Re: Microsoft's Virtual Desktop Patent

Andrew C Aitchison <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.xfree86.forum
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Thu, 26 Feb 2004, Scott McClintock wrote:

> This maybe old news but I only just saw it so forgive me if I'm bringing 
> it up again.
> 
> Microsoft have applied for a patent for a virtual desktop panner (Patent 
> app #20030189597), functionality that has been around in X for a very 
> long time. Do they have a strong case?

**** I am not a lawyer, nor even a patent expert. ****

US Patent and Trademark Office October 9, 2003
http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PG01&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=%2220030189597%22.PGNR.&OS=DN/20030189597&RS=DN/20030189597

I love the way that the html has been written so that you need a plugin, 
not a helper app, to view a bunch of TIFF files :-(
I haven't had time to look at more than the first page as an image.

The application goes into a lot of detail, and appears in sections
[0005] and [0006] (which is as far as I've read) to describe existing
virtual desktops, and their difficulties.

I don't use a virtual desktop myself (I'm a TWM diehard), so
don't know what useability features are current in competing desktops,
but several of the features in Microsoft's application are new to me.

It seems to me that they are not patenting a virtual desktop panner,
just a set of improvements to a virtual desktop panner.

Strictly speaking desktops are not part of XFree86, but are client 
applications. You may find that other groups are better placed than
us to compare their features, and judge the novelty of Microsoft's 
suggestions.
I don't even really know which groups to suggest but words like 
opendesktop, freedesktop, gnome, kde, Ximian, "Rasterman", Owen Taylor 
spring to mind as possibilities.

-- 
Andrew C. Aitchison					Cambridge
			[email protected]
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.