backtop


Print 47 comment(s) - last by senecarr.. on Sep 13 at 11:13 AM


  (Source: AllPosters)
Apple was hardly the first to make a Dock/Launcher; if Samsung's Windows 8 launcher "stole", so did Steve Jobs

Gizmodo's Jesus Diaz wrote an intriguing headline "Samsung Is Copying Apple’s Dock In Their Win 8 Machines Too: Will They Ever Learn?"  Mr. Diaz comments:

I don't know if Samsung is now just taunting Apple or if their user interface "designers" are the same lazy idiots who copied the iPhone icons. In any case, this is getting hilarious. Or pathetic. Or disgusting. Or all of the above.

The premise is admittedly amusing.  Is Samsung Electronics Comp., Ltd. (KSC:005930) really copying a patented and trademarked technology of Apple, Inc.'s (AAPL)?  Would it be that foolish after losing a caustic verdict in the smartphone space for allegedly lifting Apple features?

I. Who Really Invented the Dock?

The answer is that it depends on your definition of "copied", and what your feelings on a copy of a copy are, as a brief history of the dock by LunDuke explains.

When MacOS landed in 1984 it had no Dock (Launcher).  Arthur (1987) and RISC OS 2 (1989) -- operating systems from now-defunct ARM Holdings plc (LON:ARM) parent Acorn Computers -- were perhaps the first to add the feature, albeit in crude VGA form:

Risc OS 3.11
Acorn Computers pioneered the dock. [Image Source: LunDuke]

Later in 1989, Steve Jobs (having left Apple and gone to work at NeXT) pulled a Picasso and "stole" the idea, adding a dock to his NeXTSTEP operating system:

Steve Jobs
Steve Jobs arrived late to the dock/launcher part in 1989. [Image Source: FutureTG]

OS/2 3.0 (1994) and CDE (1993) offered minor improvements to this familiar theme.  But perhaps the most visually striking dock came in 2000 with AmigaOS 3.9's AmiDock, an operating system by German software firm Haage & Partner.

AmiDock
AmiDock was visually the most striking dock yet, made in 2000. [Image Source: LunDuke]

Lo and behold Steve Jobs -- having returned to Apple -- introduced a nearly identical dock to Amiga's in 2001 as part of the new MacOS X:

MacOS X Beta
The Aqua interface (MacOS X beta "Kodiak") added a dock to Apple's operating systems at long last.
[Image Source: Wikimedia Commons]

Eventually that dock would evolve visually to its current form.

OS X Mountain Lion
OS X Mountain Lion [Image Source: Apple]

But of course, Linux docks (which trace their roots to CDE, etc.) also have been actively evolving as well.  Both Ubuntu (Canonical Ltd.) and Gnome Desktop have docks which rival that of OS X, and owe to their rich lineage:

Gnome Desktop dock
Gnome Desktop (Ubuntu10.10 32-bit) [Image Source: YouTube]


II. Other Considerations : Did Samsung Infringe?

So is Samsung...

Samsung S Launcher
Samsung S Launcher [TechMynd]

...late to the dock party?   The Gizmodo piece and other similar pieces attacking Samsung do correctly point out that Apple acquired NeXTSTEP (by proxy its dock legacy and OS patent, U.S. Patent No. 5,146,556; filed Feb. 1991).  But they seriously overlook the fact that NeXTSTEP and Steve Jobs were not the first to create the dock -- Acorn Computers was.

Now Apple does hold another broad patent -- U.S. Patent No. 7,434,177 -- on the features of OS X, including the dock.  That patent was filed in Dec. 1999 and granted in 2008.  Some have interpreted that to Apple "patenting" the dock/launcher.  But in reality, it has made no effort yet to bring such enforcement and seems highly unlikely too; given the shaky historical ground it's on regarding prior art.

Gizmodo writes:

The Dock, as you can imagine, is patented.... Its design and functionality is credited to Bas Ording, Donald Lindsay and, drumroll, Steve Jobs.

However, the Dock is just a specific implementation detail in a broad patent regarding OS X.  Apple didn't "patent the dock".  It patented OS X, which includes a claim to a specific implementation of the dock.  Likewise it holds a patent on NeXTSTEP's graphical user interface, and claims to a crude early Dock.  

There often is a difference between a patent targeting a specific feature and a broad interface patent covering an entire system/user interface.  Often the latter approach leads to a narrowing of claims.  Thus this distinction should have been noted in the current coverage.

Also the patent itself contains a central claim:

1. A computer system comprising: a display; a cursor for pointing to a position within said display; a bar rendered on said display and having a plurality of tiles associated therewith; and a processor for varying a size of at least one of said plurality of tiles on said display when said cursor is proximate said bar on said display and for repositioning others of said plurality of tiles along said bar to accommodate the varied size of said one tile.

...which is slowly expanded upon in later claims.  The core of the claim is resizing tiles and repositioning the tiles, via moving the others.  The Samsung S Launcher does not appear to have either functionality.

Apple did not patent a bar with icons.  It patented specific animations of its task bar (Dock) icons.  Samsung does not appear to be overstepping this by simply having a more Dock/Launcher with static icons and a transparent back because that is not the invention claimed in the in Apple patent.

And besides this and the prior art issue, Microsoft Corp. (MSFT) has a broad cross-licensing pact with Apple and tends to zealously defend its Windows OEMs.  So it would likely not take kindly to Apple suing a Windows 8 device maker for a semi-similar design in a field with plentiful prior art.

Sources: Gizmodo, LunDuke



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Amiga also had...
By Belard on 8/28/2012 8:11:09 PM , Rating: 5
Amiga also had Multi-tasking since its release in 1985. It would take MS Windows95 to have that for the general user and Macs in 2000 with OS-X.

Needless to say, having to use MS-DOS and Windows 3.x(which is not an OS) was like pulling teeth compared to AmigaOS.




RE: Amiga also had...
By Belard on 8/28/2012 8:43:24 PM , Rating: 2
AMIDOCK was never part of classic AmigaOS (1.x~3.1) After Commodore died and other OS updates came out, it was added.


RE: Amiga also had...
By ShaolinSoccer on 8/28/2012 10:46:45 PM , Rating: 3
Who cares? The Amiga blew away Apple IIGS (the best at that time) and any IBM. Am I the only person who knows this?! I'll never truly understand how Commodore didn't dominate...


RE: Amiga also had...
By muhahaaha on 8/28/2012 11:54:35 PM , Rating: 4
You bet. Amiga had full color graphics and preemptive multitasking when the Mac was just black and white and slow POS.

They had a tech called HAM (Hold and Modify) that gave them 4096 colors when Apple barely was out of black and white. The Apple2GS came out with better color abilities a short time later, but it was prohibitively expensive and still couldn't compete.

http://lowendmac.com/orchard/06/amiga-origin-commo...

Commodore bought the Amiga from another company called "Amiga Corporation" and essentially ruined it, which is too bad. It was well ahead of its time. It took a decade or more for MS and Apple to catch up.

It was the custom chips in the Amiga that really made a difference, and provided graphics and animation that was unheard of at the time.

Michael Jackson, Andy Warhol, and others used Amiga's to design their stuff. There were several movies made with the "Video Toaster" tech that hooked into the Amiga.

This month is a bad day for technology, but a time to remember some better days. I had an Amiga, and I was doing things most people are just starting to be able to do today.


RE: Amiga also had...
By Samus on 8/29/2012 1:52:49 AM , Rating: 1
OS/2 was the first truely multitasking OS I used, but after Windows95 came out, OS/2 was doomed as Microsoft would not licensed a 32-bit version of WinOS/2 to IBM.

Today, that would probably be considered anti-competitive, (almost like Microsoft suing the GNU community for WINE) but back then Microsoft was getting away with bloody murder.


RE: Amiga also had...
By michael2k on 8/29/2012 2:13:39 AM , Rating: 4
Technically they didn't get away with it. Their attempt to withhold Windows licenses from IBM over OS/2 was part of the landmark DoJ antitrust suit.

Of course they didn't really get harmed by it, they actually tripped themselves up because they couldn't release a successor to XP for over 5 years, let IE fall behind, and let WM/WP fall behind as well as not responding to the iPod in a timely manner.


RE: Amiga also had...
By Paj on 8/29/2012 9:28:23 AM , Rating: 2
Man... the Amiga was such an amazing machine for its day. Such a shame Commodore lost the plot.


RE: Amiga also had...
By Jeffk464 on 8/29/2012 10:09:33 AM , Rating: 4
Is it just me or are all these court battles by apple almost an admission that they can't compete anymore.


RE: Amiga also had...
By tng on 8/29/2012 10:21:20 AM , Rating: 1
Yeah, Apple has always tried to make a huge splash with it's products going all the way back to the 80's. Steve was a genius at marketing. The problem is that you can't hit one out of the park or be revolutionary on every product, so you have to go a different route.


RE: Amiga also had...
By tecknurd on 9/2/2012 3:21:22 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Amiga also had Multi-tasking since its release in 1985. It would take MS Windows95 to have that for the general user and Macs in 2000 with OS-X.

Needless to say, having to use MS-DOS and Windows 3.x(which is not an OS) was like pulling teeth compared to AmigaOS.

The Windows environment is multi-processing and not multi-tasking.

I have not heard or read about Amiga until a few years ago. Sure Amiga may be a good OS, but it seems to me there were no developer community for it or not in the commercial area. MS-DOS and Windows back then had the developer community because Microsoft provided the tools to ease making the software. I have used Windows 3.1 for several years with an 80386 until I got a new computer with Windows 98. Fixing Windows 98 when there are problems is a pain. Fixing Windows 3.1 when there are problems is easy. Pirating made fixing Windows after 3.1 a pain in the ass.

Today's Windows versions since Windows 98, documentation is light-weight compared when Windows 3.1 came out. Reading documentation for today's Windows version and Office suite is like pulling teeth and worst I feel stupid after reading the documentation.


"The whole principle [of censorship] is wrong. It's like demanding that grown men live on skim milk because the baby can't have steak." -- Robert Heinlein














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki