The Okudas: The TNG panel graphics are intended to suggest something well-organized when a viewer sees them in the background of a scene. My advantage, of course, is that they are seldom seen closely, so I rarely have to take the time to figure out a panel in exact detail. As long as it looks credible on camera, I'm okay. This is extremely valuable, because it could easily require ten or fifty times as much time (and therefore labor and money) if I had to have all of the panels done in that kind of detail. The problem with actual software implementations of the style is that it requires far more than simply mimicking the colors and patterns. In order to work well, one has to analyze the tasks and the users' needs in great detail. This is something that the software industry in general does poorly, in my opinion. One also sees the same kinds of issues in things that should be well-understood, like VCR controls and TV remotes. They are all elegantly designed, but the users' needs are seldom adequately anticipated. On the show, I have the advantage that the viewer can assume that I've anticipated the crew's needs, simply because you can see how easy it is for the actors to use the controls.
The users needs are seldom adequately anticipated -- that does, in fact, sound like prior art for the Galaxy Tab.
If we're talking about the UI instead of the hardware, I don't remember any PADD interactions that involved pinching or dragging. They were always "tapping on buttons" from what I remember (but voice was a major UI element). But I don't know that any of that's really relevant to Apple's design patents.
We are getting into a fairly geeky tangent here but I think some of the most memorable interactions involve dragging: the engineer at the transporter room controller and the ensign at flight control on the bridge. Both involve dragging some energy level upwards.
iPad have a single physical home button which those don't have and that's something that several manufactures coped. They could use 2 buttons on the same side or mirror the bottom button on the top or offset it from the center or add some lights or even simply change the edge color or add decorative divots in the outside corners etc. http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/File:PADD_2150s.jpg
But instead of picking one of the trillions of other designs they used the iPad design because it sold well.e
Samsung. They changed white square into a white rectangle and that's about it. Design patents are a low hurtle but they they could have at least used a circle/house/drooped the icon or something other than a box for home. I mean outside of the iOS reference what does a box / rectangle even mean?
And again, if they had two buttons and use a square for one of them then that's also fine. Or if it's an arrow that stands for play that's cool. But a white rectangle?
The new Samsung phones have no buttons at all on the front. How's that for simplicity?
Box means box. It's a rectangle. Apple can't patent the rectangle.
Squares are rectangles. However, you will note that they changed the button format which suggests that they are they where treading a little close to Apple's design / long standing trend of having a single button. I still hate the fact that they use a single physical button to simulate more than one button based on how long you hold it down so IMO it's not really a benefit just an aesthetic choice.
Apple does the same sort of thing, but even more so. Tapping, holding, double tapping, triple tapping, tap and hold, etc. The home button is ridiculously overused, a consequence of less hardware holding more and more uses.
>iPad have a single physical home button which those don't have and that's something that several manufactures coped. They could use 2 buttons on the same side or mirror the bottom button
sounds like why 1-click is patentable scheme of thinking.
Yes! Excellent point. We all have to admit that there's only so much you can do to differentiate a tablet but when the thing looks identical to the naked eye then you've got a case. The only problem is having to sell that in a court. There are tons of tablets out there that are very obviously not the iPad but this one from Samsung looks exactly the same on first glance especially to the average person.
The Galaxy Tab has two buttons on the side and no buttons on the front, just a tiny camera lens. One button is power, the other is a volume button (it's a single button that you can push on two different sides).
Maybe you're talking about a different product, but the Samsung tablet does not copy the iPad in that respect. I have one right in front of me right now.
The helm consoles are large flat touchscreens with black bezels and natural user interaction:
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_XNPD380IpBQ/S8jnaB-iM1I/AAAAAAAAJx...
The iPad is absolutely a small version of that device.