Jump to content



Photo

  • Please log in to reply
59 replies to this topic

#31 ILikeTobacco

ILikeTobacco

    Neowinian Senior

  • 4,789 posts
  • Joined: 08-July 10

Posted 20 June 2013 - 21:34

How is this new technology? Apple didn't invent fingerprint scanners, nor did they come up with the idea for embedding it in the bezel of a device... HP and Dell laptops, for instance, have had biometric scanners for a long time...

 

EDIT: Also forgot about the Moto Atrix....

"New technology" refers to how it was done, not what it does. You don't patent outcomes, you patent the methods that lead to the outcome. If the outcome was the inventing, it would be copyrighted, not patented.



Oh, and just so you know. I understand they're patenting something that's already been invented, and put into use by other companies, just like every other thing they've patented over the last few years. No innovation comes from Apple itself, it all comes from other companies. =)

 

Really? Do you have prove of a single device right now that exists that achieves scanning your fingerprint EXACTLY the same way this patent refers to? They didn't patent scanning a fingerprint. They patented a specific way of doing it which is apperently unique. You seem to have the concept of copyrights and patents mixed up.




#32 rr_dRock

rr_dRock

    Resident Magical Lion v1.2

  • 893 posts
  • Joined: 23-June 06
  • Location: Time Warp, Canadian Arctic
  • OS: Windows 7 x64, Windows 8 x64, Windows Server 2012
  • Phone: Galaxy SIV (CM11), iPhone 4S

Posted 20 June 2013 - 21:38

"New technology" refers to how it was done, not what it does. You don't patent outcomes, you patent the methods that lead to the outcome. If the outcome was the inventing, it would be copyrighted, not patented.

That still doesn't explain why the article says they "invented" putting fingerprint scanners into a bezel.

 

I understand that they're patenting the design of the bezel and scanner, and the way it operates. I don't understand how anyone can think of this as an "invention" or as innovative in any way shape or form, as it's been done numerous times before. All they did, was take an existing scanner (created by a company that was later bought out by Apple), and modify the bezel of the iPhone to hold it in place.... like what every single other company has done when it puts a biometric scanner in its device.

 

But logic be damned, if it comes from Apple it never existed beforehand. Like rectangles with rounded corners.
 



#33 Astra.Xtreme

Astra.Xtreme

    Electrical Engineer

  • 8,311 posts
  • Joined: 02-January 04
  • Location: Milwaukee, WI

Posted 20 June 2013 - 21:42

That still doesn't explain why the article says they "invented" putting fingerprint scanners into a bezel.

 

I understand that they're patenting the design of the bezel and scanner, and the way it operates. I don't understand how anyone can think of this as an "invention" or as innovative in any way shape or form, as it's been done numerous times before. All they did, was take an existing scanner (created by a company that was later bought out by Apple), and modify the bezel of the iPhone to hold it in place.... like what every single other company has done when it puts a biometric scanner in its device.

 

But logic be damned, if it comes from Apple it never existed beforehand. Like rectangles with rounded corners.
 

 

 

You're confusing the logistics of a few words in the article title with the actual point...

This is an invention of a very specific way to integrate a scanner into a bezel.  There's no reason to nitpick the article when the patent itself is a very simple concept.

 

You still keep acting like Apple is patenting the finger print scanner.  And that's 100% wrong and has been explained to you about 20 times now.  Let it go already...



#34 ILikeTobacco

ILikeTobacco

    Neowinian Senior

  • 4,789 posts
  • Joined: 08-July 10

Posted 20 June 2013 - 21:44

like what every single other company has done when it puts a biometric scanner in its device.

 

And it is still an invention, regardless of how it was done, because it was never done before for that specific situation. Yes, it degrades the value of the term invention, but it doesnt change that it is in fact an invention. It has nothing to do with coming from Apple. Of course, all the Apple haters come out to claim it does.



#35 rr_dRock

rr_dRock

    Resident Magical Lion v1.2

  • 893 posts
  • Joined: 23-June 06
  • Location: Time Warp, Canadian Arctic
  • OS: Windows 7 x64, Windows 8 x64, Windows Server 2012
  • Phone: Galaxy SIV (CM11), iPhone 4S

Posted 20 June 2013 - 21:56

And it is still an invention, regardless of how it was done, because it was never done before for that specific situation. Yes, it degrades the value of the term invention, but it doesnt change that it is in fact an invention. It has nothing to do with coming from Apple. Of course, all the Apple haters come out to claim it does.

 

That is seriously degrading the term, but okay. I'll give you that one. And it does have something to do with coming from Apple, as the article states first that Apple invented it, then that another company invented it. But conflicting information doesn't matter at all. ah duuuurrrr

btw. the patent is for INTEGRALLY MOLDED DIE AND BEZEL STRUCTURE FOR FINGERPRINT SENSORS AND THE LIKE   

not for how it scans your finger.
 

 

According to one variation described in the patent, the bezel may be an electrically conductive arch-shaped structure secured to a substrate. The substrate may have leadlines or the like formed thereon to allow electrically interconnection between the bezel and other circuitry. The bezel may alternatively be a solid body or part of a bezel frame. A single bezel may be integrally molded with the sensor die in an encapsulation structure. The bezel may be adjacent a single side of the sensor die, several sides of the sensor die, or may surround the sensor die.

 

The molding of the bezel and sensor die may be such that the top surface of the bezel and the top surface of the sensor die are coplanar. In this case, the top surface of the bezel may protrude slightly above the encapsulation material, for example to improve physical contact therewith by a user's finger.

Okay. So here they say that the scanner is essentially one unit with the structure around it. Right?

 

Tell me then, how is the Motorola Atrix any different? They're patenting the fact that the scanner is protected by a piece of conductive plastic, which is then protected by more plastic. And that it may be in the shape of an arch, with the sides a bit higher. Like every. single. other. scanner (with the exception of the arch)  And don't tell me "it scans in a different way!" It doesn't, It's a regular finger print scanner. If you read the patent, it is for the design of the scanner/bezel. Not the way it scans your finger.

 

God damn that's innovative. 

 

I retain that the only reason they're doing this is so they can sue anyone who tries to use a fingerprint scanner from now on.

 

and a tidbit from the patent itself

21. The fingerprint sensor of claim 20, wherein said first conductive bezel and said second conductive bezel are each electrically coupled to said die by way of said substrate.


Yay, gluing the pieces together is so innovative, no one has ever glued anything together before.

 

 

"Further still, various presently unforeseen or unanticipated alternatives, modifications variations, or improvements therein or thereon may be subsequently made by those skilled in the art which are also intended to be encompassed by the claims, below."

 

So, anyone who improves on their design, (which is gluing things together, and putting it into a device) needs to license their patent.

 

You're confusing the logistics of a few words in the article title with the actual point...

This is an invention of a very specific way to integrate a scanner into a bezel.  There's no reason to nitpick the article when the patent itself is a very simple concept.

 

There is reason to nitpick an article. Media bias is what causes fanboyism, and breeds hatred amongst people. 

 

 

I have very little against Apple, other than their inability to have a machine function properly in an enterprise envrionment, consistent patent trolling, and the majority of their user base, which consists mostly of people who think that everything they do should be worshipped like they're a god and have an IQ range of 40-60. (ex youtube.com/watch?v=BMsLArefSOw)



#36 dead.cell

dead.cell

    My Body My Temple

  • 10,727 posts
  • Joined: 09-July 04
  • Location: Houston, TX
  • OS: Win 7 Pro / Win 8 Pro
  • Phone: Samsung Galaxy S5 Active

Posted 20 June 2013 - 22:07

There is reason to nitpick an article. Media bias is what causes fanboyism, and breeds hatred amongst people. 

 

No, stupid people are the sole reason behind "fanboyism", and what's sad is that as intelligent as many people are (or pretend to be), these "tech enthusiasts" still get wrapped up about who did what first as if any of it is relevant.

 

The general consumers don't really give a damn, and most people that have bias against one company or another is because they've had poor experiences with the product, service, or company in the past.

 

This article will not be read by the "masses", no one going shopping will ever quote this article let alone reference it... This is the reality of the general consumer: they don't get wrapped up in this nonsense. They buy with their eyes, they buy what looks good to their wants or needs.

 

tl;dr: I'm not sure what you're complaining about here.



#37 rr_dRock

rr_dRock

    Resident Magical Lion v1.2

  • 893 posts
  • Joined: 23-June 06
  • Location: Time Warp, Canadian Arctic
  • OS: Windows 7 x64, Windows 8 x64, Windows Server 2012
  • Phone: Galaxy SIV (CM11), iPhone 4S

Posted 20 June 2013 - 22:14

No, stupid people are the sole reason behind "fanboyism", and what's sad is that as intelligent as many people are (or pretend to be), these "tech enthusiasts" still get wrapped up about who did what first as if any of it is relevant.

 

The general consumers don't really give a damn, and most people that have bias against one company or another is because they've had poor experiences with the product, service, or company in the past.

 

This article will not be read by the "masses", no one going shopping will ever quote this article let alone reference it... This is the reality of the general consumer: they don't get wrapped up in this nonsense. They buy with their eyes, they buy what looks good to their wants or needs.

 

tl;dr: I'm not sure what you're complaining about here.

 

I'm complaining about the fact the patent system is ****.

 

And that an article goes over the top and essentially tries to flat out say that Apple invented biometric scanning in mobile devices.

Do you think the average consumer will know the Motorola Atrix has a biometric scanner, or that HP and Dell have integrated scanners? No? But I AM positive that the Apple users will say "Apple did this first they invented it so innovative and cool and no one else has ever done this before"  

I'm simply pointing out that they're patenting something stupid (gluing stuff together, and making it look shiny), and that they didn't invent **** all. But of course, I'm labelled an Apple hater for saying something bad about the Glorious Leader. (Yes, I am comparing Apple fanboys to the Korean regime)



#38 dead.cell

dead.cell

    My Body My Temple

  • 10,727 posts
  • Joined: 09-July 04
  • Location: Houston, TX
  • OS: Win 7 Pro / Win 8 Pro
  • Phone: Samsung Galaxy S5 Active

Posted 20 June 2013 - 22:34

I'm complaining about the fact the patent system is ****.

 

And that an article goes over the top and essentially tries to flat out say that Apple invented biometric scanning in mobile devices.

Do you think the average consumer will know the Motorola Atrix has a biometric scanner, or that HP and Dell have integrated scanners? No? But I AM positive that the Apple users will say "Apple did this first they invented it so innovative and cool and no one else has ever done this before"  

I'm simply pointing out that they're patenting something stupid (gluing stuff together, and making it look shiny), and that they didn't invent **** all. But of course, I'm labelled an Apple hater for saying something bad about the Glorious Leader. (Yes, I am comparing Apple fanboys to the Korean regime)

 

I think one of the big issues lies with that when Apple sues someone over a patent, people bitch and complain about how they're an awful company stifling innovation. Then when Google or Samsung does it to Apple, suddenly it's justice, the companies are applauded, and no one gives two craps about how we're still stuck with a patent system that needs refining.

 

As for the article, I'm not sure I understand what the complaint is if everyone seems to understand the principle explained here. None of us are mislead in the slightest from what I can tell. :ermm:



#39 +-T-

-T-

    Trapmaster

  • 2,646 posts
  • Joined: 03-December 01
  • Location: Western Australia & Scotland

Posted 20 June 2013 - 23:55

Given how poorly this type of thing worked on the Motorola Atrix, I don't imagine they'll implement this any time soon. Such a pain in the ass to use too. Why not just have the home button as one big thumb scanner, problem solved



#40 winrez

winrez

    Chronic Master Debater

  • 1,082 posts
  • Joined: 07-March 07
  • Location: Manitowoc, WI
  • OS: Windows 7 Enterprise 64-Bit, Windows 8 64-Bit, Windows RT 8.1 (Surface)
  • Phone: Samsung Focus WP7.8/ Nokia Lumina 520

Posted 21 June 2013 - 00:00

Great now when you get mugged for your iPhone they will cut off a finger as well  jk

sounds pretty cool



#41 ILikeTobacco

ILikeTobacco

    Neowinian Senior

  • 4,789 posts
  • Joined: 08-July 10

Posted 21 June 2013 - 00:02

 

Tell me then, how is the Motorola Atrix any different? They're patenting the fact that the scanner is protected by a piece of conductive plastic, which is then protected by more plastic.

No they are not. Stop simplifying the wording to attempt to make a point. If they were patenting protecting a scanner by a piece of conductive plastic, that is exactly what the wording would say. And notice how your snippet starts... "According to one variation described in the patent" or in other words, this is just part of the overall patent, not the entire patent. You are making the same mistake as the media when you over simplify a patent and then draw assumptions from that.



#42 REM2000

REM2000

    Neowinian Senior

  • 2,283 posts
  • Joined: 20-July 04
  • Location: UK

Posted 21 June 2013 - 08:32

i would like it in the enterprise, one added extra layer of security. I know some consumers that would like the option to have it to.

 

Also where does it say that Apple invented finger printer technology, the article states that there is a rumor the iPhone 5S had it, Apple haven't even commented or mentioned the tech yet.



#43 .Neo

.Neo

    Generic User

  • 17,585 posts
  • Joined: 14-September 05
  • OS: OS X Yosemite
  • Phone: iPhone 5s

Posted 21 June 2013 - 09:44

Being required to use your second hand isn't a good solution.  Like I said, the top would probably be the only reasonable location for it, but even then, you're applying downward force via the swipe, and the swipe will be at an angle (due to the aesthetics of a hand) unless you re-position your hand.  If it doesn't recognize the crooked swipe, then you'll have to try again.  Even that sensor on laptops is really picky.  Having to repeat a swipe or re-position your hand all will attribute to more drops.  No research is needed because that's common sense...

 

I have absolutely no issues making a swipe motion with my index finger over the right side of my iPhone or the top. Beyond that you're making all kinds of assumptions without even having tried the product yourself. Why don't we just wait and see what Apple comes up with first huh?



#44 goodbytes

goodbytes

    Just below average Joe

  • 6,386 posts
  • Joined: 07-May 04
  • Location: England

Posted 21 June 2013 - 10:09

That still doesn't explain why the article says they "invented" putting fingerprint scanners into a bezel.

 

I understand that they're patenting the design of the bezel and scanner, and the way it operates. I don't understand how anyone can think of this as an "invention" or as innovative in any way shape or form, as it's been done numerous times before. All they did, was take an existing scanner (created by a company that was later bought out by Apple), and modify the bezel of the iPhone to hold it in place.... like what every single other company has done when it puts a biometric scanner in its device.

 

But logic be damned, if it comes from Apple it never existed beforehand. Like rectangles with rounded corners.
 

 

It an invention because it's been invented.

 

You are confusing inventions with innovating, just because something isn't innovating it doesn't mean it wasn't an invention. You are assuming that because it's a new invention that Apple is claiming to be bringing some completely new innovation onto the market.

 

Also not at any point does the article mention it's innovation in any way shape or form, you are just a typical Apple troll jumping on the band wagon that loves to throw these words around at anything to do with Apple.



#45 illage3

illage3

    Apprentice Game Designer

  • 504 posts
  • Joined: 07-June 13
  • Location: Manchester, UK
  • OS: Windows 8.1
  • Phone: Samsung Galaxy Note 2

Posted 21 June 2013 - 10:24

I had a USB Flash drive with a Finger print scanner.  I've seen laptops with a finger print scanner. The tech is not new or innoative.