Comments on: the double click

the double click

josephtate — Wed, 02 Jun 2004 18:38:19 -0800

Microsoft patents the double-click. Microsoft has been granted a patent on the double-click. The Public Patent Foundation is protesting this as they did Microsoft's patent on the FAT File System. Double-click today, tomorrow... typing. Bwahaha!

By: smackfu

smackfu — Wed, 02 Jun 2004 19:06:29 -0800

I wonder who looks through all the patents Microsoft ges and decides what alarmist headline to put on them? This is clearly only for handhelds. It says "limited resource computing device" about a dozen times in the claims. And honestly, on the handhelds I've used, there really was no added functionality from double clicking or holding the hardware buttons. Sure it might be an obvious idea, but I wonder why Palm never did it?

By: rushmc

rushmc — Wed, 02 Jun 2004 19:13:07 -0800

Who double-clicks anymore?

By: drezdn

drezdn — Wed, 02 Jun 2004 19:15:10 -0800

Criminals, because when we outlaw double-clicks.... *ducks*

By: Jimbob

Jimbob — Wed, 02 Jun 2004 19:29:47 -0800

An alternative function of the application is launched if the button is pressed for a long, (e.g., at least one second), period of time. Does my java-enabled Nokia phone count as a "limited resource computing device"? Because, when typing text messages, holding down buttons for different lengths of time enables you to use different functions. Hell, are digital watches "limited resource computing devices"? Because I remember having a watch years ago, where holding down a button for a few seconds had a different result than just pressing it quickly, in regards to the stopwatch, I believe. I wonder who looks through all the patents Microsoft ges and decides what alarmist headline to put on them? I wonder who's job it is to research prior technology before granting patents, because they've been doing a shitty job for several years now.

By: aramaic

aramaic — Wed, 02 Jun 2004 19:30:48 -0800

limited resource computing device Funny, that could describe every computer ever made. I mean, can anyone think of a computer that has unlimited resources? I sure can't, but I'd certainly like to buy one...

By: scarabic

scarabic — Wed, 02 Jun 2004 19:36:11 -0800

What do they smoke at the USPO and how do I get some?

By: dg

dg — Wed, 02 Jun 2004 19:46:34 -0800

Jimbob, you don't need a Java-enabled phone to do that. My Nokia 8250 has this functionality in several places, most notably the power switch, where pressing it once brings up a menu of options and holding it down turns the phone off. I don't see how they can patent something that has not only been around for years, but is nothing unique in any way.

By: dg

dg — Wed, 02 Jun 2004 19:47:42 -0800

Oh, also, many cheaper stopwatches have only two buttons - pressing the stop button once stops the timing and holding it down resets the watch.

By: entropy

entropy — Wed, 02 Jun 2004 20:02:02 -0800

The ipod also uses the same concept. Hold down the menu button a few seconds and it enables the backlighting. Hold down the play button a few seconds and it turns off. It is handheld, making it a "limited resource computing device". However, I doubt this argument could hold water in court.

By: smackfu

smackfu — Wed, 02 Jun 2004 20:33:04 -0800

The lawyer part of me is in pain because I want every term used in the patent to be explicitly defined. What the hell is an "application button"? Note that the patent only refers to "opening applications". It would be hard to argue that is the same as what your stopwatch does.

By: birdherder

birdherder — Wed, 02 Jun 2004 20:37:32 -0800

Those "application buttons" are things like the record button for voice memos, or the little email button on the Pocket PC.

By: Jimbob

Jimbob — Wed, 02 Jun 2004 20:47:18 -0800

Note that the patent only refers to "opening applications". It would be hard to argue that is the same as what your stopwatch does. As you said, though, the definitions are lacking (which is frustrating). What, after all, is an "application"? What is "opening" one of them? If an application is regarded as a specific piece of code, stored in some form of memory, that can be executed...how is this different from a "function" or "procedure call"? One would assume that a stopwatch has, in a very basic form, a set of instructions stored in its circuits that are executed depending on how the button is pressed. Similarly, on a phone such as dg's, "turning off the phone" and the options menu would probably exist as isolated functions in memory. The only hope I can see for this patent is if "application button" refers specifically to a graphical representation of a button on the screen, rather than a physical external button. I still have doubts they're the first to come up with the idea of different functions for a graphical button on a limited resource device depending on how you click on it.

By: bingo

bingo — Wed, 02 Jun 2004 20:57:03 -0800

I think I'm going to jump ahead of the game and patent quintuple-clicking. You heard it here first.

By: Jimbob

Jimbob — Wed, 02 Jun 2004 21:14:29 -0800

I think I'm going to jump ahead of the game and patent quintuple-clicking. You heard it here first. Problem is, bingo, that might have been done already as well! ;)

By: Ufez Jones

Ufez Jones — Wed, 02 Jun 2004 21:25:17 -0800

So long as they don't go after the "right click...Open Link in New Tab", I should be golden.

By: cinderful

cinderful — Wed, 02 Jun 2004 21:48:55 -0800

RTFA, news-posters. This is not a patent for double clicking. It's a un-contested patent for button 3 reactions on a PDA device - specifically button actions that launch applications. The sky is not falling, the world is not ending. If MS tries to press patent infringment on anyone - it'll get tossed out with prior art. and if they don't - they'll lose the patent for not protecting it. Stop making mountains out of 'idiot patent researcher' molehills.

By: ejoey

ejoey — Wed, 02 Jun 2004 22:45:30 -0800

Sometimes, it's really more fun skip right to the comments...

By: shepd

shepd — Wed, 02 Jun 2004 23:40:12 -0800

Dude, what do you expect from a company that designs hinges on doors to trap people inside their offices?

By: sycophant

sycophant — Thu, 03 Jun 2004 03:32:55 -0800

Okay, that's really worrying. What the hell does Microsoft want with a patent on hinges? Can anyone come up with a good reason to calm my nerves, or a scary doomsday-Microsoft-kills-us-all story to further inflame them?

By: fuzz

fuzz — Thu, 03 Jun 2004 03:48:20 -0800

If MS tries to press patent infringment on anyone - it'll get tossed out with prior art. and if they don't - they'll lose the patent for not protecting it. Sure, you can win in court, but how much will it cost? Even if you're right and MS is wrong, they'll kill you with the legal fees. The widespread abuse of the patent system means that small start-ups now need much heavier funding than they did 10 years ago, in order to be able to protect their own technology and make sure that they're not violating anyone else's bogus patents. That creates a huge barrier to entry for small companies, and reinforces big company monopolies. The patent system has become a huge drag on innovation and entrepreneurialism -- exactly the opposite of what it was intended for.

By: Pretty_Generic

Pretty_Generic — Thu, 03 Jun 2004 05:16:57 -0800

When I worked at IBM, I was told we had patented "the concept of a computer menu" decades ago. The fact we weren't sueing everyone who used our patent was our gift to humanity.

By: tdismukes

tdismukes — Thu, 03 Jun 2004 06:27:03 -0800

"...and if they don't - they'll lose the patent for not protecting it." It's my understanding that patents are not like trademarks. You don't have to actively protect them to prevent them from expiring. You can pick and choose who, if anyone, you want to sue for infrigement. This makes it possible to "shake down" smaller companies that might not have the financial/legal resources to challenge a patent in court.

By: Mitheral

Mitheral — Thu, 03 Jun 2004 23:15:26 -0800

Case in point the unisys GIF landmine.

By: dejah420

dejah420 — Fri, 04 Jun 2004 08:26:16 -0800

Or the Xerox GUI...the basis for windows and Apple GUI. (If I'm remembering correctly...)