Apple files a patent for a portable headphone that can also be used as a speaker through an amp.

http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2012/11/apple-headphone-speaker/

What some people may be missing is that APPLE, is designing and thinking of not ONLY doing this but also making a portable headphone. Apple's patents look close to nothing like final products so don't worry about the patent picture.

Wired does bring to point that Apple is showcasing many sensors that they have patented for use that could be used on the headphone but my concern is, that none the less, you are puttting an amplifier and a "speaker class" driver in a headphone in terms of how much dB of sound it may produce. I would still be a bit hesitant to put that on my ears in the case that something does happen. I know, this is like worrying that the volume on your PMP will sudden somehow boost to Max. Most have thought of that before but of course it never happened unless one physically did something. 

I'll be interested in seeing what headphones Apple will be using, their drivers, how they sound, and what amp and all those nifty details that Apple may use in the headphone IF this comes to fruit. Many Apple patents never come to the consumers hands in case you are curious.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sycho 

I thought that was already invented. Either way, I think it's going to be more of a convenience thing for people who simply enjoy music on the go, and would also benefit from the speakers so they can dance to the music without having to have the headphones in their ears rather than aim for the full experience of music that audiophiles expect, but who knows.

No. Not invented. This isn't an invention. This is a full innovation. There are people that use headphones and then just blast some music on it. And some that can swivel their pads and then project a tiny bit but none of the FULL level of what they are trying to patent of just a normal headphone, but through MANY sensors, and an amplifier, innovation on a driver that can do this while safeguarding the listener has not really been something done for the consumer market. Earspeakers do not count. Those weren't made for the purpose of wearing your headphone closed and portably like you would usually and then casually setting it down and jamming with it in one go.

Quote:

Originally Posted by raytraceme 

Innovation my ASS
http://www.yankodesign.com/2011/07/21/headphones-double-as-portable-speakers/
http://tech.mikeshouts.com/zumreed-hybrid-speaker-headphones-headphones-plus-speaker/

Obviously this idea isn't a new one. But do they utilize patented technology of sensors so that it can detect the distance between head to driver, light sensing, not to mention amplifiers in use.

I can also give you product X but whichever company gives you product X with the best usability and functions is the innovator.

Quote:

Originally Posted by raytraceme 

No the iphone is an innovation where it changed the field (now which apple itself is lagging behind on with frivolous lawsuits); this is gimmicky at best and isn't much different from what I showed. Sensors etc aren't much better than flipping a switch. Unless apple thinks it's consumers are idiots (which they already do with their "Genius" ads), and wouldn't know when their headphones are in speaker mode or not.
http://www.acgears.com/headphones/zumreed-243/zumreed-zhp-015-x2-hybrid-speaker-headphones-black
it has an amp as well.

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2411890,00.asp

Keep in mind that this publication is PCMag. 

I wouldn't call it gimicky but keep in mind that the mass majority of their patents that they put up never bear fruit. Think of it as some engineer had an idea to innovate and just threw it to the patent office.

You may say that they aren't better than that but how many major companies in smartphones or headphones pre 2007 utilized sensors succesfully to the point where using sensors become very mainstream and would become intergrated into many of said company's products.

Apple is a company, not Jesus. They make contributions to society. That speaker headphone you have there never got off the ground. So why not offer a better product and innovate on using sensors to detect the placement of the head and also test audio circuity and how Apple can improve on it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HamilcarBarca 

 

The US Patent Office doesn't grant patents for full innovation [sic], only for inventions.

 

This is probably on the same level of full innovation are their rounded rectangle full innovation patent.

The U.S Patent Office was built on the principles of a flawed system. As this is a capitalistic economy it should be up to the companies to fully exploit the system to the upmost of its legality to better itself and its customers. This is not a trickle down system. This is a system where good products make customers and thus to better themselves with patents and the flawed legal system they can better use and innovate products.

The U.S Patent Office was built on the principle of taking and using many many works from people in Europe and then enforced its patents to better the country. 

This is realism. We are the 2% and its not going to matter. PC enthusiasts make up approximately 2% of the entire internet using population. A good percentage of those own an Apple product. The only ones that would hurt are then those last percentage that won't buy their stuff for their own ego's of what is fair or not. Even without that 1%, there is still a 99% out there left to be dominated and exploited and made to be users of the Apple ecosystem. The new line of products that came out recently sold 8 million + in total already. That is sold. Not shipped. Samsung says the word shipped. Apple uses the word sold. They are different.

They lost in the Socialist UK. They won in Capitalistic U.S and are on their way to possibly becoming the first real trillion dollar company being almost 3/4 of the way there. 

You don't have to join, you can complain, but its not going to do anything.

#RealPolitik 

Quote:

Originally Posted by raytraceme 

Ok apple lost in every other country except the U.S. THAT should be saying something. If you like capitalism then you hate apple otherwise you support a monopolistic apple. Apple will NOT become a trillion $ company. Also apple has a value of 514 billion thats only 1/2 of the way and I don't see them getting any bigger since android and win 8 are competing their way past apple.
I let my wallet do the talking and that's by NOT buying apple so I just don't complain.
I own: UE headphones, samsung s3 (intl) smartphone, Sony vaio duo 11 laptop/tablet, a sony ps3, an 60 inch lg plasma tv, self built gaming computer, acer monitor.
If anything I support a capitalistic society since my purchases are made upon the best quality and cost and I have a vast variety of products from different companies.

Saying what? That they are the most targeted company in the world as they are fully utilizing the resources that the U.S government and international copyright allows them to utilize? You give a man a fishing pole and the knowledge to survive. Every other company fished. Apple did it differently. The learnt how the fish lived and worked and used that to their advantage.

I never said I support capitalism. Apple is the definition of Capitalism done right. 

I am not sure about trillion dollar, that is just what many analysts say. They were last at 630bn a week ago. Oh well.

There are both problems with all three systems. Only time will tell. I don't really mind who falls or who survives. It is just life.

UE buys shelf space from Apple and sells headphones in their store(they pay for the space). Samsung's electronics department in Korea is the largest supplier of Apple's goods. Sony has worked with Apple to build and supply Camera's, LG is the next monitor panel supplier for Apple after Samsung pulls out(deal is already set). Acer is the only one not working with Apple on your list. Intel and AMD in your gaming computer are both known to have worked closely with Apple. Intel on putting their CPU's into the Mac's after PowerPC and also Intel Lightpeak which was co developed with Apple and turned(slightly changed) into Thunderbolt. And AMD played really closely to try and get their GPU's into Apple's computers last year. 

The term quality is subjective. It depends on what you look at. 

I am a realist. Let it be, let it be. We are just ants in the whole scheme of things so lets buy the products that would best fit us.

Quote:

Originally Posted by raytraceme 

I still don't know why you like to support apple so much but for someone on head-fi who probably thinks beats are overpriced, you like to support them a lot.
All i'm trying to say is that apple is loosing their status as being innovative and is using monopolistic ways to kill competitors.
My other issue with apple is that they are lagging behind on software, making way too much profit, hoarding over $130 billion in the bank, and not putting more $ in r&d.
I used to love apple and defended them a lot back when they innovated on many things until 2010. They dropped the ball from then on and for a company this big they need to fall so consumer can be first again.
You think apple is good for america? When a company hoards cash (most overseas) outsources most if not all manufacturing overseas, doesn't want to invest in new manufacturing jobs with all that cash than no they are definitely NOT good for america, and tries to limit consumer choices by suing other companies, that company is NOT good for america when it's trying to move forward.

Why does it matter? I buy what I want to buy. I don't buy Beats because I don't like them. Do I make fun of the people that do and belittle them in ever way shape possible?

Innovation is a very simple word. You take an invention and you make it better. You can put a stick behind a chair so you don't tip over(The Simpsons) and call that innovation in a way. The basic definition is just that. Innovation doesn't need to be big. IT can be anything.

Guess what? It works. The U.S does it in international politics and its companies and other companies use it. Those that don't are behind the times. Samsung is known by the locals to have deep connections with the authorities and country. Samsung more or less embodies S Korea. Are they to, handicap themselves when everyone else isn't. No said the man that wanted quality, No, said the people who wanted fair companies, No said the governments that don't have power. 

Lagging behind on software? Apple isn't a large software maker. Well they are in a sense. But iOS 6 and their editing programs are just that, programs. Apple has been slowly and slowly relying more on very very good quality 3rd party apps(that they have good relations with(duh)) to fill up the App Store and Mac store and the Mac library. 

R and D? They just put 3.5Billion in R and D this year. 1 Billion more than last year. They are putting as much money into R and D as they need. Microsoft is putting over 13 Billion and Google around the same. They aren't doing what Microsoft and Google are doing. Finacing huge many projects and hoping one wins. They are putting as much budget as needed into building and refining and making new products

I don't really care whether they are good for America. All I care about is if they have a product that I want. They have it(MBP)? I buy it. They don't have it (iPad mini)? I don't buy it. Simple as that. 

Hoarding cash? They happned to come into a large amount of money and are debating what to do with it? Spend it on R and D? No. They already have way more than their employees and anyone needs. You know what they are building? A very expensive new building. Yes.

Jobs? In America? Why should they try for that? PR? Sure. Quality? Sure but they already have a good amount of American employees. Tim Cook is going to put a dividen out so there is that. Steve Jobs wanted no dividens so that there was more money to work on products. However if they want to invest in getting more product out and demand. Foxconn and many overseas assets would be a good place to start. They are a company. Not a job listed tower. They look for specialized workers in the U.S. 

If a company that sues other companies is a bad thing. Then that company would by the end die. That is plain and simple. If what they are doing is actually bad in an objective way. Then they will die. I don't really care. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zalithian 

 

 

Apple is a scumbag sue happy company.

 

http://thenextweb.com/apple/2012/09/10/apple-reportedly-suing-polish-online-supermarket-trademarking-name-a-pl/

http://www.cnn.com/2011/TECH/web/03/22/apple.amazon.app.fast/index.html

 

Apple knows they're out of ideas to steal and they're hoping to litigate everyone out of their way.

 

My opinion.

 

There are two spots left to get a job. Do you not apply to that dream job because you feel you are not qualified. No. You go there anyway as it may bear fruit. What if you got the job and someone else that may have been more qualified didn't? Well, you got the job. And here it is. Try, and you may be able to enforce your company. Don't, and we may never know.

Out of ideas to steal? Apple was a company that was in the grave pre 2007. If they just stole an idea. Nothing would have happened. They would be dead. They innovated and thus they are here today. Every company goes up and down.