The last bit of news we got from Apple's latest display-actuator toy was a press report from AppleInsider of Apple filing patents overseas and of their engineers giving some details of the device. Also provided there was a schematic from the patent application featuring the control mechanisms that make the display move, rotate, and click at a finger's command. And that's it. A device that promises to (probably) eliminate conventional control buttons and maximize gadget-surface real estate, and that's all the details we can get.

Until now. A report at the MacNN site finally gives details of the display actuator, also based on the patent applications Apple has filed and which the US Patent & Trademark Office and European Patent Office published. If you happen to be engineering-inclined and have a great tolerance for reading long blocks of text, you can read the source article at the link below, along with their caveat that "MacNN presents only a brief summary of patents with associated graphic(s) for journalistic news purposes as each such patent application and/or grant is revealed by the U.S. Patent & Trade Office. Readers are cautioned that the full text of any patent applications and/or grants should be read in its entirety for further details."

Now if the MacNN details were not enough for you and you have a really great tolerance for reading long blocks of text conveniently unedited by a government office, then you can probably have a crack at the USP&TO's or EPO's publication of said patent (in case you're wondering, the USP&TO's website doesn't have the publication yet, but it probably will be uploaded in the future).

If you're neither, and you're still curious as to the future of touch-controlled technology, we've got a summary waiting for you.


Read on at the full article.

Imagine if you could conceptualize your own Apple product, and by that I don't mean simply customizing your iPod or MacBook, but actually conceptualizing the product from scratch. A nice but really challenging task. But since a lot of people are into taking challenges, it isn't surprising that people usually come up with concept products -- some are senseless, while some of them we wish could materialize in the shelves of Apple stores.

One of those concepts that I would pay good money for is the MacPod Pro which looks to me as a perfect mix of an iPod, UMPC, and a PDA. No, this is not a leaked Apple patent for some product or something of that sort. This one is from the UK Magazine called iCreate, an Apple magazine which has a "What if Apple made..." section.

Thus the birth of the MacPod concept which aims to be your one-stop portable device and a Mac for your pocket. Nifty contraption this one is, but I can't help but think of the Sony 's UX50 Handheld PC.

But still, this one will add to my long list of wishful thinkings. The concept MacPod can put 1000 songs in your pocket and has a built-in iSight and iLife. Perfect for anyone...who has the money to avail of such luxury. Too bad it's only an unofficial concept, but who knows, maybe Apple could get some ideas with this one.

After months of legal bickering that made their lawyers very happy and rich, Apple Computer and Singapore-based Creative Technology indicated their willingness to "remain open to the possibility'' of putting court battles over handheld music players patent infringement. The trade commission already agreed to investigate Apple's complaint that Creative infringes its patents and Creative's complaint against Apple, as well.

In case you're keeping score, here are the lawsuits filed by the two companies against each other:

• Apple Computer Inc. v. Creative Labs Inc., 06cv263, U.S. District Court, Western District of Wisconsin (Madison). The trade complaint against Creative is In the Matter of Portable Digital Media Players, 337-TA-576, U.S. International Trade Commission.
• Apple Computer Inc. v Creative Technology Ltd., 06cv114, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas (Lufkin Division).
• Creative Technology Ltd. v. Apple Computer Inc., 06cv3218, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California (San Francisco); and In the matter of Portable Digital Media Players, 337-TA-573, U.S. International Trade Commission.

Apple has sold more than 50.8 million iPods in 2001, while Creative has less than a 10 percent share of the U.S. market for digital music players.

Like most aging celebs, the iPod looks like it's also thinking of getting some work done. A series of designs registered by Apple Computer with a European trademark and design office early this year suggests the company may soon abandon its Click-Wheel interface in future iPod versions.

In one of the design sketches for the iPod nano (see image above), the Click-Wheel has been replaced by a keypad layout that resembles a traditional cell phone handset. Below the nano's screen is a circular navigation pad, flanked by two input buttons. Right below these controls is a keypad layout consisting of what could be 12 numeric keys in the traditional cellphone keypad layout. The second iPod nano design sketch includes a display and what appears to be a 4-way directional pad similar to the Nintendo Entertainment Systems game controllers.

Apple's filings also include four additional designs (see image below) based on the iPod nano. It includes a navigational interface unlike anything seen on current iPods today. One sports a square Apple TrackPad, another has an elongated scroll strip with a rounded top and base. The third and fourth designs include some form of elliptical controller .

The last two designs show an iPod nano and a fifth-generation video iPod with a display screen and nothing more. It could be related to another iPod audio interface patent Apple described as a voice-activated menu navigation system.

What do you think of these new designs? Let us know via the comments.

In a recent lawsuit filed by Apple in an E.U. court, the French government had been accused of "state-sponsored piracy." At the heart of the matter is an European Copyright law governing digital music downloads.

Despite Apple's cry of "foul!," the intention of this law would require that any music downloaded from any online music merchant needs to be playable on any digital music device. This could potentially rob Apple of a monopoly. On the other hand, it would be helpful to those downloading music if and when they chose to switch to a different portable music player, or transfer their downloads to a PDA or cell phones. The law is an attempt to create a standard music format that is playable on any device or platform.

Otherwise, users would be required to re-purchase the same tunes each time they wished to change devices.

The issue is far from simple; like laws in any democratic society, it must balance the needs and desires of both sides. From Apple's perspective, it is being forced to make its proprietary music format compatible with devices manufactured by rival companies. The French law does contain some loopholes; French artists whose performances are sold exclusively though iTunes may require that their works be made available solely in the iPod format. Additionally, the law must take patent protections into consideration. However, if Apple fails in its lawsuit, it may pull out of the French market.

Every new piece of technology that is developed is a two-edged sword. At one time, the ability to play music live was considered a valuable and useful skill. David was retained by King Saul to play the harp for him. In ancient Celtic society, bards were at the right hand of the King and could pass judgement on him. More recently (18th and 19th centuries), musicians were retained by wealthy patrons as household servants and nearly every town had its community band or orchestra.

Thomas Edison changed all of that. Now, anyone could have music any time - without the expense of live musicians.

The format in which recorded music has been kept has changed dramatically in little over a hundred years. Since 1900, we've come from bulky, spring-driven, wind-up machines the size of packing crates to slim, pocket-sized devices - and the sound quality has improved immeasurable.

Still, up until the compact disk, the format was uniform. A wax disk playable on an Edison gramophone was playable on an RCA Victrola. Audio reel-to-reels worked with players manufactured by Teac or Sony. CD's could be played on your JVC home stereo or your Sony Discman.

None of these companies seemed to suffer much from an interchangeable format. Quite the contrary, most of them prospered, and consumers wound up getting better and less expensive machines.

Considering that the "Law of the Marketplace" seems to drive everything and is fervently embraced by everyone nowadays, perhaps Apple should simply stop fighting the issue and let the marketplace decide what's best.