Microsoft Seeks Patent On Virtual Desktop Pager 716
ihabawad writes "Microsoft has a patent on file for this really cool new technology called 'virtual desktops' where you see a 'pager' on the screen. Read all about it by searching under "Published Applications" for patent #20030189597 at the US Patent and Trademark Office. You know, I had a dream that I was using such a thing once; what was it called? -- yes, FvwmPager! Weird, eh?"
nVidia Desktop Explorer does this on windows (Score:4, Informative)
Prior art.. (Score:4, Informative)
Direct Link (Score:5, Informative)
http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect
It took ages to find it... *sigh*
-huha
crazy! (Score:0, Informative)
-Jonathan c.
vtwm (Score:5, Informative)
This was circa 1990, even before fvwm. I think xrooms was earlier still.
Re:Direct Link (Score:5, Informative)
http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=
Re:You've got to hand it to him (Score:1, Informative)
Re:nVidia Desktop Explorer does this on windows (Score:5, Informative)
Power Toys for Windows XP (Score:5, Informative)
This is available in XP as a power toy.
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/downloads/
Works fine I guess... never really got used to it myself.
MS *doesn't* have a patent on this! (Score:5, Informative)
This means that the USPTO could still be contacted and instances of prior art be submitted.
Patently abusive (Score:5, Informative)
Read the patent... (Score:5, Informative)
Doesn't make it that much better, but at least make sure you're ranting about the right thing.
Prior Art (Score:5, Informative)
(Gets out Soapbox) So why don't we give the USPTO and Congress a good old fashioned snail mail slashdotting and try to convince them that while software copyrights on source code is fine, that software patents are patently stupid.
C'mon - who's with me? Anyone want to step up and coordinate this effort?
Let's write letters and Slashdot the USPTO! And the US Senate! And The House! Here's the USPTO Mailing address -
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
USPTO Contact Center (UCC)
Crystal Plaza 3, Room 2C02
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
http://www.senate.gov for finding your state's senator. http://www.house.gov for finding your district's representative.
It's an application. (Score:3, Informative)
Pager? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Power Toys for Windows XP (Score:2, Informative)
Re:You may want to mention that (Score:5, Informative)
from uspto's website [uspto.gov]:
A protest under 37 CFR 1.291(a) must be submitted in writing, must specifically identify the application to which the protest is directed by application number or serial number and filing date, and must include a listing of all patents, publications, or other information relied on; a concise explanation of the relevance of each listed item; an English language translation of all relevant parts of any non-English language document; and be accompanied by a copy of each patent, publication, or other document relied on. Protestors are encouraged to use form PTO-1449 "Information Disclosure Statement" (or an equivalent form) when preparing a protest under 37 CFR 1.291, especially the listing enumerated under 37 CFR 1.291(b)(1). See MPEP 609. In addition, the protest and any accompanying papers must either (1) reflect that a copy of the same has been served upon the applicant or upon the applicant's attorney or agent of record; or (2) be filed with the Office in duplicate in the event service is not possible.
who wants to do it?!
Re:vtwm (Score:5, Informative)
From the tvtwm man page:
Protesting Patents (Score:5, Informative)
Here is the link to the Patent Protest Document. [uspto.gov]
Re:nVidia Desktop Explorer does this on windows (Score:4, Informative)
Re:vtwm (Score:2, Informative)
Re:You may want to mention that (Score:5, Informative)
Just because most of these never make it to court is hardly an excuse either. Honestly, how many open source developers do you think could afford to face Microsofts high-paid lawyers in a patent case?
Re:You may want to mention that (Score:2, Informative)
Of course they do business that way. They just don't need that when they have the opportunity to buy their competitor. But when the competitor cannot be bought (think of a free software enthusiast in his garage), they don't even need to sue, intimidation is enough. See for instance the VirtualDub issue [ffii.org].
Re:vtwm (Score:5, Informative)
Sort of.
vtwm was a different fork.
twm was "Tab Window Manager"-- window managers previous to that didn't have the object at the top of the window (called a tab in this case) to do the window manipulation with. However since it was written by a guy named Tom LaStrange, it also was known as "Tom's Window Manager."
vtwm involved a bunch of folks taking twm and adding virtual screen capabilities to it, the same thing Tom LaStrange was doing at Solbourne (remember them?) for swm (Solbourne Window Manager, of course). swm evolved into tvtwm, which is where Tom's name was first "officially" put in the window manager's name: "Tom's Virtual Tab Window Manager."
Re:Innovative (Score:5, Informative)
Funny but also (sadly?) true. With the provervial disclaimer IAMAL, but I have worked in R&D labs where were were regularly briefed by the lawyers and harvested for ideas, to be patentable, an idea does not have to be a completely new product area, it just needs to be a way of doing something. So if one step in a process is novel, you can try to patent it. This means, of course, that someone can come around with a different process to do the same thing and they can also try to patent it. In the realm of software, business processes etc. this means that some dubious sounding things can get through - but it also means that there are often work arounds e.g. if one click shopping is patented, add a second step.
Don't stop at the Abstract. Look at Claims (Score:2, Informative)
Download the whole patent (Score:5, Informative)
Some of the illustrations show a gnome display right down to the foot. What Microsoft seems to be trying to claim is...
1) When you preview, then entire screen is filed with tiled preview images large enough so you can really see what is in each window.
2) The mini-images on the toolbar have the same background properties as the full-scale window.
Not the most innovative patent in the world, but not a slimy attempt to patent the work of others either.
Re:Full Screen Preview? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Read the patent... (Score:3, Informative)
> trying to patent a pager with a preview of each desktop.
Both vtwm 5.4.5a and fvwm 1.24r have previews in their pagers. Granted, these are the latest versions straight out of apt, but I'll lay dollars to donuts that these major feature enhancements haven't been added in after October of 2003 when MS filed the patent in question.
Re:vtwm (Score:3, Informative)
James
Oddly Enough (Score:5, Informative)
Just my 2 cents.
Re:Prior Art (Score:5, Informative)
Maybe if you actually look at the patent application you'll see that they (Microsoft) INCLUDE a representation of both KDE and Gnome implementations in their drawings.
See page 2 (tiff) [uspto.gov] of their application. They're not trying to pretend that virtual desktops don't exist. They're trying to describe a slightly different way of doing it that is related (but not the same) as existing methods.
This application doesn't look like their trying to patent the concept of virtual desktop pagers, but a specific implementation of one. This patent app would fall under the broad cateogory of being an incremental improvement of an existing invention.
The question the patent office will need to face is whether the claims are unique enough that this specific implementation warrants a patent. This patent wouldn't cover all virtual desktop pagers, just ones that use the method they describe in their claims.
Re:This has got to stop (Score:5, Informative)
Reviewing patent applications to assess if they comply with the basic format, rules and legal requirements, determining the scope of the protection claimed by the inventor, researching relevant technologies to compare similar prior inventions with the invention claimed in the patent applications, and communicating the examiner's findings to patent practitioners/inventors with reasons on the patent ability of applicant's inventions.
Patent Examiners are responsible for the quality, productivity, and timely processing of patent applications, which is the basis of their performance evaluation.
See the actual posting HERE [opm.gov]
I'm not trying to be glib, and I know one person cannot change the world, but with all of the unemployed /.'ers out there, one of you could take a leap and actually apply for this position.
Let us know how it goes.
Re:Read the patent... (Score:2, Informative)
I haven't read the patent, but I have installed the virtual desktop manager on my XP box, and the way it does previews is not in the pager itself (it just shows round icons with numbers for each desktop) but with a preview button. Click on the button, and the screen is divided into four preview images of your desktops. Click on the desktop you want, and it switches to that desktop. Sort of like expose for virtual desktops, I guess.
Re:nVidia Desktop Explorer does this on windows (Score:-1, Informative)
I didn't read the article (hey, it's /.) but if it is what I think it is, KDE had it since 3.0
Feel free to correct me if unlike me you actually know what you're talking about =)
this is a patent application (Score:5, Informative)
As this is only an application, it does not have patent protection.
Borland C (Score:4, Informative)
Re:I actually use MSVDM (Score:1, Informative)
http://download.microsoft.com/download/whistler/I
This is NOT a patent (Score:3, Informative)
OSS is mentioned in the specification, perhaps you should be less paranoid.
Re:GNOME/KDE Ripoff? (Score:3, Informative)
Here's staright link to the pdf: http://www.pat2pdf.com/20030189597.pdf [pat2pdf.com]
And this is what it says about these figures in patent application:
[0013] FIG. 1A is a pictorial diagram illustrating a desktop of a graphical user interface according to the prior art.
[0014] FIG. 1B is a pictorial diagram illustrating one implementation of a panel containing a desk guide used to switch among multiple virtual desktops according to the prior art.
[0015] FIG. 1C is a pictorial diagram illustrating another implementation of a panel containing a desk guide used to switch among multiple virtual desktops according to the prior art.
MS clearly states that there is prior art, which makes me think that they aren't patenting desktop pagers but some kind of enhancement to it. (I only had a quick glance at the patent)
Re:nVidia Desktop Explorer does this on windows (Score:4, Informative)
The problem is in the patent system... once the system is in place, however flawed, you can't blame people for trying to get the most out of it, because they're competing with other people who are trying to make the most of it. Shaking our fists at MS will no good, it just means that somebody else will benefit from a flawed system. But the consumer loses either way.
Re:Innovative (Score:3, Informative)
Re:You may want to mention that (Score:4, Informative)
#50 How does one file protest on patents that are pending?
Protests by a member of the public against pending applications will be referred to the examiner having charge of the subject matter involved. A protest specifically identifying the application to which the protest is directed will be entered in the application file if: (1) The protest is submitted prior to the publication of the application or the mailing of a notice of allowance under rule 1.311, whichever occurs first; and (2) The protest is either served upon the applicant in accordance with rule 1.248, or filed with the Office in duplicate in the event service is not possible. For more detailed information on protesting a patent, you may visit our Web site at http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/mpep.htm [uspto.gov] for the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP) Chapter 1900.
The difference they claim... (Score:2, Informative)
Kinda like how a number of pagers show window names or grab a scaled view of the window contents continuously. And have been doing so for years. So yeah, I would call it invalid in a heartbeat.
-Lars
its not a joke (Score:5, Informative)
I work as an examiner.
The claims presented in this application will likely be signifigantly different if it becomes allowed.
Examiners usually have 10-40 hours based on paygrade to fully examine a case. Keep in mind experts don't need as much time to search, and unless you have a proper legal background to understand the metes and bounds, you may not realize how narrow or broad the claims actually are.
I can not comment on office policy, or validity of the claims for this, or any other patent application.
How to protest the patent! (Score:2, Informative)
here. [uspto.gov]
If anyone is dedicated to going through with this thing,
we should be able to stop this patent from being granted.
Re:nVidia Desktop Explorer does this on windows (Score:2, Informative)
Re:nVidia Desktop Explorer does this on windows (Score:5, Informative)
Beats anything in powertoys hands down.
RTFP, indeed! (Score:4, Informative)
No, they're not - they're actually showing the Gnome pager as prior art (Figure 1c). You have to go up to Figure 5 to see what they're actually claiming: a method to preview your virtual desktops on the entire display. So you'd click a button on your pager to get, say, all your 2x2 desktops displayed simultaneously at half size. The undeniable advantage is that at half-size you'll see a lot more detail than at pager (say, 1/16) size.
If anyone knows of prior art specifically relating to this kind of preview, please *do* contact the patent office. This isn't going to be so easy to defeat as some here are spouting off without bothering to look at the blasted thing. Give the MS-lawyers some credit - they may be evil, but stupid they're not.
Re:nVidia Desktop Explorer does this on windows (Score:3, Informative)
The virtual desktop feature was especially nicely designed, since you saw minipictures of each virtual desktop and could drag windows between the minipictures. And you could password protect some desktops (which allowed you to have one desktop for the kids, and one for porn).
There is a key difference (Score:5, Informative)
Reading the patent document, the key point is that the users hits a key and all the desktops are scaled within the window using animation. So if I have a 3 x 3 virtual desktop and hit the desktop view button, my screen is shrunk to (say) the top left 9th of the screen and 8 other mini desktops become visible. If I select another desktop it zooms towards me filling the screen. They make a number of references to background images and I guess animating 9 different background images for the demo above would look very cool.
I haven't seen this implemented before. The nearest is Mac OS X.3 which allows all application windows to be minimised and switched between, I use it a lot and it is excellent, particularly if you have a number of quicktime movies or similar playing. As I recall, Apple patented this and I think this is Microsoft's answer
Re:Is the patent being misunderstood? (Score:5, Informative)
It can make miniture pictures of all your apps and you can rearrange them, etc.
Checkout my desktop screenshot [submarinefund.com] Note: this is my desktop on 2.21.03 almost exactly a year ago. And I've run E for at least 5 years.
Re:nVidia Desktop Explorer does this on windows (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Patently abusive (Score:1, Informative)
Comment removed (Score:4, Informative)
Re:nVidia Desktop Explorer does this on windows (Score:5, Informative)
The Enlightenment [enlightenment.org] window manager does that already. Look at the lower left corner of of this screenshot [enlightenment.org].
Re:its not a joke (Score:4, Informative)
PTO fees [uspto.gov]
Re:Um how about the DOS filesystem patents? (Score:3, Informative)
They basically said "hey, that code that was always available for free? Well, now you have to pay for it. Feel free to write your own, but we've already got it written for you if you like..."
Re:vtwm (Score:3, Informative)
Relying on a mostly useless google search and my failing memory, tvtwm was apparently based on the X11R5 version of twm, which would mean it came out in late 1993 at the earliest, which is around the time I remember first using it.
Of course, one of the documents I found in said google search mentions that in 1993 all of the workstation manfacturers agreed that mwm would be the only window manager and they'd stop making any other ones, so clearly tvtwm never existed and we all hallucinated using it.
Re:RTFP, indeed! (Score:2, Informative)
Point is, does Enlightenment (or any of the other virtual desktops bandied about) provide a button that maximizes the preview to cover the entire display? *That* is the prior art that would kill this patent. If nobody has thought of it before, they *will* get a patent for this feature, silly as that may strike us.
It's a standard ploy for patent applications: you cast your net wide (all virtual desktops with pagers) in your primary claim, then focus on what you *really* want to get through (the full-screen preview feature) in the subclaims. If you're unlucky and the patent office (or, later, a judge) strikes your primary claim as unreasonably general, you still have the subclaims standing. If you're lucky and the primary claim sneaks through, you have a large impressive club with which to extort license fees, justly or not.
Stop whining and just write to the USPTO (Score:5, Informative)
37 C.F.R. 1.291 [gpo.gov] gives members of the public the right to protest a pending application by simply advising the patent office of any reason why a patent should not issue, including prior art. The essential aspects of this are that you must (a)correctly identify the application; (b)provide a concise explanation of the reason for the protest; and (c)provide a copy of the prior art your protest relies on.
So, rather that the usual pablovian reflex of ranting about this stuff on
Ready
SGI had it first? (Score:2, Informative)
E-mail to patent office (Score:3, Informative)
Subject: Patents
Patent application #20030189597 - Virtual Desktop Manager
I have been using a facility identical to this both on my Unix/Linux systems and on Windows systems for a (large) number of years.
On Unix/Linux under the X-windows system the facility is best typified by the pager facility of the fvwm Window manager. It has equivallents on all graphical user desktops since the mid 80's
On Windows, a pager called sDesk (Semik's desktop), based on the above mentioned fvwm has been on my desktop since 1999 (it was copyright 1998 by Jan Tomasek)
More information and a picture of my desktop may be seen at: http://richard.pacdat.net/home-office.htm [pacdat.net]
I trust this will put a stop to the possibility that anyone may patent this facility - it has ample prior art.
richard
Re:abstract (Score:4, Informative)
Not really. It's kind of like if the Enlightenment pager had Expose functionality. You hit a key, the pager scales to full screen, you pick a desktop.
What's interesting is that the patent application predates Expose by a few years.
Re:nVidia Desktop Explorer does this on windows (Score:3, Informative)
I think *most* window managers actually have the ability to handle multiple desktops. I think maybe the very basic default ones don't, but there's definately prior art. What's next, MS patenting the concept of an instant messager that installs automatically with an operating system?
Re:Protesting Patents (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Patent Abuse = Slander of Title? (Score:2, Informative)
Patent Office is entirely fee-based. The companies pay for the service. No taxpayer dollars are used. In fact, congress appropriates a percentage of the money the PTO earns for other things. Please, people, stop making wild assumptions about IP and the PTO, y'all really don't know what's going on.
I've been using tvtwm for over 10 years! (Score:1, Informative)
DVWM (Score:5, Informative)
The link above points to a patent submission by Bret Anderson (aka MrJukes) on behalf of Microsoft for a Virtual Desktop Manager. Here's a relevent blurb from the patent application itself...
"...each pane containing a scaled virtual desktop having dimensions that are proportionally less than the dimensions of a corresponding full-size virtual desktop, each scaled virtual desktop being displayed with one or more scaled application windows if the corresponding full-size virtual desktop has one or more corresponding application windows that are active."
The patent application was file on April 5, 2002. MrJukes and I have both been writing and writing applications for replacement shells for many years. In 1997/1998, i wrote a shell called Dimension. One of its components that eventually was released by itself (in 1998) was DVWM. It was downloadable from my website between 1998-2002. Below is a link to lokai.net's download page from 2001 (the best i could get via archive.org). Bret Anderson had clear knowledge that this patent application contains prior art. I was definately not the first person to do something like this either.
VWM's and VDM's have been around for a very long time. Enlightement's Pager/VWM/VDM did this at the time as well, however at that point in time, while giving mini-views of the windows on a given desktop, it did not provide a 1-to-1 mini-view like DVWM did to my knowledge (please correct me if i'm wrong).
I believe this to be a pretty low point. A former shell developer lands a job at Microsoft and patents ideas obtained from the shell community and/or elsewhere in free software. I don't know if idea theft is illegal since i didn't patent it myself, but i'm just disgusted that this has happened.
Here's the archive.org view of lokai.net's downloads. You can download the version of DVWM that was hosted at the time which does all the things i describe.
Archive.org view of Lokai.net in 2002 [archive.org]
Here is a screenshot of DVWM from 2001.
DVWM Gif [redf.net]
Here is the source to DVWM from 2001.
DVWM Source [redf.net]
Here is DVWM 1.02 in case archive.org fails to work for you.
DVWM Zip [redf.net]
Here is the skinnables.org orphanware page showing DVWM.
Skinnables Orphanware [skinnables.org]
I'm currently exploring my options to see what if anything i can do about this. I find it to be just flat out wrong. It should be noted that not all things that are wrong are necessarily illegal, but i'll see what i can do.
Re:nVidia Desktop Explorer does this on windows (Score:3, Informative)
No, it does not do that already. By definition, if I have to look at the "lower left" of the screen to see something, then that something is not taking up the "full screen".
Microsoft's "invention" is to quickly blow up the pager-previews to cover the whole monitor. While not innovative enough to deserve a patent, that's not something you can accomplish today in Enlightenment. This feature is probably meant to compete with Apple's "Expose", and is similar to an enhanced version of Microsoft's "Coolswitch" (accessible since Windows(r) 3.1 by pressing alt+tab); all are quickly accessible modal ways to choose what you want to see, rather than a constant feature of the environment's chrome.
Re:DVWM (Score:2, Informative)
Re:No references (Score:3, Informative)
Did you bother even reading ANY of the patent application [uspto.gov] or did you just spout of typical /. drone rhetoric? They specifically mention prior art in several places, and they even include examples of it in the drawings. Give me a break, there is even an entire section of the patent application dedicated to references.
Re:its not a joke (Score:3, Informative)
some of the basics are right here:
http://www.cambiaip.org/Tutorials/Tutorial_1/tu
Understanding those basics at least can easily make one realize that the application claims may be very narrow, or very broad. It gets even more hairy when the applicant gives a range in their claim, for example, a value approximatly between 10 and 100. Is 101 approximately 100? Probably, is 110? Maybe. How about 200? It could be as well.
There are lots of procedural things, such as proper antecedent basis for words in the claim, are the claims supported by the specification, the introduction of new matter etc.
Where the technical background comes in, is understanding whether or not there would be sufficent motivation to combine two disparate technologies, if it would be possible to combine two disparate technologies, or even if such a combination would be well known and obvious to one skilled in the art at the time of invention.
The problem many examiners have is hindsight, just about anything seems obvious in hindsight. This is where all the obviousness comes into play. Hindsight is a common argument utilized by attorneys, and requires a lengthly response to which an examiner explains the explicent or implicent motivation found in the references.
Thats the 30 second summary. For more information, read the manual of patent examining and procedure or contact a patent agent or attorney.
Re:nVidia Desktop Explorer does this on windows (Score:3, Informative)
by OLVWM - the Open Look Virtual Window Manager
on Unix systems by 8-10 years. I was using it
in about 1984. In about 1988 I had an assistant
that took care of the MS-Windows systems our company had and he used a product called BigDesk that did the same thing on MS-Windows 3.1.
I suggest that geeks flood the USPTO with citations of prior art on this one. I just called them and they told me to call 703-308-6906
to inform them of prior art. It is much better
to stop this before it is granted than to try and
fight it through the courts after it is granted.
Rasterman has this WAY before that date.. (Score:3, Informative)