Microsoft vs Gooble, I hope this will be one of those wars..
..where consumers ultimately will benefit from.
Microsoft has applied for a patent for its very own Google Goggles-alike Terminator-style tech, which will slap facts and figures over everything you see. Microsoft&#39;s propose &quot;head-mounted display&quot; Redmond's idea is for "a head mounted display with supplemental information when viewing a live event …
..where consumers ultimately will benefit from.
It doesn't matter whether or not the patents are valid as Microsoft can still freeze trade until a long legal process of validation/invalidation has concluded
.. which is exactly what should happen to shake things up. Both have enough cash to
buy support a change of law if it hurts them too much, something which seems long overdue.
Fine by me.
If Apple, Google and MS focused their battles on trying to out do each other in their products rather than the courtroom the consumer would be a huge winner. The technological world would be much better off if all that cash and effort was spent on research rather than lawyers, and of course stop stifling newer/small companies with the fear of suing them over the most trivial "innovations" that anyone who used a computer could think of.
Microsoft is investing about 8 Billion US dollars every year in R&D. The courtroom battles to protect IP are a drop in the bucket so to speak.
New abbreviation to learn
BVoD: Blue Vision of Death
That would probably be a relief. The whole thing sounds like sitting next to John Motson. Agony. Stadium bins will be full of these things.
... is there a requirement that you use 1950's style artwork and diagrams? It seems to be a common theme.
I'm not saying it's 'wrong', just wondering why it always looks that way.
Well, it's a 1950's Sci-Fi idea, so probably, yes.
I care not for baseball. But I'd buy some Facebook specs. It's would be great to see the latest LOLCAT that somebody had posted to their wall floating mysteriously alongside their fissog. OK, maybe not FB, LinkedIn during work hours, etc.
I can feel a big lawsuit coming on...
I wonder if corporations would be so quick to risk infringing on each others' patents if when found liable for violating a valid patent that the payment had to be made by the CEO writing a million small checks like Navin had to?
The coolest AR I've see was in Eden of the East.
But anyway, no invention here, we've been talking about glasses with computer screens in them for decades.
Does that mean, if that patent is granted, that it will be forbidden for Google Glasses to display information about a live event that the wearer is attending?
Google only after use patents as a weapon when attacked.
They rarely ever call the first shot.
Tax payers fund the MS legal team, they do not google's.
"This all might sound a bit familiar, and not just because of Project Glass. " -- Maybe that's why we actually heard about Project Glass, so that Google could say "Prior Art, Ha ha ha!", whilst not actually bringing out a finished product.
whilst not actually bringing out a finished product
.. you mean, doing a Microsoft? Now *that* would be funny.
I get WHY their patenting it, but I don't get HOW they are granted it, unless it specifies HOW they are doing it? i mean the exact details, how they project the image onto your retina in focus with the live action, how they identify players etc and provide relevant details....
... A few grand to submit a patent. I can draw better than that, and probably came up with half these designs (and technical perspectives) at 8!
There is no way that patent should be issued. There can be no detail about the invention, because it simply cannot exist at the present moment. In order to insert the information, the computer has to know what it is looking at, and it has very limited and low resolution data to go on. I do not believe that it can do face recognition on faces that far away, shirt recognition, maybe, some of the time, given a state of the art camera. Not a cell-phone one.
Given that no details of the invention mechanism can have been given, all that remains is a simple and obvious concept. And concepts are not patentable.
Any mechanism details that could be supplied are "obvious to one skilled in the art," which invalidates the patent. As one skilled in computers, but not in any sub-field close to this invention, here would be my take, simply from the above article. I have not read the patent.
You could use GPS to locate the event, and get the running order and commentary from online sources or maybe a dedicated server. You could do shirt number recognition or face recognition (given a superb camera too big to mount on glasses). You can recognise the layout of the ground and thereby identify players in specific well-known positions. That would work very well for baseball, much less well for American football, and horribly for most other events, such as horse-racing or (association or rugby) football. Once identified, players could be tracked from frame to frame, and other factors of their appearance could be logged to re-identify them after the chap passing out the huge order of burgers and soda stops standing in the way and sits the hell down again. Given that you recognise the playing field and have live commentary, you can also display the game score, state and other data, including which way the teams are playing and so forth. You could even have an action replay from on-line or over-the-air services. Since loads of people in the stadium are using the glasses, and they are all on-line, you could even have multiple viewpoint replays.
In fact why bother with expensive camera teams? just edit down the view from a few dozen members of the public. The cameras are good enough to see shirt details, and therefore plenty good enough to supply a TV .
I would have thought that various military groups around the world have been using ocular augmented reality systems for solider ground ops for quite some time?
How long before the specs actually become eye implants and we all have them fitted at birth......no missing the ad breaks then !
Glasses which block out very bright headlamps / those silly day time fog lamps ect so I can see the road better.
I love how Google bring out an actual working protortype, then a few months later Apple and Microsoft bring out... oh, no, they just file patents on things you could do with them.
Either way this patent should be shot down by tons of prior art... I say should.
Indeed, it's America and the patent office gets paid by the patent.
First past the post system as well isn't it?
As far as today's patents go that actually counts as innovation
They've applied for a patent for technology that not only has already been patented, but has already been RELEASED (albeit in a limited fashion). If this patent gets granted, it will be a sign of everything wrong with the US patent system...
I think there's massive collusion between patent lawyers going on. If they persuade all these firm to keep filing patents for such things then continually sue the hell out of each other, it's a lawyer's gravy train that roles on and on.
I think that there are going to be numerous glasses based options and it will provide whole new apps. I have been working with glasses for a while and we managed to create a system that allows you to do pinch to zoom and rotate with precise hand tracking for augmented reality delivered in glasse, think minority report hand gestures and augmented reality you get in some of the best smartphone apps combined together
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017