Data processing: generic control systems or specific application – Generic control system – apparatus or process – Having operator control interface
Reexamination Certificate
2000-03-07
2003-01-07
Gordon, Paul P. (Department: 2121)
Data processing: generic control systems or specific application
Generic control system, apparatus or process
Having operator control interface
C345S163000
Reexamination Certificate
active
06505088
ABSTRACT:
TECHNICAL FIELD
The present invention relates generally to computer operator interface processing systems, and more particularly to electrical control devices which permit an operator to input data for selectively control of a computerized system. It is anticipated that primary application of the present invention will be in the control of personal computers and network communications enabled devices.
BACKGROUND ART
Various input systems already exist for users to input data for the control of computerized devices. However, many new systems are developed and introduced every year and this serves to illustrate how completely suitable input systems for all purposes still do not exist.
One of the first such systems was the simple keyboard, which permits entry of alpha-numeric data, but with only the most basic of cursor positioning commands. These were promptly extended to include various positioning keys, first to position within text display screens, then within textual data representations extending beyond the immediate screen, then within graphics data display screens, and further to within graphics displays that also extend beyond the immediate screen. The conventional personal computer keyboard with its up, down, left and right arrow keys, and its page up, page down, end, and home keys is an example of the result of this evolution. However, keyboards remain an incomplete solution.
Which input system came next may be debated, but unquestionably the most widely used today is the mouse. The mouse is particularly popular for use with graphics and in graphical user interfaces (GUI), although its inventor, Doug Engelbart, first demonstrated its utility in simple word processing. Variations of the mouse exist and are also popular, such as the trackball, which is essentially an up-side down mouse. However, the mouse and its variants also remain an incomplete solution.
Another popular class of input systems includes joysticks and gaming controllers. This class is large and reconciling relationship between some of its diverse members can be difficult. But again, and particularly here, the shear quantity of members in this class of input systems and the shear variety which it encompasses serve to illustrate the fact that we are still uncomfortable with the input systems we presently have.
Before discussing some particular problems with existing input systems it can be helpful to summarize the current needs of such systems. An input system for a computerized device may be called upon to input very simple, even primitive, forms of manual instruction. Alternately, such a system may be required to operate with very complex computerized devices and larger systems which those computerized devices are, in turn, part of. An input system may need to input simple state changes, such as YES-NO, ON-OFF, TRUE-FALSE, etc. Or it may need to input complex continuous ranges of data representing, for instance, linear and angular values of direction and magnitude. Within the “spaces” which a computerized device can create, movements in one to six degrees of freedom must be controlled with such input devices. And as computerized devices themselves have become more powerful due to our recent and growing ability to network them together, our demands and expectations of input systems have also increased.
One problem which remains today is how to enable a user to move an input focus on a graphical user interface (perhaps connected to the Internet) in both the horizontal and vertical dimensions simultaneously and independently. Most past and current attempts to do this make use of the existing input systems, such as keyboards and mice. However, cursor keys do not allow for continuous and simultaneous movement in any respect. And mice only allow for simultaneous, but not independent, vertical and horizontal movement. What has particularly been missed with the mouse solution is the ability to move in the horizontal and vertical dimensions independently. One reason this was missed was that the tasks these devices were being designed for simply did not require this feature.
Another problem remaining today is how to represent fractional changes in electronic objects in computerized displays in a manner that more closely maps to the real world. One way that this is accomplished today is by requiring the user to enter a number (like 90 for a 90 degree rotation) and to have the computer show the fractional portion of the whole. Another way is to click on the “handle” of an object and rotate it, like with the free rotate tool of PowerPoint (™ Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, Wash.). However, this solution does not closely map to the real world experience of rotating an object. It is not a natural, easy way to represent changes to the parts of a whole (for example, volume control, radio tuning, dimming of a light switch, temperature changes on a thermostat, clock movements, steering wheel turns, changing proportions on a pie graph, etc.). Also, some objects that one can import cannot be rotated or flipped with this approach because they don't have a “handle” that was created by the software program employing them.
Representing the shaking of electronic objects in a manner that more closely maps to the real world is also a problem remaining today. The way this is commonly accomplished today by requiring the user to click on a button that causes the shaking to occur. However, in the real world shaking does not happen that way; it is a physical movement where a hard object is shaken. For example, the shaking of a pair of dice.
Adding a level of skill and amusement to certain operations such as computer freehand drawing, the playing of games that require the use of a knob, and the playing of games that require shaking of objects are also characteristics removed from many existing input systems. The way this is often accomplished today is with cursor keys or a mouse, which can be very precise even when that is not desirable. Little skill is required to perform many functions with such existing input systems. For example, shapes are often predetermined to make drawing simple. One selects a circle object with a mouse and then places it into the drawing area; one does not actually draw the circle. However, in the real world, drawing, shaking and turning are physical activities. Drawing a straight line or drawing a circle takes skill in the real world, and this is not duplicated with a mouse or cursor key.
To reduce the hand-eye coordination requirements of a mouse or other traditional input device is quite difficult, and usually appears awkwardly contrived. Current systems (like Microsoft Paint, Adobe Illustrator, and Adobe Photoshop) require significant hand-eye coordination with a mouse or other traditional input device. But a mouse is difficult to control and there have been many studies that have addressed this issue. The problem is not easily solved, however, because a mouse moves across a surface with no constraints other than surface space. This makes operating mice and related input systems especially difficult for very young children, the elderly, the disabled, and computer novices.
Accordingly what are needed is a new input system for computerized applications, one which may replace existing input systems in some roles and supplement existing input systems in other roles.
DISCLOSURE OF INVENTION
Accordingly, it is an object of the present invention to provide a system to enable a user to move an input focus in a graphical user interface in the horizontal and vertical dimensions simultaneously and independently.
Another object of the invention is to provide a system to represent continuous, fractional changes in electronic objects in a manner that more closely maps to the real world.
Another object of the invention is to provide a system to represent the shaking of electronic objects in a manner that also more closely maps to the real world.
And another object of the invention is to provide a system to add a level of skill and amusement to certain operations such as computer freehand drawing, the playing of games
Bayer John
Schneider Andrew J.
Simkin Aaron
Simkin David
Gordon Paul P.
Intellectual Property Law Office
Mental Models, Inc.
Roberts Raymond E.
LandOfFree
Electronic controller does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with Electronic controller, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Electronic controller will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-3068570