|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, May 28 2013 @ 01:00 PM EDT |
You continue to ignore the details of what is being claimed. 1950's Dad did not
do THIS method.
11. A method for inputting data into a computer system having a display screen
associated therewith, said method comprising:
(a) displaying a form on the display screen of the computer system, the form
having at least one field associated with a field class and requiring data entry
by a user;
(b) displaying a history list associated with the field class on the display
screen on the computer system;
(c) determining whether the user has selected an item from the displayed
history list;
(d) assigning a data value for the field to that of a data value associated
with the selected item when said determining (c) determines that the user has
selected an item; and
(e) updating the history list in accordance with the selected item when said
determining (c) determines that the user has selected an item.
You may assert that this is not a hugely important invention and the difference
between what is claimed and the prior art is small. I might even agree with
that. Nevertheless, is was apparently new and not obvious. At a minimum, no
one had bothered to do this particular set of displays and reactions before.
Accordingly, now that the inventors came up with it, they wanted not have their
idea, which they thought the world would love and therefore might give them some
advantage of desire-ability in the market place from being copied. Whats wrong
with that?
As you point out, there are zillions of other related techniques for acheiving
similar goals that others can use. Carving out this tiny combination as Apples
property for a few years is next to harmless. Samsung should have just worked
around it.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
