box, you patent how you do it.

  • Again, infringing on my well known patents (Score:4, Funny)

    by BubbaThePirate ( 805480 ) on Monday August 16, 2004 @08:11AM (#9979463)
    I've already patented the concept, and actualisation of 'housing having an illuminable portion...[which] also includes a light device disposed inside the housing.'. I call it a House with a Light Bulb(tm).

    Gimme my 699$ or suffer the litigatious consequnceses.

  • This isn't new. (Score:5, Informative)

    by labratuk ( 204918 ) on Monday August 16, 2004 @08:13AM (#9979481)
    This (or a very similar Apple patent) cropped up about a year or two ago. It was discussed then. Some people freaked out, some people used it as an opportunity to give Apple a blowjob, some people didn't care. I guess nothing changes.

  • Chameleon Computer Case (Score:5, Funny)

    by The Subliminal Kid ( 647767 ) on Monday August 16, 2004 @08:14AM (#9979488)
    Just what I need a computer that hides from me by becoming the same colour as the desk.

  • Prior art? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by pesc ( 147035 ) on Monday August 16, 2004 @08:20AM (#9979535)
    Is it like this [thinkgeek.com]?

    Surely there is a computer inside that controls that case!
    • Good call, very interesting.
      It is a peripheral device, but yes the point is that it is controlled by events occuring on a computing device like email arriving etc.

      Any lawyers have any insight on this?
  • I can't find a url now, but I'm pretty sure Apple patented some kind of computer casing that changes lighting depending on software events. This was at least a year ago. Is this the same thing or something new?

  • Not new (Score:5, Informative)

    by loginx ( 586174 ) <xavier AT wuug DOT org> on Monday August 16, 2004 @08:23AM (#9979559) Homepage
    The register should probably read slashdot more often then...
    This story was posted on slashdot two years ago [slashdot.org]

  • No, Apple does not have a patent (Score:5, Informative)

    by the eric conspiracy ( 20178 ) on Monday August 16, 2004 @08:23AM (#9979560)
    Apple has a new patent for "a computing device...

    LOL. Slashdot and obviously the Register don't seem to be able to determine what a patent is. THIS IS AN APPLICATION, not an actual patent.

    It was filed in Feb 2004 and PUBLISHED, not GRANTED on Aug 12. 20040156192 is the application number, not the patent number. Patent numbers are serial and are in the 6 million range.

    Talk about egg on face.

  • Wurlitzer was first (Score:5, Insightful)

    by chiph ( 523845 ) on Monday August 16, 2004 @08:25AM (#9979579)
    You mean, changeable colors on your case, like a Wurlitzer Jukebox [2nd-sight.com] from 1934?

  • IP has run amuck! (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Phoenix-IT ( 801337 )
    Our next major economic dowfall will be Intellectual Property related. The US consumer base will become fed up with exclusives, restrictions and pay-per-exhibit models of content & products. We will see people forming newsworthy general boycotts of things. Only then will legislation begin to really take notice of consumer fancy.

  • ACHTUNG! (Score:3, Funny)

    by StoatBringer ( 552938 ) on Monday August 16, 2004 @08:33AM (#9979645)
    ACHTUNG! Alles touristen und non-technischen peepers!

    Das machine control is nicht fur gerfinger-poken und mittengrabben. Oderwise is easy schnappen der springenwerk, blowen fuse, und poppencorken mit spitzensparken.

    Der machine is diggen by experten only. Is nicht fur geverken by das dummkopfen. Das rubbernecken sightseenen keepen das cotten picken hands in das pockets, so relaxen und watchen das blinkenlights.

  • Apple Protecting An Advantage (Score:5, Insightful)

    by tabdelgawad ( 590061 ) on Monday August 16, 2004 @08:38AM (#9979679)
    Apple is a design leader, and there's a portion of the PC hardware industry that watches Apple designs and makes knock-offs on the PC side.

    The question with patents is always: if this patent were not granted, would companies still have the incentive to innovate in this area with the same intensity? To the extent that this patent is original and non-obvious, I think the answer here is that the patent is justified. Apple has proven that they can innovate in this area, and they should be rewarded for this.

  • Irony: Previous RGB light patent (Score:3, Insightful)

    by shoppa ( 464619 ) on Monday August 16, 2004 @08:52AM (#9979791)
    In the late 90's a company named "Color Kinetics" was granted a patent on making arbitrary colors by mixing R, G, and B sources. Since then they've gone around driving other companies out of the business.

  • Glowing keyboard for Mac desktops? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Writer ( 746272 ) on Monday August 16, 2004 @08:56AM (#9979837)

    I wonder if this means that Apple will implement the same glowing keys feature that is present in the 15" and 17" Powerbooks on their desktop models. That's a great feature for allowing the use of a computer in the dark. In this case, the whole computer can light up when the lights go down. Great for getting that "computer tan".

  • Useful? Yup. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 16, 2004 @08:57AM (#9979857)
    Patent issues aside, I like the sound of this feature. Xserves are already pretty nice for 'admin by eye', but this sort of design takes that to a new level.

    I've got new mail. How do I know? The Mac's pulsating yellow. Device 3 on that RAID's getting sick - it's turned a nasty shade of puce. We need to tweak our load-balancing: that server's green, but that one's red.

    Shit. They've all gone red. Start blocking links from slashdot.

  • On board camera could make it invisible (Score:3, Funny)

    by Wonderkid ( 541329 ) on Monday August 16, 2004 @08:59AM (#9979866) Homepage
    By using a built in camera to scan its vicinity and match the skin's casing to its environment the computer (or anything else for that matter) could be made to vanish. If a thief breaks in, he or she would find it a lot harder to find!

  • Conspiracy! (Score:3, Funny)

    by Have Blue ( 616 ) on Monday August 16, 2004 @09:10AM (#9979982) Homepage
    • Apple gets sick of computer world copying things they come up with.
    • Apple announces intent to use case lighting in the future.
    • Everyone else starts building hideously ugly lighted cases (seriously, it does NOT make your computer cool, and when Dell tries it it will look even worse).
    • Apple releases computers that look halfway normal and laughs all the way to the bank.
    • There's no step... uh... 5!

  • The really interesting thing is... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by TheHonestTruth ( 759975 ) on Monday August 16, 2004 @10:03AM (#9980647) Journal
    The really interesting thing is that patent applications by default publish at 18 months. This one published after 7 months. I think Apple had to request early publication, which makes me wonder why they would. Typically you'd love to never have you application publish until it is granted and then get money from people already practicing your invention. In this case, early publication has put competitors on notice, which is typically not a good thing. Weird.

    And as mentioned, this is a published application not an issued patent. I love that the Reg uses "finally" in describing the "granting" of the patent. A typical prosecution time is a couple years, not a couple months. Having a patent granted in 7 months would kick ass. But again, this is just an application.

    And for those crying "prior art!" note that the application claims priority back to 2001. I dunno what case modders were doing three years ago, or if the glowing orb thing on thinkgeek was around, but it makes your prior art case harder (though still not that weak of course).

    -truth

    PS if everything is so obvious, why haven't you patented it? People here are like Nostradamus fans: everything is obvious (predictions are accurate) after the fact.

  • Practical Uses? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by buckhead_buddy ( 186384 ) on Monday August 16, 2004 @10:19AM (#9980843)
    The idea of a mood ring isn't too far off from the actual implementation. Heat sensitive liquid crystals would react to your body heat and change color (and sometimes pattern in some rings). They'd say various colors equated to different moods e.g. green = normal body temp = calm, yellow = hot = stressed, red = very hot = horny.

    There are many ways color could be put to use.

    In a computer lab situation, all students are taking a quiz. The color reflects the student's "questions per second" rate of progress through the quiz. Blue = Quick Pace, Green = Average Pace, Red = Slow Pace. (or any sort of gradients between these). Blue might be indicative of a really sharp student or one who's cheating. Red might indicate a dumb student or one held up by technical problem.

    Again in a school lab, but where the students are given free research time to roam the web. The case may show green for sites on an approved "white list", some form of amber on an off-site list based on a computed content rating, a red color for black listed sites or ones with highly offensive content rating.

    A boot up progress bar? As the machine starts up the colors fill the neutral body color from grey to blue from bottom to top and the whole case seems like it's being filled with water as it indicates where it is in the boot process. (Aqua?)

    A mode (initiated from the server) that would turn all the machines cases to indicate 802.11 signal strength for a period of 10 seconds. Allowing you to adjust the base station's antenna or position to give good signal strength to everyone in the room.

    An accessibility feature for deaf users (or an option for computers in mute) to strobe to the would-be sound strength being generated by the computer with color indicative of volume. While you won't be able to make out the content of what's being said, you could distinguish between a system beep when played over the sound of your game of risk. All without interfering with the real screen's content area.

    Any other thoughts?

    • Re:Practical Uses? (Score:3, Interesting)

      by mrchaotica ( 681592 )
      about some of your ideas: the test question rate and web browsing ones have some privacy implications, and the boot up progress bar wouldn't work, because the controlling software wouldn't have loaded yet (similar to how the software brightness and volume buttons don't work until the OS loads)

      My idea for this is to have it be a generalized system monitor; i.e. monitor everything (cpu load, network usage, number of programs, number of iChat buddies online, unread mail, etc) in different areas of the case.

  • Design patents (Score:5, Informative)

    by Perianwyr Stormcrow ( 157913 ) on Monday August 16, 2004 @10:51AM (#9981243) Homepage
    This looks to me like it's going to be a design patent when it's approved (you can tell these at a glance by the prefix D on the number,) which is a very specific sort of patent and very different from what you may normally think of in terms of patents.

    A design patent protects a particular aesthetic or functional design, not any process or underlying technology.

    So, it's quite reasonable that Apple would get a design patent, I'm sure they have a great many of them already. Design patents are also not particularly strong- all you have to do to get around it is make a significant alteration and you're generally all right.

  • Hackers will love this. (Score:3, Funny)

    by Rai ( 524476 ) on Monday August 16, 2004 @11:38AM (#9981716) Homepage
    Whenever the feds bust in, the computer can blend in with the background and hide itself.

  • Where Can I get one? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by rspress ( 623984 ) on Monday August 16, 2004 @11:47AM (#9981819) Homepage
    If Apple released a G5 iMac that had this feature and an upgradable video card and one PCI slot I would buy it in a heartbeat.

    While Apples all in ones have made them a bundle of cash they need to look forward and offer at least some upgrade potential to the machines. At least an upgrade to the video card and one PCI slot for expansion. Even with the cool color changing feature I would not buy another Mac that could not have the video card updated and at least one PCI slot.

Slashdot Top Deals

The game of life is a game of boomerangs. Our thoughts, deeds and words return to us sooner or later with astounding accuracy.

Close