Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?

Old Apple 1 Up For Auction, Expected To Go For $160,000+ 156

vanstinator was one of several readers to point out that Christie's is holding an auction for one of the original Apple 1 machines, complete with a manual, the original shipping box, and the letter from Steve Jobs to the owner. The invoice says the computer was purchased on December 7th, 1976, with an Apple cassette interface card, for a total price of $741.66. The auction house expects it to sell for over $160,000.

Sony Gets Nasty With PSBreak Buyers 246

YokimaSun writes "The war between hackers and Sony over the PlayStation 3 has now taken an even more sinister turn, with Sony going after not just shops but actual buyers of the PSBreak dongle, threatening them with fines of many thousands of Euros and forcing them to sign cease-and-desist letters. It seems Sony will use any means necessary to thwart both homebrew and piracy on the PS3."
PC Games (Games)

Valve Apologizes For 12,000 Erroneous Anti-Cheating Bans 202

Earlier this week, there were reports that large numbers of Modern Warfare 2 players on Steam were getting erroneously banned by Valve's Anti-Cheat software. While such claims are usually best taken with a grain of salt, the quantity and suddenness caused speculation that Valve's software wasn't operating correctly. A few days later, Valve president Gabe Newell sent out an email acknowledging that roughly 12,000 players had been inappropriately banned over the preceding two weeks. "The problem was that Steam would fail a signature check between the disk version of a DLL and a latent memory version. This was caused by a combination of conditions occurring while Steam was updating the disk image of a game." Valve reversed the bans and gave free copies of Left 4 Dead 2 to everyone who was affected.

Son Sues Mother Over Facebook Posts 428

Most kids hate having their parents join in on a discussion on Facebook, but one 16-year-old in Arkansas hates it so much he has filed suit against his mother, charging her with harassment. From the article: "An Arkadelphia mother is charged with harassment for making entries on her son's Facebook page. Denise New's 16-year-old son filed charges against her last month and requested a no-contact order after he claims she posted slanderous entries about him on the social networking site. New says she was just trying to monitor what he was posting." Seems like he could just unfriend her.

Comment Re:Claims (Score 1) 250

In order for prior art to cover this, either one reference, showing that this was known before the patentee's invention, has to anticipate every one of the limitations in the claim; or, it must have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to combine multiple references which, when put together, cover every limitation in the claim.

INAL goes with saying.

Please see patent office for better information.

Can anyone tell me what the differences are between claims 1 and 16? Outside a rewording??? This patent describes a point and click filesystem interface. It provides a visual snapshot of the files, links applications to files based apon being able to manupulate them, and opens the application when that file is selected.

Claim 2/3 looks like screen capture to me.

Claim 4 is the loading of the application linkage with the icon into memory.

Claim 5/6 looks like focus follows mouse cursor.

Claim 7/8/9 is opening application when the icon is selected by unknown method, keyboard or mouse.

Claim 10 allows multiple invocations of the same application.

Claim 11 looks like autosave.

Claim 12 looks like it's trying to cover the bases by mentioning paths and handles for each file. MacOS anybody?

Claim 13 again looks like base covering by covering automatic printing instead of application invocation when selected.

Cliam 14 is copying the file instead of invocation of an application.

Claim 15 is bogus (like the rest). Instead of creating an icon of a "real" file, it a template file instead.

Claim 16 is claim 1 reworded as far as I can tell.

Claim 17 is claim 16's version of claim 4.

The weird part of this patent is the requirement that an application be manuplating the files in question when the snapshot is made. Most likely a restriction required by the examiner.

Now for a REAL laugh, they filed an another for a NEW patent as a continuation-in-part of the granted application. I can't belive they spent the money. And BTW, it almost looks like the filed lawsuit assumes that THIS application has granted instead of 09/878,009 from which patent 7,346,850 was granted.

And remember that it is the language of the claims that matter, NOT the abstract or desciption.



Slashdot Top Deals

A computer scientist is someone who fixes things that aren't broken.